|
Post by coombes on Jan 19, 2011 10:55:05 GMT 1
With neither Coventry nor Peterboro seeming to accept the recent BSPA offer of returning to the EL fold, it looks like the threat of legal action still exists. I think the last time it actually happened was way back during the PL/NL dispute in 1964 - although I may have missed some in recent years when Coventry and Eastbourne threw the proverbial toys out the pram on more than one occasion. In the 60s Bob Andrews tried to ride for Wolves in the PL while contracted to Wimbledon in the NL and was served papers in the Hackney pits. This ended his PL "career" although part of the judgement stipulated that Wimbledon too must honour the contract and not disadvantage him. This case more or less ended riders "jumping ship" although Oxford's Ronnie Genz rode as "Reg Neal" for Exeter in one meeting. Shortly thereafter Oxford had a rider called "freddie Falcon" programmed in their second half, but he never showed up!! IT is to be hoped that no injunctions stopping league speedway are successful, nor indeed sought, as this would no doubt spark off counter claims of being denied employment etc. The EL certainly can't afford to waste money on legal fees and perhaps more worrying what would Sky do if the season didn't start as scheduled. Would they pull out completely - that would surely be the end for the EL. Perhaps Sky would simply switch to the PL!! In that case lets hope we see them in court!!
|
|
|
Post by warrenedric on Jan 19, 2011 11:08:43 GMT 1
And if the current situation remains we face the real situation of Britain's only GP competitor not riding in the Elite League.
Belle Vue are the only team in the current 8 team set up who can fit him in.
It would be absurd if the British Champion, British number 1, and only GP representative can't be accomodated in the Elite League this season.
|
|
jock
Neck and Neck with Charlie McKinna
Posts: 160
|
Post by jock on Jan 19, 2011 16:21:36 GMT 1
A " spokesman ", Rosco, was on Sky news on Monday night. What he says indicates to me that its an fight over averages and rule changes. Most important lesson is this MUST never happen again. Once its sorted, it will be,they should make sure this is the only time this ever happens.
|
|
|
Post by jim on Jan 19, 2011 16:50:02 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by herbie on Jan 19, 2011 23:10:51 GMT 1
Would always listen to Roscoe as he always makes sense, just think if the Bees and Panthers have an issue they have a better chance of getting sorted from within than from the outside looking in-they need to remember that if they sit out the season they will lose support, might not be a lot, but if it's only £15 to get in then for 60 punters maybe going to Leicester instead of Brandon every week the Bees will be a grand down every meeting when you add in progs, food, 50/50's etc. Telly money obviously counts for a lot but just worry that Elite League is unsustainable whatever way you do it-how many people saw a well atended, and televised, Sky Elite meeting last year-end of season playoffs maybe?
|
|
|
Post by Graham on Jan 19, 2011 23:35:15 GMT 1
This is a tedious business which has been dragging on for weeks. I sometimes wish speedway had a Bernie Ecclestone-type character who could cut through red tape and get things done quickly.
Incidentally does anyone have a link to the PL KO Cup draw for this coming season? And the various rule changes that have taken place? I don't think there's been a detailed press release from the BSPA, or if there has been I can't find it.
|
|
|
Post by djw on Jan 20, 2011 0:15:50 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by Graham on Jan 20, 2011 0:47:19 GMT 1
Thanks DJW. Might be a long shot but does anyone know the second round draw and who we will get if we beat Leicester? (No chickens being counted of course).
Any dates / venues for the PLRC, Pairs, 4s yet? The Super7 site is still showing information relating to 2010.
|
|
|
Post by djw on Jan 20, 2011 13:52:09 GMT 1
Haven't seen a second round draw, which is unusual as they normally do that at same time as the first. As for the 4TT, etc, I suspect the Coventry/Peterboro fiasco has held up venues for that, especially since the fours were there last year. Kings Lynn must be in with a shout to host the fours you would think(back to its original home!!), assuming Somerset has the pairs. Would be no surprise either if the PLRC was at Sheffield, normally around the end of Sept
|
|
|
Post by coombes on Jan 20, 2011 20:37:41 GMT 1
Gather a lot of the dispute is now "sub judice" and neither side can say much about it until it comes to court. Unlike Herbie, I'm not so taken with Rosco's pearls of wisdom! Might be wrong but the root cause seems to be the EL-PL average conversion factor. Last year Poole got a "steal" with Darcy Ward coming in at less than 5 ( ie PL 10 divided by 2) . The Pirates ran away with the league race which was over by early summer, so maybe a revision was in order. If the old ratio continued Larsen would have be a bit below 5, something like 4.8 or so. With the new conversion rate - is it x0.6? - it now works out just below 6, something like 5.7 or so. Still think Larsen is good value at this figure. Don't know what the figures are for Sundstrom but guess they are similar. If the 60% factor was applied in reverse for Joe Screen last year, I think his assessed figure would have been around 9.5 which seems fairly realistic against his final average - certainly more so than his 11+ figure So I think I'm with the BSPA on the average front. HOWEVER the idea that neither Coventry nor Peterboroshould get any Sky money, as seems to being mooted, is simply outrageous. Lets hope this gets sorted without huge expense which British speedway can certainly not afford, and lets hope Sky are not frightened off.....lets hope!!!
|
|
|
Post by blantyre1forever on Feb 3, 2011 13:01:43 GMT 1
Not that it really matters, but there is a widespread myth that there is some sort of 'sub judice' rule that stops a party from commenting on on-going legal proceedings in which he is involved. There is no such rule. A party may be advised by his lawyers to say little or nothing, but that is a different matter. There are rules that apply to discussion in Parliament of legal proceedings, and rules that mean that newspapers need to be careful once someone has been charged with a criminal offence, for fear of prejudicing the trial, but none of that applies to a civil action between, say, a Midlands speedway promoter and the BSPA.
Besides, as a general rule, members of the public are entitled to obtain copies of the 'pleadings' filed by parties, at least when the claim is brought in England and Wales: Rule 5.4C(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules for E&W.
One interesting question is the proper identity of the Defendant. If, as I suspect, the BSPA is an unincorporated association, then it is just like a club, whose members will, on the face of it, be jointly and severally liable for its liabilities - such as, for example, a costs order from a Court. That could, conceivably, have implications for Glasgow and the other PL teams.
|
|
|
Post by jim on Feb 3, 2011 16:39:57 GMT 1
Interesting and a wee bit concerning (the last point). Now I know who to pm when a bit of litigation is being considered. ;D
|
|
|
Post by herbie on Feb 3, 2011 22:56:58 GMT 1
Interesting and a wee bit concerning (the last point). Now I know who to pm when a bit of litigation is being considered. ;D Yeah, might be going down that road soon-do you do special rates for Tigers fans? ;D
|
|
|
Post by blantyre1forever on Feb 4, 2011 0:20:51 GMT 1
Have done so in the past - but only for those on the other side of the fence. A long story.
|
|