|
|
Post by admin on May 6, 2016 8:01:22 GMT
Yes the fun times are back  (not sure for how long though if Rathbone really is considering his future  ) DISILLUSIONED Peterborough promoter Ged Rathbone is considering his future in the sport after seeing a high-profile capture of Great Britain star Craig Cook blocked.The British Speedway Promoters' Association (BSPA) management committee have incredibly ruled that the 'T Balfe Construction' Panthers cannot complete a double-change that would have seen top talent Cook and fellow British rider Tom Stokes replace two Danes, Nicklas Porsing and Michael Palm Toft, in their team. Rathbone has been informed the decision was made In line with rule 16.3.5 of the 2016 Speedway Regulations, which states that the BSPA management committee monitors all proposed moves and has the sole responsibility to approve all (re-)declared team line-ups having been satisfied they are in the best interests of the sport.That conclusion appears to have been reached by the governing body even though Peterborough want to hand jobs to two British riders.It is a setback which has left Rathbone questioning whether he can continue in speedway beyond the club's next two Premier League meetings - a trip to Plymouth tonight (Friday) and a home clash against Sheffield on Sunday, when the new-look team was due to take to the East of England Showground track. A shocked Rathbone said: "The BSPA have told me it is not in the best interests of the sport to allow our signing of two British riders to go through - and that is something I find completely and utterly staggering. "I'm completely disillusioned as to how we can be blocked from bringing one of the finest British riders in Craig Cook and an up-and-coming British talent in Tom Stokes into a British team in a British league when we have broken no rules. "There is absolutely nothing in the sport's rulebook to suggest that this move cannot happen and the BSPA have failed to prove otherwise by providing me with such a ruling.“I'm told the management committee do not want a rider to double-up between two teams with the same race-night either - even though we have only a handful of Friday fixtures and there were only three clashes between ourselves and Craig's Elite League club, Belle Vue. "Using a guest on those three occasions was a perfectly acceptable scenario for both ourselves and Craig, who had jumped at the chance to return to racing in the Premier League. He is already in the process of having equipment brought back to the UK from Poland to facilitate this move. "I've also been informed that Belle Vue were not in a position to give us permission to speak to the rider - something they did grant to my co-promoter Trevor Swales when he made contact with them."I've had messages of support from other Premier League promoters telling us what a great move we have made - not just for Peterborough but for the whole of British speedway by bringing Craig back into the league - yet now we find our plans scuppered.“Craig was runner-up in the British Final last summer and would have won the title had the final race not been stopped. “With champion Tai Woffinden choosing not to ride in this country, Craig is now technically the best Brit actually racing in Britain. “He wants to compete in the top two British leagues, but is being prevented from doing that. What sort of message does that sound out to other British riders? "I've worked tirelessly since late in 2014 to bring stability and success to Peterborough. I cannot contemplate being in a position where our crowd levels drop, something I believe could happen after our poor recent form. "That is why I decided to act and make the exciting changes to create what we all want and what our paying supporters expect - a winning team. "At this moment in time, I'm committed to completing our away meeting at Plymouth and the home fixture against Sheffield, but I will be seriously considering my future in the sport beyond that. "The way I feel right now, Sunday may well be a farewell from me should our appeal over this decision not be successful.” Peterborough must now revert to their previous one-to-seven line-up. peterboroughpanthers 6/5/16 |
|
|
|
Post by admin on May 6, 2016 8:03:36 GMT
"rule 16.3.5 of the 2016 Speedway Regulations, which states that the BSPA management committee monitors all proposed moves and has the sole responsibility to approve all (re-)declared team line-ups having been satisfied they are in the best interests of the sport." That's the the most flexible rule you're ever likely to see. If they don't want it to happen, just quote 16.3.5 - one size fits all. Well you can't knock Rathbone's reply. It'll be interesting to see our lord and masters response if it ever arrives. Oh well, better get ready for work  |
|
|
|
Post by admin on May 6, 2016 10:53:05 GMT
I never get how full approval is not sought before a press release is issued saying what has happened?
If the BSPA and all of their committees agree it first (and in writing as I've said numerous times) then what's the problem. There should be no get out clause or ongoing factors once a press release is issued.
"Subject to BSPA approval" should never appear in a press release.
"Following BSPA approval" should
it isn't rocket science bash
|
|
|
|
Post by Bigcatdiary on May 6, 2016 11:26:06 GMT
I never get how full approval is not sought before a press release is issued saying what has happened? If the BSPA and all of their committees agree it first (and in writing as I've said numerous times) then what's the problem. There should be no get out clause or ongoing factors once a press release is issued. "Subject to BSPA approval" should never appear in a press release. "Following BSPA approval" should it isn't rocket science bash David Wootten (Porsings manager) decided to share it with the world via Facebook about why Porsing had been dropped. To be fair any submission to the BSPA generally gets out quite quick as any attempt to keep it quiet generally fails. As I view it "it's same rubbish different year" I see absolutely no changes this year despite Busters statement as the BSPA lurch from one PR disaster to another, and yet another decision which beggars belief. As I submitted elsewhere it's interesting that almost 100% of people disagree with the 5 man MC who decreed this wasn't in the best interests of British Speedway. At the very least I would be telling the BSPA what they can do with their fours weekend that's of course assuming Ged chooses to carry on after this weekend. Peterborough Speedway has been a big part of my life but I genuinely wouldn't knock Ged if he just walked away because I don't see the BSPA ever changing. edit for double punctuation. |
|
|
|
Post by rodders on May 6, 2016 13:29:52 GMT
Looks like the situation has come to light earlier than it would have been due it would seem to sour grapes from Porsing and his Manager.
One wonders however why the announcement went ahead in any case if Ged had been told as has been suggested that it was unlikely to get approval.
Also wonder effect on much vaunted team spirit if Porsing and Palm Toft have to return.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 6, 2016 14:12:53 GMT
Shouldn't have announced the signing, shouldn't have told the riders who were being dropped until confirmation had been received from the BSPA, as Rigsby says, it isn't rocket science. A harsh learning curve for Ged. Irrespective of that, citing he rides for a Friday track where there are THREE clashes, seems a stupid reason and certainly isn't in the best interests of Craig Cook or Peterborough Speedway.
As for Porsing, he's been next to useless, we're well rid of him.
|
|
|
|
Post by admin on May 6, 2016 14:23:04 GMT
"rule 16.3.5 of the 2016 Speedway Regulations, which states that the BSPA management committee monitors all proposed moves and has the sole responsibility to approve all (re-)declared team line-ups having been satisfied they are in the best interests of the sport." That's the the most flexible rule you're ever likely to see. If they don't want it to happen, just quote 16.3.5 - one size fits all. Well you can't knock Rathbone's reply. It'll be interesting to see our lord and masters response if it ever arrives.
Oh well, better get ready for work   BRITISH Speedway vice-chairman Rob Godfrey is keen to explain why Peterborough's bid to sign star rider Craig Cook has failed. Panthers had announced their intention to bring in the Belle Vue man on a doubling-up basis - but the sport's management committee didn't approve the move. And Godfrey insists Cook is welcome to ride in the Premier League and is also slamming suggestions of a vendetta against the East of England Showground club.He said: "I'm annoyed by the amount of unfair criticism the association are taking over this. "The fact of the matter is that I advised Peterborough promoter Ged Rathbone that any such move was unlikely to be approved, I told him this as a friend."You simply cannot sign a rider when he already rides for a club on your racenight. King's Lynn switched from a Wednesday to a Thursday and as a consequence they had to lose Lewis Kerr from their team as he was already signed to a Thursday night track. "Here, we have Peterborough who are a declared Friday night racetrack as in the promoter's guide and yet Craig already rides for Belle Vue who are also a Friday track.
"I explained all this to Ged but he still went and released riders from his team."This is not a vendetta against Peterborough and not a vendetta against Craig. Craig is more than welcome to ride in the Premier League, but not for a Friday night track and if we allowed it to happen now, everyone would be trying the same thing. "Doubling-up is a necessary evil in the sport, as an association we have a responsibility to maintain control of the situation. "I hope people, even our fiercest critics, can at least appreciate my explanation as to how this decision was reached." speedwaygb.co/news 6/5/16 |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 6, 2016 14:32:55 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 6, 2016 14:44:39 GMT
As usual, the whole thing has been handled badly.
If BSF is correct, Porsing's manager was informed of the sacking and was never told not to keep it to themselves.
Informing them prior to it all being cleared by the powers that be was a huge mistake!!
Ged must have known that as soon as the dropped riders were informed it would be on social media and everyone would know even if they were asked to keep it quiet ... why would they.
We tried to sign a rider whose EL track ride on the same night as we do, yes I know the fixture clashes are only 3 but that gives a logical reason for it being blocked, especially as the chairman lost a rider, Kerr, after a same night clash between Kings Lynn and Ipswich. It was never going to go ahead after that!
I fear for the team for the rest of the season, if indeed there is a rest of the season!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 6, 2016 14:48:09 GMT
"rule 16.3.5 of the 2016 Speedway Regulations, which states that the BSPA management committee monitors all proposed moves and has the sole responsibility to approve all (re-)declared team line-ups having been satisfied they are in the best interests of the sport." That's the the most flexible rule you're ever likely to see. If they don't want it to happen, just quote 16.3.5 - one size fits all. Well you can't knock Rathbone's reply. It'll be interesting to see our lord and masters response if it ever arrives. Oh well, better get ready for work Reminds me a couple of years ago, when POOLE were in danger of not making the playoffs, and brought in GREG HANCOCK, of course that was in the interest of speedway,it must have been the correct decision by the BSPA because they won it, after getting the points required before the match was abandoned on the lake they were riding in, which should never been allowed in the first place, the worst conditions I have ever seen jim |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 6, 2016 15:06:11 GMT
I read a little while ago that PK would be interested in the Prem league, would come in around 7.70, as he is foreign think that might well be approved
jim
|
|
|
|
Post by admin on May 6, 2016 15:19:37 GMT
"rule 16.3.5 of the 2016 Speedway Regulations, which states that the BSPA management committee monitors all proposed moves and has the sole responsibility to approve all (re-)declared team line-ups having been satisfied they are in the best interests of the sport." That's the the most flexible rule you're ever likely to see. If they don't want it to happen, just quote 16.3.5 - one size fits all. Well you can't knock Rathbone's reply. It'll be interesting to see our lord and masters response if it ever arrives. Oh well, better get ready for work Reminds me a couple of years ago, when POOLE were in danger of not making the playoffs, and brought in GREG HANCOCK, of course that was in the interest of speedway,it must have been the correct decision by the BSPA because they won it, after getting the points required before the match was abandoned on the lake they were riding in, which should never been allowed in the first place, the worst conditions I have ever seen jim Not forgetting the Kozza Smith was he wasn't he legal debate. After deciding that he wasn't, it was in the best interests of speedway that he was. Panthers got shafted and Poole progressed. Ironically, wasn't Craig Cook double booked that night before EL fixtures became priority, hence seriously weakening Belle Vue  |
|
|
|
Post by Bigcatdiary on May 6, 2016 15:20:56 GMT
"rule 16.3.5 of the 2016 Speedway Regulations, which states that the BSPA management committee monitors all proposed moves and has the sole responsibility to approve all (re-)declared team line-ups having been satisfied they are in the best interests of the sport." That's the the most flexible rule you're ever likely to see. If they don't want it to happen, just quote 16.3.5 - one size fits all. That's the relevant bit and its unappealable, basically the MC can allow or decline a declaration as they please, and to be fair over the last 10 or 11 years it's been in place they have, to the benefit of some and the detriment of others. |
|
|
|
Post by admin on May 6, 2016 15:29:14 GMT
"rule 16.3.5 of the 2016 Speedway Regulations, which states that the BSPA management committee monitors all proposed moves and has the sole responsibility to approve all (re-)declared team line-ups having been satisfied they are in the best interests of the sport." That's the the most flexible rule you're ever likely to see. If they don't want it to happen, just quote 16.3.5 - one size fits all. That's the relevant bit and its unappealable, basically the MC can allow or decline a declaration as they please, and to be fair over the last 10 or 11 years it's been in place they have, to the benefit of some and the detriment of others. Problem is though, what the hell does monitor mean in practice? They should be part of the process before anything is announced or discussed. There should be no "this is what we're doing subject to approval". Everyone needs to shut it until these things are fully agreed and signed off by the BSPA MC. That might be tough on some people but that's the world we live in. The BSPA management committee is made up of chairman Buster Chapman (who promotes at King’s Lynn), vice chairman Rob Godfrey (Scunthorpe), George English (Newcastle), Chris van Straaten (Wolverhampton) and Colin Pratt (Swindon). |
|
|
|
Post by Bigcatdiary on May 6, 2016 15:29:22 GMT
Reminds me a couple of years ago, when POOLE were in danger of not making the playoffs, and brought in GREG HANCOCK, of course that was in the interest of speedway,it must have been the correct decision by the BSPA because they won it, after getting the points required before the match was abandoned on the lake they were riding in, which should never been allowed in the first place, the worst conditions I have ever seen jim Not forgetting the Kozza Smith was he wasn't he legal debate. After deciding that he wasn't, it was in the best interests of speedway that he was. Panthers got shafted and Poole progressed. Ironically, wasn't Craig Cook double booked that night before EL fixtures became priority, hence seriously weakening Belle Vue As I sad previously to the benefit of some and the detriment of others on a regular basis. Precedents mean jack, it again depends on who is asking. Let's be honest it's never going to change until the powers at be want to change. I have seen little evidence of that despite some recent statements following forum criticism. |
|
|
|
Post by rodders on May 6, 2016 20:24:48 GMT
Sorry to say that in my view Ged has got this massively wrong. Sheer madness to push ahead when he had been warned it was unlikely to be approved. I fear for the future of Panthers.
|
|
|
|
Post by admin on May 6, 2016 21:55:16 GMT
Sorry to say that in my view Ged has got this massively wrong. Sheer madness to push ahead when he had been warned it was unlikely to be approved. I fear for the future of Panthers. Funny how it's developed over the day isn't it as both sides have put their case so that fans can make an informed decision. This was the game changer for me if true: "The fact of the matter is that I advised Peterborough promoter Ged Rathbone that any such move was unlikely to be approved, I told him this as a friend."Rathbone's early piece without reply seemed good although I was a touch concerned when I got to: "I've also been informed that Belle Vue were not in a position to give us permission to speak to the rider - something they did grant to my co-promoter Trevor Swales when he made contact with them." |
|
|
|
Post by rodders on May 7, 2016 5:04:46 GMT
Sorry to say that in my view Ged has got this massively wrong. Sheer madness to push ahead when he had been warned it was unlikely to be approved. I fear for the future of Panthers. Funny how it's developed over the day isn't it as both sides have put their case so that fans can make an informed decision. This was the game changer for me if true: "The fact of the matter is that I advised Peterborough promoter Ged Rathbone that any such move was unlikely to be approved, I told him this as a friend."Rathbone's early piece without reply seemed good although I was a touch concerned when I got to: "I've also been informed that Belle Vue were not in a position to give us permission to speak to the rider - something they did grant to my co-promoter Trevor Swales when he made contact with them." Exactly my view, it may well be unfair, stupid etc, but Ged seemingly was well aware of the likely outcome. |
|
|
|
Post by rodders on May 7, 2016 7:02:25 GMT
Possible progress according to official site!!!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Bigcatdiary on May 7, 2016 9:09:37 GMT
Sorry to say that in my view Ged has got this massively wrong. Sheer madness to push ahead when he had been warned it was unlikely to be approved. I fear for the future of Panthers. Funny how it's developed over the day isn't it as both sides have put their case so that fans can make an informed decision. This was the game changer for me if true: "The fact of the matter is that I advised Peterborough promoter Ged Rathbone that any such move was unlikely to be approved, I told him this as a friend."Rathbone's early piece without reply seemed good although I was a touch concerned when I got to: "I've also been informed that Belle Vue were not in a position to give us permission to speak to the rider - something they did grant to my co-promoter Trevor Swales when he made contact with them." Funnily enough the game changers for me were Dan Bewley Being allowed to ride for Edinburgh and Belle Vue (both Friday night tracks) and the fact that Gdfrey in his statement quoted that Lewis Kerr didn't ride for Lynn and Ipswich this year because of this rule, but which now has been said Kerr decided to quit Lynn because of the money side as he would earn more in the PL. So basically what Godfrey said in his statement was untrue. |
|
|
|
Post by admin on May 7, 2016 9:35:10 GMT
Funny how it's developed over the day isn't it as both sides have put their case so that fans can make an informed decision. This was the game changer for me if true: "The fact of the matter is that I advised Peterborough promoter Ged Rathbone that any such move was unlikely to be approved, I told him this as a friend."Rathbone's early piece without reply seemed good although I was a touch concerned when I got to: "I've also been informed that Belle Vue were not in a position to give us permission to speak to the rider - something they did grant to my co-promoter Trevor Swales when he made contact with them." Funnily enough the game changers for me were Dan Bewley Being allowed to ride for Edinburgh and Belle Vue (both Friday night tracks) and the fact that Godfrey in his statement quoted that Lewis Kerr didn't ride for Lynn and Ipswich this year because of this rule, but which now has been said Kerr decided to quit Lynn because of the money side as he would earn more in the PL. So basically what Godfrey said in his statement was untrue. That's the beauty of a forum isn't it. I look for the simple things that people say before our knowledgeable technical team deal with the specific detail  |
|
|
|
Post by admin on May 7, 2016 9:38:04 GMT
Possible progress according to official site!!!!! PETERBOROUGH are still hopeful of being able to complete a double-change to their Premier League team. ‘T Balfe Construction’ Panthers initially saw their capture of Great Britain star Craig Cook and local lad Tom Stokes rejected by the British Speedway Promoters’ Association (BSPA). But promoter Ged Rathbone was involved in negotiations with a senior member of the BSPA management committee yesterday afternoon as they try to work together to reach a satisfactory outcome on the matter. A further update will be provided when appropriate. peterboroughpanthers.co/news 7/5/16 |
|
|
|
Post by Bigcatdiary on May 7, 2016 10:01:01 GMT
Funnily enough the game changers for me were Dan Bewley Being allowed to ride for Edinburgh and Belle Vue (both Friday night tracks) and the fact that Godfrey in his statement quoted that Lewis Kerr didn't ride for Lynn and Ipswich this year because of this rule, but which now has been said Kerr decided to quit Lynn because of the money side as he would earn more in the PL. So basically what Godfrey said in his statement was untrue. That's the beauty of a forum isn't it. I look for the simple things that people say before our knowledgeable technical team deal with the specific detail What is very noticeable this year is the BSPA are taking a lot of notice what's said on the forums/twitter/Facebook and responding to it, in passed years they just ignored it. It shows what a useful tool technology is, look at the coach and horses people have driven through Godfreys statement from yesterday. I thought it was also interesting that the BSPA were blocking some of the Twitter users. |
|
|
|
Post by rodders on May 7, 2016 10:06:08 GMT
Seems to me two entirely separate issues here.
(1) The BSPA ruling
(2) Why did Ged go ahead when we are led to believe that he had been told that the changes would not allowed.
It would also be interesting to have the actual number of meetings he will miss should the move go ahead. Presently it is between 3 and upwards of 7 depending on whose figures are to be believed.
|
|
|
|
Post by admin on May 7, 2016 10:45:49 GMT
Seems to me two entirely separate issues here. (1) The BSPA ruling (2) Why did Ged go ahead when we are led to believe that he had been told that the changes would not allowed. It would also be interesting to have the actual number of meetings he will miss should the move go ahead. Presently it is between 3 and upwards of 7 depending on whose figures are to be believed. If what Ged did/said is true then I'm sure that he'll get his wings clipped behind closed doors this time for sure. As Dick says, BSPA rulings are being examined as never before due to the internet and that may just bring our sport into the modern world. Their decisions have to be clear/consistent and explained properly. The smoke and mirrors guff they put out first wasn't good enough and Godrey's attempt at responding to the backlash has gone down like a lead balloon with the majority, even though some thing that the BSPA done good! |
|
(not sure for how long though if Rathbone really is considering his future 
)
