Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2009 15:35:07 GMT
Very good, I did not know about the permits issued by Svemo for riding abroad. I somehow thought the BSPA would issue a starting permit for a rider wishing to ride in the UK, for example. AFAIK, licences are usually issued by the national federation of the country where a rider comes from, although it's not always the case. The rider is subject to the rules of the federation that issued the licence, and if they're suspended by that federation, it usually means they can't ride elsewhere either. Thanks Wibblemuis, but that's still rather strange. I don't know what could stop THJ from riding for his polish or british club if he felt like it, despite the ban from Svemo. They would surely be pissed off, but I can't see them having actual power over other leagues and their teams.
|
|
|
Post by schumi on Oct 15, 2009 15:41:09 GMT
They don't, but presumably Svemo can, as a last resort, revoke his license if he doesn't take the penalty seriously.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2009 15:53:29 GMT
They don't, but presumably Svemo can, as a last resort, revoke his license if he doesn't take the penalty seriously. I guess so, but it doesn't seem hard to get a license with someone else. Like Holta or Kylmäkoorpi (he was swedish u21 champion before he fell out with Svemo). But all things said, I do agree with THJ's punishment.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2009 17:03:06 GMT
I don't know what could stop THJ from riding for his polish or british club if he felt like it, despite the ban from Svemo. They would surely be pissed off, but I can't see them having actual power over other leagues and their teams. I think national federations do have the power to prevent a rider competing elsewhere, simply by announcing a suspension or revocation of the licence. Of course, whether such a thing would actually be legal if tested in a national or European court is open to question, but I suppose we won't know until a rider is disgruntled enough to start a test case.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2009 17:47:10 GMT
I don't know what could stop THJ from riding for his polish or british club if he felt like it, despite the ban from Svemo. They would surely be pissed off, but I can't see them having actual power over other leagues and their teams. I think national federations do have the power to prevent a rider competing elsewhere, simply by announcing a suspension or revocation of the licence. Of course, whether such a thing would actually be legal if tested in a national or European court is open to question, but I suppose we won't know until a rider is disgruntled enough to start a test case. Yes, that's what I feel aswell. Don't think it would hold water if actually challenged.
|
|
|
Post by admin on Oct 15, 2009 20:49:14 GMT
It's interesting to me that Svemo can suspend a rider outside of Sweden. Why is this possible? Surely he should be able to ride in meetings run by the BSPA, PZM or FIM? Didn't the BSPA do exactly the same thing to Lewis Bridger after he missed an Eastbourne meeting to race for Czestochowa? No doubt Edinburgh will attempt to sign Jonasson and if they succeed JDC will be asking for a facility to cover during the ban. The BSPA must ensure that Edinburgh do not get a facility, otherwise JDC will cram as many home fixtures in the banned period as he can credibly manage. After all, Jonasson is really only worthwhile away from Armadale.
|
|
|
Post by admin on Oct 15, 2009 20:52:45 GMT
Of course, whether such a thing would actually be legal if tested in a national or European court is open to question, but I suppose we won't know until a rider is disgruntled enough to start a test case. An interesting point. No doubt the argument would be restraint of trade. But since the rider has alternatives, such as applying for a license outside the jurisdiction of his home federation, I don't see why a sanction such as this shouldn't stand a test in the courts.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2009 10:47:25 GMT
As competitors accept the disciplinary code when they take out a licence, i see no reason why any further court would be interested in this case given the short duration of the ban. Although each case is unique and you cant predict everything in legal terms similar cases involving football and short bans have been kicked back. The only criteria they generally get involved is if the decision by the sporting body is considered OTT for the crime committed or there is a breach of the sporting bodies own disciplinary codes.
Anyway THJ is going to appeal on the grounds he advised SVEMO 8 days in advance that he couldn't make it. If that's correct then THJ will likely end up with a suspended ban and slap on the wrist.
The real issue with this case is again the actions of the Polish authorities who ignored the SVEMO ban and allowed THJ to ride. PZM told THJ that he had to bring documented proof to the match and as SVEMO would not give him that he was allowed to ride, however SVEMO are under no requirement to do so as the suspension of a licence according to FIM rules. Suspension of International licences are dealt with directly between the respective national bodies, all SVEMO have to do is contact the PZM and then its upto the PZM to enforce the ban. In fact the PZM did followed FIM procedure correctly in the Piscz case where they informed the ACU of the decision to suspend Piscz's international licence and its up to the ACU to inform the club [via the SCB] of the suspension. IMO the crap about bringing documents to the match is just an excuse Gorzow could use to get him to come track side so he could be told to ride. Gorzow pulled the same stunt last season when THJ's Swedish doctor ruled him out after a concussion but Gorzow insisted THJ bring the medical cert himself, THJ was then taken from airport directly to Gorzow's "doctor" who immediately declared him fit to ride after having given THJ 2 injections and THJ was threatened with a season's ban if he didn't ride. His interview on TV was quite alarming as he seemed almost drunk.
As usual Subedei's beloved PZM doing what they want. Under the FIM sporting code in theory the FIM could suspend the PZM from the FIM or SVEMO could bar all SVEMO licenced riders from participating in any PZM event if it's proved they deliberately went out of their way to allow THJ to ride.
FWIW you cant just take out another countries licence to escape a ban, FIM sporting code covers that too.
FWIW 2 THJ has had this coming for a long time and it's doubtful he will ride in Edinburgh's colours next season if he is riding in Poland also. Monarchs have had enough of him in that respect.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2009 10:53:11 GMT
No doubt Edinburgh will attempt to sign Jonasson and if they succeed JDC will be asking for a facility to cover during the ban. The BSPA must ensure that Edinburgh do not get a facility, otherwise JDC will cram as many home fixtures in the banned period as he can credibly manage. After all, Jonasson is really only worthwhile away from Armadale. I take it you will be calling for PZM to be suspended from FIM for breach of regulations over the THJ meeting he rode in Poland?
|
|
|
Post by schumi on Oct 16, 2009 14:13:52 GMT
The real issue with this case is again the actions of the Polish authorities who ignored the SVEMO ban and allowed THJ to ride. Gorzow pulled the same stunt last season when THJ's Swedish doctor ruled him out after a concussion but Gorzow insisted THJ bring the medical cert himself, THJ was then taken from airport directly to Gorzow's "doctor" who immediately declared him fit to ride after having given THJ 2 injections and THJ was threatened with a season's ban if he didn't ride. His interview on TV was quite alarming as he seemed almost drunk. As usual Subedei's beloved PZM doing what they want. Agree with all that. I said a while ago Thomas should have told Gorzow where to go after the first incident, and I stand by that. As I mentioned, he's no longer a junior, so won't be as valuable to the Poles - it'll be interesting to see if they reward his loyalty or drop him like a stone. Either way, I don't think riding in Poland is doing him any good at all - he has plenty of options elsewhere, and rides two days a week in Sweden, as well as individual meetings. I know money is a factor, but is riding in Poland worth all the trouble it's caused?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2009 14:52:39 GMT
It all depends on how many polish clubs survive the winter, big question marks over 2 of this years EL teams and 4 or 5 will have to clear payments before signing more riders. Lower down its highly likely no foreign riders in Div 2 at all and maybe 1 or 2 only in div 1 while the Polish quota in EL is apparently going up ro 2 or 3.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2009 17:20:46 GMT
As competitors accept the disciplinary code when they take out a licence, i see no reason why any further court would be interested in this case given the short duration of the ban. This assumes the disciplinary code is reasonable in the first place. If a complaint is made as to the validity of cross-border bans, then a court would be duty bound to at least consider it regardless of the duration. Although each case is unique and you cant predict everything in legal terms similar cases involving football and short bans have been kicked back. Football doesn't really provide any precedent as probably no footballers play for multiple teams in different countries at the same time. The question is more whether a contractual dispute in one country is grounds to prevent an employee competing elsewhere.
|
|
|
Post by admin on Oct 16, 2009 17:43:13 GMT
I take it you will be calling for PZM to be suspended from FIM for breach of regulations over the THJ meeting he rode in Poland? Go on then, I call for the PZM to be suspended from the joke that is the FIM.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2009 19:04:10 GMT
This assumes the disciplinary code is reasonable in the first place. If a complaint is made as to the validity of cross-border bans, then a court would be duty bound to at least consider it regardless of the duration. Of course the "reasonableness" test applies but courts have turned down such requests before. Such as test also applies to jurisdiction too dont forget Football doesn't really provide any precedent as probably no footballers play for multiple teams in different countries at the same time. The question is more whether a contractual dispute in one country is grounds to prevent an employee competing elsewhere. It does in terms of getting involved or not in disciplinary issues which resolve around sporting codes. The multi country is another issue as you say, but multiple countries issues have existed from time to time.
|
|