BWitcher

WK, you're digging now. The thread is about Australians not getting work permits, so someone posting "If they were Australian...." would hardly be funny would it. The only reason you thought it was funny was because he used the term black, nothing more, nothing less. Jokes about English, Irish, Jews etc that many find amusing are stereo-typical jokes.. Jews and money for example... those are the jokes where political correctness interferes... They are stereo-types, so based upon elements of truth. However, in this case there is no element of truth, its simply ill-educated nonsense that sadly many actually believe to be true.

Not rubbish at all. The work permit criteria wouldn't prevent the majority of Australians who have come to this country from riding. Without checking I suspect those three would have met the relevant criteria most seasons. The issue has stemmed from riders of lower quality than those coming over. It wasn't a harmless thing. I hate political correctness, but that comment had nothing at all to do with 'political correctness' and is PRECISELY the reason there is so much trouble and prejudice. The only way you could find the joke funny is if you had a pre-held belief that if you were black with 6 kids you would get a work permit. This is ill-educated nonsense.

Why do you think it was funny? Why would being black and having six kids have any bearing on gaining a work permit? It's nothing to do with Political Correctness...

Why? Because we don't get to see some second rate riders? Instead, those places should go to young British riders which WOULD help the sport in this country. If it was funny perhaps... Instead it was an ill-educated, bordering on racist post. As has been said, all other walks of life are required to abide by the work permit rules. Those that don't can be punished heavily, speedway should be thankful that isn't happening in this case. Despite the gibberish spouted by folk such as Tsunami, you don't see poor quality work permit players in most other sports.. I note he hasn't made further comment regarding his utterly incorrect claims regarding footballs lower leagues.

Name a higher level league for speedway in the UK. If you can, your point is valid. If you can't, the Elite League is appropriately named.

If it's silly WK, it only strengthens my argument further.

Which NL rider is going to replace Craig Cook, the No 1 rider in the PL? I can see the point you're trying to make, however it's flawed.. As Cook/Lawson wouldn't be replaced by a NL rider, simply a new Dane/Swede etc would be brought in. It's the bottom end of PL teams that needs to be sorted out.

It's not even a debate. One is named correctly, the other isn't, quite simple. You are right though, PL reserve births should be filled exclusively by British Riders.. the PL won't play ball however.

BWitcher, on 23 Jan 2015 - 11:12 AM, said: You can't name any because there aren't any. It doesn't matter how much you swear, stamp your feet or make things up Tsunami the facts are there are ZERO work permit players in League 2 and very few, if ANY in League 1. The closest that there can be found is a New Zealander who qualifies to play due to his ancestory.

It is the highest level league in the UK. Therefore, it is the Elite. 100% accurately named. By mocking the 'Elite' League, which IS the highest standard you are really putting your boot into the 'Premier' League which is below it.

Similar, but you were blaming the wrong situation. The double uppers aren't taking up the places that the young NL riders should be moving into. The progress is being blocked before that stage and that very much lies at the door of the falsely named Premier League.

What you have said has no bearing on the situation at all. Those riders aren't blocking places for young NL riders. The young NL riders should be moving into PL reserve spots and progressing up from there. Instead those sports get clogged up with journeyman riders from overseas.

There are hardly any work permit players in the lower leagues at all. There doesn't appear to be a single one in Division 2 and the same applies to Division 1. Very few 'foreign' players either in those leagues. You're clearly very confused. Do you know who the BSPA are?

The BSPA approve every signing. If one was illegal, they reject it. Simple.

So there isn't an issue. Thankyou for admitting that and rendering your whole point null and void. "Legally" is the key word you used there. You are still banging on about the number of work permit players in the lower leagues. I've asked you to name some, you've not managed to name one as yet... I wonder why that is?

Are all teams not approved by the BSPA? The BSPA are the promoters, not some other body.

Because the system should be used in the PL, but they won't do it. More interested in useless Danes/Swedes etc. As it happens, it appears it benefitted quite a few of the better fast track riders last season. The Premier League is the biggest cause of the lack of progression for British riders. They don't want to play ball when it comes to development. They're more interested in rip off entrance prices and false advertising

Don't blame the EL. The PL are the ones to blame for lack of progression of kids from the NL.

Please give some names of these footballers. As has been pointed out there are stringent rules in place for work permit footballers.

Irrelevant information. Neither is it up to SCB to "Give the guy a break". It's up to the government and the laws they enforce. As for trying to make a living.. is he incapable of any other form of work back home? Entirely the promoters fault.

I agree. I'm not really disagreeing with John Leslie either, I would lean towards his interpretation too. I'm simply looking at it from the Ward angle. With regards to previous cases, it would be interesting to know if the normal procedure following a failed breath test is to take a blood sample. If, for example, in all the previous occasions this was the procedure followed, but this time only a breath test was taken, they could perhaps use that as an angle.

As said, I can totally see the way you are explaining it and I'm sure that is what it is meant to mean. However, you can be assured that lawyers will twist it their way.

I have read it. You've put your own spin onto it, the way you WANT it to read. Ward's lawyers will put their own spin of how they WANT it to read. It's poorly worded and can be interpreted both ways... which is where the FIM could have problems.

Why does it kill it stone dead? The way that reads is you would need a Breath AND blood... or just a blood. If it was one or the other, it would simply say Breath or Blood. Blood clearly being the stronger of the two. It's this sort of wording that legal teams will play on. It doesn't matter what the rule is 'meant' to mean.. it's the way it can be interpreted.

So as suspected, Ward is looking to weasel his way off on a technicality. He'll now become a wanted man that's for sure.