BWitcher

Another who can't read. He didn't.

It didn't take long. If you'd bother to read, which is something that a number of Ward's lackeys might wish to try, you would discover that he hadn't discussed any of the specifics of the case, merely confirmed how these cases worked. As the article says (using Google translator) "Nilsson was clear that he did not want to comment anything about the particular case ." Just because it doesn't fit in with the outright LIES that the Ward camp has been spreading, doesn't make it wrong.

I keep reading people saying we won't see the likes of PK and Hancock again, riding till their age... frankly I don't understand it. Riders are fitter now and know how to look after themselves better (at least some do) and I think its likely we will see more in the future. Agree with the rest of your post though!

What this interview basically reveals is what we have suspected all along. The Ward camp has been playing games in the media, purely for sympathy. There is absolutely no way that Ward will not have been clearly briefed by his legal team how proceedings were going to work. If we can discover it on the internet, then you can be sure his legal team will have, regardless of whether or not the FIM explained it to him (which they no doubt have as well). Basically, Ward/Middlo/Ford etc.. well and truly busted.

You're making no sense. They announce they will hold the SWC in 2013? SCB doubts that as he believes it will take longer... It DID take longer and you say he has no idea? The ones who had no idea were the ones making the promise. Although, 'no idea' is a bit harsh... more over enthusiastic. Don't get me wrong, it is absolutely FANTASTIC this project is now going ahead.

Sam's times weren't even couple of seconds slower tbh. All that he was lacking really was gating, until his final race when he gated and stuffed Lindgren and Ward out wide. They both got by but he stayed right behind them as they had a cracking battle, Ward making a mistake on turn 2 lap 3 and Sam passed him up the inside. Ward did throttle of a tad on the final lap, but the pass had already been made so he may or may not have got by. Lindgren only won by a short distance.. and this wasn't an 'exhibition race'. Apparently Holder enjoyed ribbing Ward in the pits about being beaten by an old man. Miskowiak was the 4th man in the race, he might have finished by now. Earlier he'd beat Janowski by some distance. As you say the conversation is silly anyway as he won't under any circumstances be banned for 4 years.

Oops Yep, hands up, you whooshed me.

Beat Darcy too

Still good enough to beat Janowski You are wittering on that if Ward were out of the sport for 4 years (which he won't be unless by choice) it would be impossible for him to return. Sam Ermolenko was out for longer, and far far older. Yet still was able to rock up and beat Janowski. Merely pointing out you're talking rubbish.

What exactly would he be 'catching up on'. Do we still turn left? Yes.. job done. Sam Ermolenko can do it at age 50+.

Not really, I still fail to see why his 'career is on the line'. Hardly going to ban him for life are they!

Why? You're falling precisely into the trap they want.... Ward knows full well the FIM have up to 45 days. He knows full well his lackeys will fawn over everyone of his 'woe is me tweets'.

Why is his career on the line?

So? That would be his choice and would be yet another poor decision.

The amusing tweets just keep on coming ... "utterly unprofessional treatment. Hope it's sorted today and in a favourable way. this is a big joke now the boy need to no total conspiracy!!! All getting beyond a joke. How long does it take to make a decision?" Sadly, the FIM don't seem to be interested in any bricks

Thanks for highlighting the foolishness of your comments. So we now have, Woffinden wasn't breaking any rules.. he wasn't delaying the start, which you agree with.. So where's the problem? What exactly is there for the referee to 'nip in the bud' if no rules are being broken? How is Woffinden gaining an unfair advantage (as you claim) if he isn't breaking any rules?

I'd like it to move on, but if someone posts fabrications, I'll refute em

Nice selective quoting there, conveniently leaving out the parts that don't fit your argument... all the signs of someone who has no argument. Just to help you out, on the 8th he actually said... "As for your Surgeon - no problem their either - he/she is useful to this Country. My gripe is with those who aren't and there are plenty of them about if you open your eyes. Racist - possibly!!!* Truthful - YES!!! * Depending on how you read my Post. Since when was TRUTH Filth?" Quite clearly explaining his gripe is with those who offer nothing to the country. A very legitimate standpoint. So very quickly we knew what he meant, which renders every single one of your posts since including your doctored one here, irrelevant. Run along so the thread can continue.

That's when they're coming back

I agree with that, but those are the regulations, so its acceptable to take 45 days until those are changed.. which perhaps (there maybe reasons we are unaware of) they should be.

Then you are talking rubbish again. The timescale in the Ward case is within 45 days. Therefore anything within that time frame is acceptable. As I said, whether the regulation itself giving 45 days is acceptable is another matter. That would be something to look at and be changed for future cases.

Yep.. but we could be sitting very pretty if both were to return in a season or two's time..

This post did make me chuckle. Many threads go off on a tangent, especially long running ones. It always comes back in the end. I love the school teacher threats though!

I think you are confusing the issue. The timescale IS acceptable as that is the timescale laid down by the rules. I'm afraid that's one of those facts that some seem to want to overlook. Now, whether the rules governing the timescale are reasonable is another matter.. but they are the rules as it stands now and are therefore the rules by which Ward must comply.

And you are doing precisely the same thing on the other side. The Romanian/Bulgarian (and some other eastern European countries) situation IS a problem. No, they are not all beggars, criminals etc, but there are many that are. It is just as wrong to turn a blind eye to that. How to solve the problem, given the rules of movement between EU countries is an entirely different matter altogether as there are many Eastern Europeans (and Western) who bring benefits to the country as well as you rightly point out.