PHILIPRISING

THEN why didn't Greg just feign an engine failure and pull off to the side when in all probability no one would have said a word? These things happen. He's certainly not stupid and if he wanted to do Chris a favour that would have been the way to do it.

YOU can be really quite stupid at times. Peter White censored? Give me a break. Pravda? Give me another break. Your jaundiced view of Speedway Star and self-proclaimed expertise on journalism is breathtaking. HATE away ...

BUT the extra point didn't get him a medal and he would have been a genius to work out that it would.. Hancock's withdrawal from the meeting (which I profoundly disagree with) didn't make him ineligible for the title only any subsequent rounds had there been any. The FIM, as reported, chose to take no further action. Why was it necessary to "mention' that Greg's version of events didn't match that of the FIM's? It was there in black and white. AGREE, that was wrong. YES, he spoke to all the FIM officials. Don't think it was Pawlicki who allegedly made a complaint but certainly no one wanted to make any public comment. And, with respect, if you want to know their replies buy a copy of Speedway Star.

YOU want a comment? Okay, Paul did a brilliant job. Spoke to all parties concerned as he should have done. He reported what went on and while you and others might think that was with a biased eye I certainly wouldn't agree. It was not Paul's job to be judge and jury or give what the end of the day would simply be a personal view, no different to mine or anyone on here. Those of you bitterly complaining about what he wrote are only doing so because you don't agree with what Hancock says and what action the FIM took. As I say, plenty do. I have watched a rerun of Heat 9 several times and can understand why many on here, but certainly no all in the great big world out there, think Hancock pulled over. I get that impression too but it has not in my view been proven beyond all reasonable doubt even if the FIM Jury decided so. Had it gone to an appeal in a Court of Law the outcome may have been very different. But, playing Devil's Advocate for a moment: why would he actually do that? Why so early in the meeting gift Holder a point when Chris was assured of a top eight place and still had two rides to compete to qualify for the semis and two more to actually win the final? So much could have happened to make that race irrelevant. Did the result of that race actually have any bearing on the outcome of the meeting? It was not as though it was a semi-final or final. So, I repeat, why do it? Without what Hancock perceived as a gross miscarriage of justice he would not have taken the subsequent action that he did and this whole furore would not have taken the form that it has. And comments like those made by Fromafar are as petty as they are ridiculous. End of season booze up? We should be so lucky.

AS you are doubtless aware, she is unmissable especially when holding up her iPhone in front of her face just a few inches away. . I was very tempted to lean forward and get in on the act but Nicki might not have approved.

HE doesn't have to but unlike others including Sayfytdinov doesn't have an irrefutable claim to a wild card.

I THINK he was taken into consideration but he has always declined to take part in the qualifiers. Will have to wait see whether than changes.

THAT'S the understatement of the year.

POSSIBLE that I got hold of the wrong end of the stick (does happen ) and the Etihad are waiting to hear from Dorna and the Moto GP so that they can, in fact, run on the same weekend. Either way, confirmation from Dorna is awaited.

WHAT are you getting at? I never said I spent most of the meeting watching her. She was directly in front of me so could hardly avoid her taking selfie videos while I was looking at the racing.

ONE thing that I do know is holding up the complete calendar is a date for Melbourne. BSI have been waiting for Dorna to confirm their date for the Moto GP at Phillips Island, which they and the Etihad are keen to avoid which was not the case this year. It also has to be ratified by the FIM.

RULED out for the rest of the year ... nothing about taking all his points away. No love lost between messrs Hancock and Pedersen for obvious reasons. Rightly or wrongly the FIM accepted his explanation for pulling out. They will leave it at that.

SAT behind her at Teterow and she spent most of the meeting taking a selfie VIDEO

THEN you obviously don't read SS very often. Publicly criticised his contract negotiations in Poland and his withdrawal from the SWC. Haven't seen this week's edition myself but would expect them to report the FACTS. Let's not forget that there has been plenty of riders and others on Twitter and the like defending Hancock and saying that his explanation of Heat 9 was sound. It is all about opinions.

AND no doubt you could find two lawyers who agree. That's what lawyers do. But nothing will change your mind, and nor should it, but nothing will change the FIM either. AND no doubt you could find two lawyers who agree. That's what lawyers do. But nothing will change your mind, and nor should it, but nothing will change the FIM either.

I'M sorry but your interpretation is at odds with that of the FIM. They could have prevented him from appearing in subsequent rounds, although no doubt had that been the case with rounds still to go he would have immediately lodged an appeal, but they cannot and could not take way the points he had previously scored or disqualified him from championship. And, incidentally, this is not a question of what I do or do not disagree with but how the FIM view it

BUT it doesn't. He could not score any more points but the regulations say nothing about taking away any he has already accumulated. I am not defending Greg here, and publicly denounced his non-appearance in the latter stages of the SWC, but the fact is that none of us know 100 per cent or can prove without a shadow of a doubt that he allowed Holder to pass him. Hancock has come up with a plausible explanation and one that a court of law might find hard to discount. Only he knows whether or not his bike suffered a mechanical failure. No one can definitively prove one way or another. Guilty beyond all reasonable doubt? He will and does argue that the FIM's decision to deduct his points from Heat 9 branded him a cheat without a fair trial. His withdrawal in protest at that alleged accusation was, I agree, ill-tempered and without thought for the speedway world at large but it did not risk him losing the title because there is nothing in the regulations, as seen by the FIM, to retrospectively take points away.

NO but your interpretation of the rules doesn't coincide with theirs that a rider withdrawing is ineligible for the rest of that year's championship and not retrospectively thrown out of the whole year's title race.

CROWDS throughout 2016 have been excellent for what is sadly a minority sport with a very limited market attraction. The Etihad knew what they were taking on and obviously their sponsorship with the airline, who provide all the tickets for riders, etc, is a big plus. Any lack of promotional work in Melbourne itself and around the stadium in particular is strange but, again, down to them. I have never liked the idea of the series finishing in Australia and believe an opening two rounds in Oz and New Zealand would work much better but logistically that is currently proving impossible because of current usage of the Etihad.

THERE is a process which involves discussion between the FIM (notably Arando Castagna and Phil Morris) and BSI and then notification to the FIM itself but it should not take too long.

IT is nothing to do with BSI. The FIM are the sole arbiters of this and presumably interpreted the regulations differently to you. I would imagine that while you and indeed many others believe that GH allowed Chris Holder to pass him there is no definitive proof that he did. They would presumably also argue that withdrawal from the meeting (not the championship itself) did not warrant the sort of action you advocate. If any riders, including Nicki Pedersen, wish to challenge that ruling there is a procedure by which they can do so but from what I have heard (many thousands of miles away admittedly) there is no stomach for such action.

OF course they help them and provide the organisers with whatever they need. They had people on the ground working alongside the Etihad but the Etihad organise plenty of events and surely know what to do. They had David Tapp and Jason Crump doing plenty of promotional work but, at the end of the day, the crowd might be about what can be expected.

BEAR in I mind I wasn't there but the allotted time for the autograph session has always been the same. With regard to advertising, promotion, etc ... couldn't argue with anything that has been said but this is an event promoted by the Etihad themselves and not BSI. Personally I think that one has to be realistic about the attraction of any speedway event these days and outside of Warsaw and Cardiff a crowd in excess of 25,000 is hard to achieve. In such big stadiums as the Etihad and the Friends Arena in Stockholm the attendance can look pitifully small however much the TV cameras try and mask it. I know all the riders love racing at these big stadiums in major cities but we should all be realistic these days about the appeal of speedway. It is waning rapidly in the UK, where virtually nothing is being done to attract a younger audience. Many years ago the Sports Editor of the Daily Express told me that they would cover any event at Wembley even if it was tiddlywinks. I think there is an assumption in Melbourne, the sporting capital of Australia, that any event held at the Etihad would draw a crowd from the local public but that may not be the case.

DON'T think Smolinski has a hope in hell ... same for the three Brits you mention. Smolinski is good for a wild card in Teterow, assuming there is another SGP there, but nothing else. King, Cook and Lambert would fare no better than Harris. And don't run away with the idea that BSI are the sole arbiters ...the FIM and especially Armando Castagna have a strong voice and probably the deciding one if push comes to shove.

WHO knows... more secrecy than when choosing a Pope.