Grand Central

Have to agree Gemini. The great thing we do here is discuss things that may, or may not happen ... at great length. And I love doing that But when it comes to the BSPA AGM, it is utterly pointless. They will decide what they want. Or not. Any views we may have are of no interest whatsoever.

Not arguing, as such, just interested in the idea of a void being created. My thinking was that one of the great virtues of SGP over the years is that such a thing has never been noticeable despite the loss of some really big hitters. I see now that you mean that the 'void' is a different one that I was imagining. You seem to mean from a sort of marketing perspective. That the series 'needs' a really top-line American, Swede or Pole who is able to pull in the media etc in their own country. I presume that is why you do not see Crump/Adams in the same way as they they have had other Aussies to replace them. I was just thinking from a spectators point of view. The loss of Rickardsson seems to have been long, long forgotten 'down my way'. Even Gollob, who really did look to be irreplaceable to me, hasn't really been lamented once you are into the series. We just get over them pretty quickly, really.

I have stood and cheered, many time, when Greg has won GPs ... at least ten to my immediate memory. But that still does not really validate the term 'void' if he were to retire. Two totally different things, strangely confused.

Void? Strange word. Since the GPs started we have seen the retirements of so many real stars; Nielsen, Rickardsson, Crump et al. No void. This last year we managed without Gollob, Emil and, for the most part, Ward. No void. When Nicki goes we will miss him, a little. But no void. When Greg goes, we will barely bat an eyelid.

.Exactly the same thing has happened to me in the past. Now I am a happy subscriber to the online version. It was funny how they always 'remembered' to stop sending me the mag when the sub was finished. But never managed to remind me to send them more money to keep it going. Odd. I imagine it difficult for the editorial of the mag to criticise promoters for not doing enough 'promotion'. When failing in this regard themselves. .

.If Darcy's legal team really can argue the case of wrong protocols, successfully And get him off free of a further ban. Then the the guy REALLY would be a prize idiot to take further legal steps of any type. He should count his blessings and get back on his bike, racing, as soon as possible. Oh, and he definitely should NOT go out on the lash to celebrate! .

It is still not a 'European' issue.

There is no European court issue here at all. The FIM issued a totally legal WORLDWIDE motorcycling suspension. As is their jurisdiction. You may equate this to some contrived Euro issue. But as I say. You are quite the comic.

Sometimes it's the posts that are written in all seriousness, with heavy handed gravity and import, that are just plain hilarious. To prick your balloon. No he won't.

Thank god you inserted the remark in parenthesis to disassociate yourself from the 'thought'. Whoever came up with it is clearly an idiot. And was, no doubt, 'insufficiently hydrated' at the time. .

Yes, everything here is hypothetical at the moment. But is the idea of Ward getting a series wildcard for 2015 really on the table, at all? No matter who else is in the frame. Last year the wild cards for 2014 were announced at the end of October 2013; and Ward isn't even due to have his hearing until November this year. Even if he gets off completely scot-free it will all be too late, won't it? Or are the timings being changed for this year? Even allowing for some contrivance where the wildcard selection was delayed until after his hearing it is surely inconceivable that he would be selected if found guilty, isn't it? If we take your scenario of a six month ban being imposed. Of course it would start from the day he was suspended which means he is actually banned from all motorcycling worldwide until the end of February 2015. Is it really feasible that he could be considered by BSI and the wild card 'committee' for selection; or have that sanctioned by the FIM in the immediate aftermath of that ban being announced, by the FIM themselves? Surely not.

The guy knowing the difference between right and wrong would suffice.

They don't allocate wildcards. No one said they did. The FIM have to sanction the list that BSI put to them. I imagine that the FIM are talking this long just because they see no urgency whatsoever in this. We might think this whole matter is really, really vital and urgent. In Geneva, they don't.

All spot on. As he has been suspended by the FIM he WILL get a ban. And that ban will start on the very same day as his suspension started. That is is the reason the FIM used the time after the incident to convene with its lawyers on the correct protocol. The only question will be the be the length of the ban they deem appropriate at the tribunal. It may turn out to be exactly the same as the suspension period already served or, hopefully, longer. The FIM will not consider him for wildcard selection at all during the period of suspension for ban. They just can't. The FIM will not care one jot about any 'club' in this matter. .

Quite right. I do not remember Braun going public with anything about his parents splitting up and explaining that bad news had led him to overdo things, though. He just denied it. Full stop. Darcy seems to gave got himself into a very different position with any hopes of blaming the protocols. Best fess up and hope that it would be taken as a very positive sign by the tribunal.

I do not believe that the correct outcome in this case is the one that is tailored to suit the learning ability of Darcy Ward. He should grow and develop as a human being in his own time and no one should expect the FIM to take it on 'in loco parentis'. He should get exactly the same treatment as any other rider who found himself in this position. Be it Greg Hancock or Darcy Ward. The speedway-wide, and indeed motorcycle sport-wide, thing of most importance is that the FIM carry of their judicial role here scrupulously and fairly. Nothing more. The case against Ward was substantial enough to convene a hearing and as an anti doping offence carries a likely ban their worldwide suspension was totally appropriate. If a ban were to be imposed it would doubtless start from the date of the suspension. If Ward chooses to use the defence that the testing had not being done properly then his advocates would need to tread carefully. He has openly admitted imbibing the night before - and even offered mitigation as to why this may have been to excess. So the coincidence of having a 'faulty' test twelve hours later be the cause if his' positive blow' seems to stretch credulity a trifle too far. To lose his case after claiming that as his defence may only lengthen the ban the hearing would impose. That would not be a wise move at all. The last thing we need is to find that the anti doping procedures are poorly carried out at GPs. We need to know that they are robust and trustworthy. Let us hope that the hearing gives us that confidence, at least. If Darcy knows he had 'one too many' perhaps the next step on his learning curve would be to plead guilty, offer his mitigating circumstances, give a thousand words on his lessons learned, make earnest promises on future conduct. And then, this time, actually follow through. .

Yes it's the old 'I must have taken it unwittingly' defence. Always comes up when someone is caught. Just about every single time. And all those negative tests that get taken time after time, meeting after meeting. I wonder if some people think they were just 'unwittingly' clean? No they were clean. Full stop.

If (big if) he got a six month ban then clearly he would be back in action next season but the crucial time when the four series wild cards are decided is during the winter; during his ban. I doubt it possible that the FIM could sanction a wildcard who is actually serving a ban at the time the decision is made.

Even the thread that carries his name has spent the last two pages talking about something completely unconnected to our little miscreant. Poor Darcy, none of his misdeeds can compete for comment when there is the opportunity for having a wrangle over Pearson.

I fully understand the FIM making every effort to ensure that they have 'the law on their side' before taking further action. No one would expect any competent organisation to do any other. Actually I find the fact that they have completed this within two weeks and done it silently in Geneva quite laudable. Albert Einstein, were he ever to have found himself banged to rights on a charge of this nature, may well revert to employing lawyers to fight every legal point to get him off. But then he never had to. And Darcy is no Einstein, is he?

It seems interesting that you have mentioned, more than once, that Ward may feel it worth ploughing the line of 'poor procedures'. Is there anything that one could learn from being in the pits on GP nights that would lead a reasonable person to believe that a slip-shod operation is being run on these matters?

Absolutely right. No one is really saying that they think he didn't really 'blow' a true positive here are they? What we are talking about is that the procedures that need to be followed in order for the test to be so watertight that it will not be taken apart by some high flying lawyer in Geneva may not quite be adequate. Or that is what they are endeavouring to check out. The truth is that the guy, by his own admission, had too much to drink the night before. And he got caught out the following lunchtime. The serial D!ckhead is the one at fault here. Any only him.

I agree he could get the bug for more property developing. But as it stands the Brandon site is his 'deal of a lifetime' and if he were to sell it for the right price he may just go away happy. I certainly would! Funnily enough the office development across the road from my business has just been sold. The vendors took on the, not inconsiderable, task of getting PP for change of use to housing before they put it on the market. That done .... They are laughing all the way to the bank, having sold at a massive premium over the value as commercial property. Me thinks Avtar must have some very good reason why he has not done similar. But I can't think of it.

.Of course it makes good business sense to sell Brandon at a massive profit if he, or the purchaser, is able to get PP for housing. But, strangely, he has not applied for such permission in order to maximise his return at sale. As housing is the way to go with maximising profit, why would he be able to buy 'other' land for Speedway 'out of the proceeds'. Would it really be easier to find land in the general Coventry area for Speedway, and get PP for it? Surely THAT land would be more profitable as housing. And easier to get PP, I imagine. Surely it is a lot easier to believe that his 'promises' are solely there to shut up the protesters until his deals are done. By which time Coventry will be in the same boat as Reading. .

I really don't understand why Coventry people are so silent and so 'in the thrall ' of Sandhu. There is no planning permission for any housing or any change of use. And no one has applied for any such permission. The stadium has not been sold to anyone, for any purpose. But it is still up for sale. So ... Why does Sandhu look like the guy that could 'help save Speedway'? He is he guy who owns it now, and Speedway is running but he intends to sell it to someone who will close it down and get PP for housing! Why would he really look for new land to run a Speedway on? If he were to find such land, why not sell that for housing? Or is it me who is mad?