E I Addio

The FIM are vicariously responsible for the actions of their servants or agents which means they can be sued for any negligence of the jury members. On thinking about it though, I think it would be very difficult to blame the FIM in legal terms for the state of the track. The FIM Jury made a subjective decision that in their opinion the track was not safe. Other people might have other opinions but in legal terms that doesn't automatically make the FIM wrong. You would have to show that there was something either negligently or fundamentally wrong with the decision, which in legal terms is not that easy. Hanging the blame on OleOlsen would be easier in legal terms but the whole thing would get very messy and the only winners would be the lawyers. A more practical and less costly alternative would be to quietly make sure Jim Lawrence and Tony Steele are out out to grass, and unless Ole Olsen is deemed to be squeaky clean get someone else to do the tracks. Olsen must be about retirement age anyway.

Nothing wrong with the set-up per se. Other sports around the world manage similar when TV is involved, but like any other organisational arrangement it depends on people doing their jobs efficiently. We saw for a start Jim Lawrence was not the sharpest tool in the box and hopefully we won't see him in charge of a GP ( or an EL meeting) for a long time. Tony Steele lost his credibility at the Pool/Belle Vue rain off a couple of years ago and he hardly restored it in Warsaw. If we put to one side our differing opinions on the track for a moment the situation seems to be this:- The FIM jury apparently accepted the track as being in a fit state to race and at heat 12 they decided it was not fit to race so one of the following scenarios must apply- 1. Either the FIM accepted the track as fit when it wasn't or 2. They decided at heat 12 that the track was unfit when it still was or 3. the track was so poorly prepared that it went from being fit to unfit in the space of 12 heats which presumably hangs the blame round Olsens neck. I find it increasingly difficult to see how the buck does not ultimately stop with the FIM jury even if they managed to hang part of the blame on someone else.

TBF with lawyers floating around the standard advice to all involved would be to keep their traps shut. It looks like someone is going to have to pay big bucks for all this and behind the scenes it is likely to get very messy. The acid test for Joe Public though is (and I hate this expression) will lessons be learned? Will we now see a big step forward in the professionalism of the presentation? Only time will tell but it will be bad news for the sport if we don't The problem is though, the way the wind is blowing at the moment suggests the FIM might find it hard to completely exonerate themselves. If Olsens comment is to be beleived the FIM jury passed the track as satisfactory and the FIM jury called the meeting off so whatever mudslinging goes on, some of it will presumably land on those guys.

Except thst is not what was said.

True. A.J is out on Friday as well . Doyley comes in for him again. The lynch mob seem to have gone very quiet.

I cant believe it. Three posts on the trot I have agreed with Starman. Good post anyway mate That's not quite what's being said. There is no reason why a temporary track cannot be a good track. it is a matter of putting the right amount of time into the track prep.

No reason why any body should go to see supposedly world class racing on a substandard track. The riders have taken control now the paying public should take control and make it clear that they are no longer going to pay to see sub-standard tracks. Temporary tracks can be made to work, they have been made to work. No reason at all why with a bit of forethought and effort Cardiff and the rest should not have decent racing surfaces I really don't understand why anybody should want to pay to see an event of GP status on a track full of ruts. People are making a lot of money out of these events, which I don't begrudge, but the fans are expect to be given value for money..

No Wembley didn't. There was A brilliant track when Len Silver and Peter Thorogood did it in 1981 but they did it as a Labour of love and really put the work in but before that track prep varied year to year, sometimes good sometimes not so good. The main difference is that in those days the two valve and even four valve engines did not dig the sort of ruts that the modern lay- downs create, and that seems to have got worse with the silencer changes in the last couple of years. However, according to Len Silvers book he was working on the track until the early hours of the morning of the Wednesday before the 1981 World Final, then slept in his car until 8am and went back to work with Peter Thorogood continuously packing and re-grading in for 10 hours. Then after practice day they went back again on race day and spent all day re-packing and re-grading once again, right up until the turnstiles opened. In other words they did all the things that the money grabbing Ole Olsen should have been doing last week.

But that's not quite what you said before. I agree that track did not LOOK dangerous but I wasn't riding it. We have seen worse tracks at Cardiff especially around 2008/9/10 as I recall but that doesn't make it right. In fact it's a pity they didn't all walk out then as we might be seeing better tracks now if they did,. What we saw on Saturday was a shambles from start to finish. Supposing the riders hadn't walked out then what? More rubbish tracks and hopeless referees ? Ole Olsen continuing to line his pockets for substandard workkmanship ? At least there is now a chance that something might get done. Maybe Eurosport and sponsors might tell the FIM to do a proper job or they are off. Someone else has posted AJ's comments about the track, so more and more information will gradually leak out. Well done to the riders for sticking together and making a stand I say. Hopefully the heads that roll will be those responsible for the shambles, because even if the full 23 heats had been raced there is no way that sort of meeting can be regarded as acceptable for what should be the jewel in the crown of 21st century speedwáy.

A view (opinion ) held by many judging it from their TV screens. Many others are reserving judgment. Gavan says as a fact the track was not too dangerous. None of us were at the meeting between the riders and officials and as yet none of us don't know exactly what was said.(although Gavan apparently thinks he does.). There could have been more than one cause of complaint, or it could be the culmination of complaints going back over time, . At this stage we simply do not know. My inclination at this stage is to go along with Ashley Holloway who has tweeted that Phil Morris is not to blame but others are. Who these others are we simply don't know yet. No doubt more information will leak out with the passage of time especially if the PZM take legal action as a previous poster, has suggested but Gavan's outburst is probably best explained by the fact he was replying to his mate Starman.

Maybe their armchairs coped with the ruts better than the bikes.

It took 618 posts to get there but at last someone had managed a sensible, balanced and unhysterical post. I am quite shocked by the number of posters that are prepared to "do a Briggo" and pass judgment on the state of the track from their armchairs, based on what they see on their TV screens. It's all very well to say that Bomber and others could ride the track but they must have agreed to the refusal to ride as they could have insisted on carrying on as Kenny Carter did at yhe British Final years ago and the protest would have collapsed. Whether riders have raced on worse tracks in the past is irrelevant. This situation has been a long time coming. Poorly prepared temporary tracks have been a problem for a long time and this was bound to reach a tipping point and boil over sooner or later. It's just a pity it didn't happen a long time ago, then we might have been on an upward curve by now.so for my part I don't think we should be pointing the finger at the riders until more information leaks out, as no doubt it will,in time. It's also a bit premature for the lynch mob to start accusing Phil Morris. Ashley Holloway has tweeted that the problem lies with others, not Phil, and I guess he has a bit more insight than most of the armchair experts on here. Ole Olson , I have long felt is more trouble than he is worth . I think he has a lot to do to escape blame because the bottom line is that it's his track. A simple legal principle is that if you hold yourself out to be an expert you take the blame if the product is no good. As for Jim Lawrence I have never in the past seen or heard anything that persuades me that he is anything other than a poor referee, although presumably one with friends in high places. We can make a judgment on him because he is in charge and the buck stops with him, although I daresay there are a few other nameless ones lurking in the shadows who should perhaps be taking some of the abuse being hurled at Phil Morris and the riders. Bottom line though is that for my part I hardly watched any GP's last year, and whatever the rights and wrongs of last night I can see this year being the same. I am sure there are many more coming to the same view of the appropriately named "circus"

Except that each time a few less turn up.

It's not simple. There is no rule in existence that says a bona fide sick note can become void. As there is no specific rule, who takes responsibility to over-rule the doctor? What would be the response in the rest of speedwáy, the rest of motorcycle sport and the rest of sport in general if British speedwáy decided medical reports can be over-ruled ? If the BSPA can over-rule a doctors report on this occasion what authority does a track doctor have to withdraw an injured rider if the rider/his team manager /Sky want him to ride? Either doctors reports count or they don't . You can't pick and choose which ones you want to rely on. As I said before dodgy medical reports have been around speedwáy and other sports for years. Maybe it's long overdue for something to be done but the whole thing is a minefield and needs to be looked at seriously but a knee-jerk reaction is likely to cause more problems than it solves.

One of the things you have overlooked is whether he rides in Sweden on Tuesday. I am the first to agree that it looks bad when a rider rides in Poland Sunday, misses GB on Monday then rides in Sweden on Tuesday, and its difficult to escape the conclusion that some of them have been pulling a fast one in the past, so I am with you there. The difficulty as I see it is that if you have a doctors certificate certifying a rider was fit to ride in Poland but aggravated the injury do you say the doctor is lying ? We know it goes on but from a pragmatic point of view the SCB is governed by the ACU, who are in turn affiliated to the FIM and there is no way that a national organisation like the ACU, let alone an international body like the FIM are going to say doctors reports should be ignored.. Lets put it another way round. If a rider has a relatively minor injury but keeps quiet about it and then says he is missing riding in England because it was an old injury that was aggravated in Poland, then what do you do? I don't see how you can have a rule that says if you ride in Poland you have to ride in GB or get a ban, irrespective of what Doctors say.about the riders fitness. The only way round this sort of thing as I see it is to have certain FIM approved doctors , known to be well qualified and reliable who have to examine riders but I can't really see that happening for a variety of reasons including cost and logistics. . Even if it did, if a rider says he is in pain the doctor pretty much has to go along with it.. This sort of thing has been going on in various forms in various sports probably forever. I say that as a general principle not specific to AJ because we still don't know the position there. Anyway we'll have to wait and see a) if he rides in Poland, what score he achieves if he does ride, and c) whether he rides in Sweden.

If there is no genuine injury, who should pay the price? The rider or the Wolves fans ? If a 6-pointer were put in the forum would be full of complaints. I

If Lakeside are denied a facility the people you are hurting most are the Wolves fans who won't want to pay £18 to see a PL six pointer riding at No1 and the Wolves promotion who would lose gate money because GP riders will always put more on the gate than a PL 6pointer. To a lesser extent the Lakeside promotion would be affected because any chance of a point would be greatly reduced, and the one person unaffected by lack of facility would be the rider himself. If riders don't appear without good reason then they should be the ones to pay the price, not the fans or the promotions, especially the opposing promotions.. Not yet . He's going to get one of Matt Fords spares and tippex THJ's name out

http://www.lakesidehammers.co/aj-fitness-race/

He has injured his knee. No idea how bad it is so we are not in a position to judge his fitness. One can understand a rider riding in a GP when carrying an injury, especially the first of the season when even two or three points could potentially be crucial to final placings at the end of the year. It's difficult to say whether he should or shouldn't be riding on Monday but everything we know about AJ suggests that he is not a micky taker, unlike your average Pole (Swiderski and Skornivki excepted). The thing about riding in Polznd is that he doesn't have to make a decision until tha last minute, as they have enough in the squad to put someone else in, plus he has a base in Poland and won't have to catch a flight home at some unearthly hour. In GB though, you can't really fly in in some Ryanair cattle truck with a dodgy knee then decide at the last minute you can't ride then expect a suitable guest to be dredged up at a moments notice. I don't think Doyley has ever guested for Lakeside so it with be interesting to see how he goes.

Instead of wondering you could ask Belle Vue management why they agreed to the fixture without Zagar then publish their comments in Speedwáy Star so the fans are informed, and whether they really are bothered about the sort of away teams they field. After all isn't the essence of good journalism something to do with finding out both sides of the story instead of just "wondering" ?

In fairness to Leicester, they wouldn't have known when the fixture list was made that there would be no Zagar and no guest for him. At that stage all that is required is for BV can make the fixture. BV only have to declare their team three days before and it's a bit late to do anything about it by then. It seems incredible that BV would agree to the fixture if they knew Zagar was unavailable, but we don't know whether that was due to incompetence or some other reason. The point is that Leicester can't just cancel a meeting at the drop of a hat because it will involve a financial loss. However it's not going to encourage the fans when this sort of thing happens. Ironically BV seem to have thrown a couple of league points away that might ultimately edge them out of the play offs. The unavoidable fact is that the continental season makes things difficult for the domestic season and that is unlikely to change.

Like plenty of others over the last 50 years you understand the problem, but like all the rest you are unable to come up with an answer. Not a real world answer anyway.

We have been through all this about 50 times before you joined the forum. A smiley face doesn't change a comment that's been done before into someting original.

At least one of the centre green lights went out as well . I thought it looked very shadowy coming off bend 4. The sport has been wrestling with the guest rider problem for over 50 years, and nobody has come up with a viable alternative. How would a pool system be funded ? The problem as I see it is that a rider in the "pool" would still have to have a couple of bikes over here plus a workshop of some kind, a van, and a mechanic/helper available at short notice. Where is he going to earn the money to pay for that set-up with possibly only a handful off meetings per season. Even if you had a pool system, you can still get, for example, a rider, injured on a Wednesday and a replacement needed on Thursday which leaves you in an impossible position in trying to fly someone in. Even with a pool system you would still get Joe Bloggs riding for Poole against Coventry one week and Coventry against Poole another week.

Cricket has probably produced more listenable and knowledgeable commentators than any other sport. Some have already been mentioned and I would add to the list Christopher Martin-Jenkins. You didn't have to know much about cricket to enjoy their well informed commentary. Outstanding as the others were, Richie was the best of the best and set the standard for others to follow. The great thing about Richie was that he somehow pitched his commentary at a level that was interesting to avid cricket fans but also informative to those new to the sport. Only Harry Carpenter comes anywhere near the same class. A sad loss.