500cc

A poor performance from the Swedes. A quarter of the field and apart from a mid meeting push from Lindgren, no threat to qualifying. With only 3 to qualify, starting the meeting with a combined single point (against the zero scoring Puodzuks) immediately put the entire contingent in to last chance saloon. And as it turned out by the time of their last rides, none of them had a chance to qualify (although mathematically Sundstrom could have in freak circumstances).

Stunning AGAIN from Chris Harris

Personally I'd go for 28 Heat Meetings as it would solve a lot of the woes of British Speedway. Instead of the Nominated Heat, just repeat the standard 14 heats. You get significantly more heats in an evening. And 28 heats times 6 points per heat equals 168 divide by 14 riders (7 per team) = 12.00. That gives you 14 world class (all time greats) per meeting. Perfection (literally). Surely that's the way to go !!!

The ultimate position of guilt was from Ward's own admission of drinking 5-7 vodka's after signing-on.

So Greg Hancock and Jarek Hampel were entirely alcohol free. And Ward was drunk. And he's never been involved in any incidents involving alcohol when riding a motorcycle. Cloud cuckoo land. And so Mr Holder, you still hoping your boy gets off? Happy to race with a drunk rider, but not with a rutted track? And: - 29 Sept Ward's defence requests information disclosure - 29 Oct FIM advise as a result, hearing delayed from end November to 8 January - 4 Nov Wards defence complain about the delay - End Nov Ward's defence accept new date - 19 Dec Ward's defence declare Ward hasn't had sufficient time to prepare his case and request a postponement.

Thank-you for the insight. It does again highlight the fact that how a failed starting gate can appear to have made the difference between a GP completing or not. There are clear rules for starting on the green light if the tapes failed. Ok, they tried to fix them. But we lost NINE heats. The riders deserve all the backlash they get for this. Riders influence has become to much in recent years. They are given the benefit of doubt over safety, but they are abusing that privilege. But even the area of safety is becoming blurred. So having pushed it this far, it's time we cleared it up. A rider in this meeting compared his fitness and limitations to driving a car with his legs. Well, any rider deemed not fit by a medical expert taking into account safety implications must be excluded from riding (that includes the equivalent of driving a car with your legs). Other sports have no problem with this and that is typically only the health of the individual. Motor sport needs to consider other competitors. Can riders really not be fined for refusing to ride, even if it's not just for delaying the start? And then into the realms of riders saying a track is unsafe. It's a difficult one. The riders will know best, but how independent is their view. My view on this is in maintaining the riders veto on safety issues, there should be ZERO tolerance on all other issues. They should have no influence on issues such as starting procedures unless the referee specifically requests their input. Any (including Safety) rider meetings are only allowed at after request to and agreement from the referee. The Referee would not be allowed to reject a safety request. Personally I wouldn't allow any rider meeting without the referees presence. Any unofficial meeting should result in rider fines, and if holding up the meeting, exclusion of all 4 riders from the 'delayed' Heat. Any meetings called under the request of Safety that are proven not to be, should make the riders liable to fines and suspensions. There was lots at this meeting that need resolving, but the riders have pushed this to the limit. So let's take away the grey areas. But the riders shouldn't expect sympathy if they aren't then happy then.

It gets worse and worse. We watched this unravel on Eurosport in disbelief. The number of things that "went wrong" are mind boggling. But of course nobody is really responsible, it's all everybody else's fault. Did ANYONE do a good job including the Riders (whose reaction to the green light decision should NEVER be allowed again). The Riders are given an extra benefit of doubt over safety. In exchange they must NOT take advantage of non-safety issues. This is getting serious. It's easy, the referee puts on the red lights if the correct riders are not at the tape. But it is being reported that Lawrence wasn't confident the red lights were working. WHAT? That's bordering (and surpassing) negligence. As a starting point Lawrence should be suspended until the facts are proven. This is just dangerous. And it's just incompetent he ran the race without Doyle. So this was enough communication to organise an entire heat to be re-run (that takes some communication), but not enough to ensure the correct riders were at tape, or even re-run after the officials screwed up. So this "expertise" built up over years was not sufficient to pre-empt issues with exposed pits / referee boxes. I expect that will another pass the buck issue. Will anybody actually admit that the entire model for managing a Speedway Grand Prix is flawed. If the review of problems repeatedly identifies the failures having no single point of responsibility or management responsibility, then the model is flawed. Resolving this meetings failings is insufficient, if the model is fundamentally incapable of supporting it. To me it's a shambles. The reality is that a perfect system is unrealistic. But the number of issues in Warsaw is beyond belief. And let's be honest, what we are aware of publicly is not the full story. There will be more failings, some of which may not cause problems directly, but when mixed with others will cause theses bigger issues.

Although Shearer never played under Robson for England and amazingly a talent like Bryan Robson was never even capped (The White Knight should hopefully understand that one). But despite being pedantic (apologies ... it's late !!!) I understand the point you are making

It's interesting that Poole waited on Ward. The original plan was to include Janowski. I guess the fact Ford has waited on Ward suggests that Holder wasn't initially part of his first choice team. I suspect what happened is Ford became more concerned that Ward wasn't going to be available and didn't want to risk missing out on both Ward and Holder. Having tied up Holder, Janowski appears to have gone from first choice to third choice. It's fair to say, had the Ward case been dropped end of last year, then the top 2 would have been Ward and Janowski.

But how would you know that ?

I do find it surprising that the FIM continue to get stick for their handling of this case. Whilst performance enhancing drugs and alcohol are different; one is cheating, the other dangerous, they are part of a single program. It is understandable that introducing different processes for each type of offence (the two I've named are just two ways to look at it) isn't realistic. Take the example of British 400m Hurdler Rhys Williams and consider the related timelines with Ward. He tested positive for drugs on 11th July 2014. He hearing was then delayed twice. First from end of October, than from early November. At the third attempt it was held on 15th December. Directly after the hearing the athletics media reported they wouldn't hear the outcome until January 2015. The decision was announced on 16th January 2015. Williams was judged to have unknowingly consumed contaminated supplements. He was banned for 4 months. So his he was actually suspended awaiting a hearing and decision for longer than his eventual ban. He missed captaining Wales at the Commonwealth Games as a result. However, it's worth noting he is quoted as saying: "However, I accept that responsibility for the supplements I take rests with me and I accept the four-month ban. I remain as committed to drug free athletics as ever." Perhaps Ward will be making a similar statement re the dangers of alcohol and motor sport ? So again, has the process been unfair on Ward who knowingly drunk excessive alcohol prior to the meeting? I see incredible similarities with how Williams case was handled. The structure of a sport (e.g. dates of season, qualification for the GP's etc) should not be a consideration in passing judgement. I've been very unimpressed by the response of the Speedway establishment on this, primarily in the UK. From those participating, officials and media, it has been outward looking at the audacity of the FIM interfering in their sport in such a bureaucratic way. Very much a 'Of course we don't agree with riding under the influence BUT .......". The right thing to do now is condemn Ward's actions, send out a stern warning to all riders, but don't hang Ward out to dry. He is being severely punished, but the authorities need to be backing that punishment, it's severe but not unnecessarily excessive. Bleating about the unfairness is not the way to go.

Agree with your first paragraph. Re-paragraph 2, Poole new he had failed a test. Whilst Poole shouldn't be penalised for that, they have to accept the ranifications linked to back-dating an offence. But where is the BSPA on this one? Ward was replaced by guests after the suspension. Prior to that I suspect he would have been charged with withholding services and Poole forced to ride a PL six pointer (or whatever that exact rule is).

I think that says more about the sport than the FIM. The FIM were checking things like if the off-duty police officer was really qualified because they are a responsible organisation. The sport of Speedway just carried on merrily oblivious to what had happened. He could have been suspended whilst under investigation. Speedway's choice. Not saying its right or wrong, but that wasn't tacit approval. As a sport though it needs a (nother) kick up the backside to operate in the real world. The sport had the right to let him ride whilst under investigation, but shouldn't bleat afterwards that has performances during that period are now nullified.

Muddlo said “It's what most young people do these days isn't it?"

Those comments had me in stitches. Absolute classics. And he Echo is oblivious to what's going on in that reader's comments section.

Can't match that length, but I always found the Ian Callaghan story interesting. Made his England debut just weeks before the 1966 World Cup. Then played in the Group victory over France. Then waited 11 years to get his 3rd cap when Ron Greenwood tried to build a team of Liverpool players plus the recently departed to Hamburg, Kevin Keegan. That was a short wait compared to receiving his World Cup Winners Medal nearly 43 years after the success. Winning his 4th and final cap in 1977, that means he is the most recent World Cup Winner to play for England. Will he ever lose that particular record?

Perhaps Ford should sue Ward for breach of contract causing Poole to lose income? Chelsea sued Adrian Mutu (successfully I believe) for breach of contract after being banned for cocaine. Basically they sued for the cost of buying him. Ward should be relieved Ford is unlikely to look to get his King's Lynn investment back?

And of those may be called off as Poole suggested the start of the season be put back !!!

Most of this 'life of its own' is the direct result of speedway 'insiders' releasing information. There is really no direction or control to this sport nationally or globally. Somebody at the BSPA should be speaking to Middleditch and getting him to tone down his comments in the media. It is incredibly negative for the sport. It doesn't matter this is an international issue, domestically we shouldn't be interfering. If Ward is guilty, I fear a backlash against the sport for the way they've handled it. It is easy for every one to say drinking and riding is acceptable. Most people say Ward must learn from this. But I don't see that from the sport which is more concerned about having one of its star attractions suspended. It should be remembered that in almost any other job Ward would have been sacked by now, and certainly if a guilty count is returned. If a bus driver failed a breath test having previously dragged his companies name through court cases, you can be sure his job wouldn't be kept open for the future. Now Ward deserves to be treated fairly and the fact his employees continue to stand by him puts him in an envious position. So why can't his acquaintances leave it at that rather than using the media as a propoganda weapon and a route to abuse the FIM.

So Middleditch is quoted as saying “Although he has done wrong and deserves to be punished" So what is all of this coming out from the establishment about faulty equipment / procedures? Because if there were faults then regardless of whether or not Ward drunk to much, if it can't be accurately measured or ascertained (not entirely sure how) then he has to be found not guilty and cleared. So exactly why should he be punished for that Mr. Middleditch? I'm actually pretty unimpressed by how the speedway world is handling this, or to be more accurate the British speedway establishments. I suspect the FIM are not exactly enamoured either. Ward deserves to be treated fairly. He also doesn't deserve to be thrown under a bus. I actually think he comes out of this affair (post alleged offence) so far with some credit, something I wouldn't say for him in the past. Regardless of the result he would be well advised to continue with this approach. Not so sure about others who haven't really helped him publicly, and have actually resulted in greater negativity towards him than would have otherwise been the case.

I'm just not convinced that is true. I believe sports can (and do) restrict the number of non-domestic players per team. In the UK I know of. British Basketball League. The new eligibility allows teams to play a maximum of five over-18 non-British players per game, of which a maximum of three can be work permitted. All remaining spots on the team have to be filled by British passport holders. British Ice Hockey (2nd Tier). Not anything like the level of Sweden of course. Teams allowed 4 non-British players (no work permits I believe). But here it gets interesting. There are players who have been playing at this level who were born in Canada, have a British passport through residency, have represented the GB in World Championships Group A (where Sweden of course are quite successful - GB weren't !!!), but count as one of these 4 which even restricts when they can ice (I think only two non-Brits on the ice at any time). It is professional. Not huge but budgets in the £100,000's. German Basketball. Maximum 6 non-Germans on the roster. Italian Basketball. Minimum 5 homegrown players (including one who may be naturalised). Spanish Basketball. Minimum 4 players eligible for the National team. Although I believe there have been some issues over the full restrictions here. My understanding is you can have some restrictions, but need to be careful to meet EC restrictions. For example, I'm not sure you can treat differently non-domestic players who are home-trained. I think the British Basketball regulations attempt to address that particular concern. Even in Elite League Speedway, the number of non-British riders is effectively restricted to 5 with the Fast Track System.

It isn't that simple though. Contracts have to be plausible. If the BSPA knowingly allow riders to sign contracts that directly contradict another contract then the validity of that contract can be questioned. It could be argued that's entirely the riders problem, except at the same time the authorities in different countries are discussing how they manage the 'clashes' the riders experience. Forgetting the ban element, a rider could actually be put in an impossible position if both contracts state total availability. And as you say, I believe UK contracts at least state that. Having said all that, I'm not sure if the non-UK contracts are so restrictive on a riders availability. And also you need to have a participant wanting to challenge any contract and for it to make sense to do so. The actual issue I have is that on one hand the authorities are effectively saying the rider needs to manage all his 'self employment' whereas on the other hand those same authorities believe they can separately interfere with those agreements. The rumour of the FIM restricting riders to two leagues being one example.

Sure I understand that. I wasn't really directly commenting on the suggestion that riders be limited to two clubs (sorry going off on my own track rather the sticking to the point of the thread !!!). It's perfectly reasonable that riders can earn in multiple countries. I just find it interesting that those clubs / associations can then restrict the rider's earning ability by banning them if they make themselves unavailable for one team in order to ride for another.

FIFA / UEFA happily restrict players to a maximum of two clubs per season; and none at the same time. Whilst you are comparing self employed riders against employed players (although on a restricted length contract), this isn't black and white. Speedway wants to believe it 'owns' riders when actually those riders change 'ownership' multiple times a week. The BSPA can ban a rider for 28 days because he rides in a different country whilst his UK team has a fixture the same day. It's a can of worms if ever anybody wanted to unravel it, and as primarily an EU based sport, things could change. In my opinion it's difficult to legally ban somebody who isn't contractually obligated to ride for you; and if he is, then you potentially have two clashing EU regulated contracts. Problematic. Only becomes an issue under challenge, but currently Speedway's 'management' of multiple team places is confused.

I agree its incredibly draconian, although having worked for US companies, I fear some of these 'bad' habits may start to spread, but not obviously to this extreme. Josh Gordon has now been suspended for at least a year without pay. His crime. Two beers plus two other drinks on a private jet after his team's season was complete. He was tested because he recently pleaded guilty in court to driving under the influence of alcohol and part of the agreement for his re-instatement from a previous ban (cannabis), was a total ban from alcohol until the entire NFL season was finished . He was fined $100, had his driving licence suspended and received a 60 day suspended sentence for the DUI. A prime reason for pleading guilty was to avoid a 2 game NFL ban (it's complicated due to new NFL disciplinary rules and when they take effect). That decision has come back to haunt him. He is a big name in the NFL, but his career (and earning potential) is now in tatters. Whilst we don't expect anything as draconian as this in Speedway, it's a sobering (sic) reminder to Ward how close he is to throwing away a stellar career.