500cc

His lawyers !!! They get to practice their international law with the potential for trips to Geneva, Australia and the UK. Seriously though, the number of altercations he now has with various legal authorities is worrying. They all involve him putting himself in positions that leave him open to 'dangers'. Middleditch gets a lot of stick on here. However, his comments just comments fail to recognise the severity of the issues Ward is getting himself into. But like many I just realise he doesn't have a clue. Ford is more interesting. He effectively stated Ward had a last chance. In terms of supporting Ward I don't have an issue. But if he is found guilty, will he still give him another chance (i.e. guilty but available for March). I would have no confidence this is the last issue Ward will be involved in. Remember these are serious legal altercations. However contrite he appears, he continues to make these major mistakes. If Ward is cleared, then the worst thing he and his advisors can do is treat it as a non-issue. It is fact that he has put himself in this position, even if he were proven innocent of the charges. He must truly learn this time, and the first thing to do would be to accept he has let himself and others down, and be grateful that he avoided being found guilty. Innoncence or Guilt are black and white in this case. The fact he consumed alcohol to put himself at risk of being caught is not. He must recognise the impact of his actions.

You can never trust the press !!! Just blame the Bournemouth Echo for saying he was convicted.

I agree. I only put it out there as there are some similarities (and differences of course) with the situation with Josh Gordon in the NFL. I believe like Ward, they both have a single criminal conviction relating to a motor vehicle under the influence. Both have been linked to marijuana use. It is interesting to see how the two sports have addressed these issues. Gordon failed a drug test as a student (marijuana) and was indefinitely suspended (effectively kicked out of college) - he had a previous suspension for the same offence. He entered the NFL with effectively one strike next to his name for that offence. He subsequently failed a test in the NFL and was suspended for two games. A second failure and he was suspended for a year. The NFL don't specifically identify the type of substance abuse (alcohol, marijuana, cocaine etc). But from what Gordon has chosen to say, they are all marijuana. He was then stopped driving under the influence whilst his one year ban was being confirmed. Perversely due to some changes in the regulations, this was reduced to 10 games (the season is 16 games - max 19 with the play-offs). And this is then the bit I'm linking to with Ward. As part of his re-instatement he was required to entirely abstain from alcohol during the remainder of the season and be subject to regular testing. After his teams final game of the season he boarded a private jet with some team mates. He drank two beers and two further alcoholic drinks. He was subsequently tested and failed - i.e. he drank alcohol, the quantity being irrelevant. He fell foul of the fact that the NFL season was/is still in progress, even though his season was over - he was on holiday. He now faces a potential year ban for those drinks and potentially the end of his career. On the face of it, he has a string of offences. However, all but two are marijuana use and one of those two was a few social drinks with ZERO criminal implications. So one serious offence, driving under influence. Then look at Ward. He has a similar public criminal offence with a vehicle. In fairness it's not known if he was over the limit, but he was reported as using both marijuana and alcohol. As Middleditch said “It is what most young people do these days isn't it? He wasn't racing or putting anyone else's life at risk on the track. It is just another silly mistake from Darcy - hopefully it won't have an effect on his riding.” Speedway chose to ignore this offence. Ward now stands accused of failing an alcohol test prior to a meeting. It would be nice if Middleditch better recognised the significance of his second sentence in relation to the current situation. Offering him support is fine. Making his own decision that he's served his time is not something he should be involved in as effectively a manager of the accused. In terms of delays, by the way. His employee, Cleveland Browns, were kept waiting a large amount of time for a decision on the one year ban, to the extent it was too late to get a partially suitable replacement. So no different to Speedway there. Now I don't agree Ward should be punished in the way Gordon has / will be. I'm actually critical of the NFL on their drug policy. It is far to lenient on those who are drug abusers. And the NFL are a law to themselves anyway. But it is still an interesting comparison. Absolutely agree 100%. The NFL is different because there are agreements with the Player's Union on what is and isn't allowed. And I totally disagree with the idea I put forward anyway. The only bit that makes sense is it would probably do Ward an awful lot of good to abstain voluntarily.

If Ward were to be found guilty (and I accept that remains an open issue), what would everyone think of this. a) Either a suspension for a period as determined by the FIM OR An earlier re-instatement but with stringent conditions for the period between re-instatement and the expiry of the full suspension. Those conditions would be an agreement for zero consumption of alcohol and regular testing during this restricted period. This includes no alcohol in his personal time, even if he isn't riding that week for example. It would also include the period where his personal bookings for the European season had finished but the restrictive period was in place (i.e. he was on holiday). Failure to adhere would result in the immediate activation of the full suspension, with the potential (and probability) of an actual increase in that suspension. Not advocating this, just wondering people's thoughts. The bit that does resonate with me, is that Ward's "problems" do appear entrenched with alcohol. Not necessarily what we'd perceive as drunk, but just being around it.

I think the article is clouding the waters uneccessarily. There are two separate issues. 1. Not following the black and white rules that the BSPA themselves basically created with the Border Agency 2. The recent red tape that has made the process more complex. The BSPA and the clubs shouldn't hide behind point 2, where point 1 is where they have been unacceptably lax.

Will he be allowed back whatever the result. You know what immigration officials are like. "Sorry Mr. Ward, you don't have a current Work Permit, you can't even come into the UK just because yours mates with Mr. Ford and Mr. Middleditch"

Apparently Ward as requested multiple breaks in order to allow himself to re-hydrate.

And there we have the case for the defence. He was only following guidelines !!!

I think your views on potential outcomes are correct; although I admire your confidence that he won't put a foot wrong going forward. I thought legal controversy was an annual event for Ward, something you could pencil in like your tax return. Ward's lawyers need to focus on clearing their client. Any attempts to push it beyond that will negatively impact both Ward and the sport. The danger for Ward if his lawyers were to be threatening the FIM with compensation claims, is that if he were not cleared, the FIM are likely to respond with a ban to the limit of their powers. You'd assume the lawyers are sensible enough not to have raised this in any form at this stage. The FIM will be very awkward going forward if they themselves were 'threatened'. You only have to look at the current Visa situation, but the FIM's response would involve retribution.

Now we know why there is talk of delaying the start of the Elite League season. The viewing figures would be too badly hit by the clash with Monday night Netball !!

Why do we have a thread for Darcy Ward on the Speedway Grand Prix and Speedway World Cup forum as he is not a GP rider and the World Cup is a team event ? It won't get much interest, could never see many people posting to such a thread !!!

I think there were a lot of similar conversations going on last night. Can't for the life of me think what the cause may have been !!!

Says the man with approaching 12,000 posts on this site !!! Pointless trivia. There are less than 11,000 days in 30 years.

I'm not sure I've ever come across a debate when one person so entirely misses the point. It's all about the legalities of employment in the UK. Speedway has finally been pulled into the real world. It's why footballers struggle to get work permits if they don't play enough international football, how ever brilliant they may be. It's why American Basketball players can get refused work permits because there recent experience hasn't been in a recognised level of the game, even if they are far superior to the alternative EU player available in the same salary range. The BSPA is totally confused in this area. On one hand they've failed to follow the restrictions related to work permit riders. Yet on the other they've failed to understand that they can set restrictions on the number of non-British riders in a team. European Basketball Leagues limit the number of (non-domestic) EU players. The second tier (equivalent to the Speedway Premier League) of British Ice Hockey restricts the number of non-British players, to the extent that players who have qualified via residency and have participated for GB in the World Championship are counted in the four non-British category. So if the team selected four other EU players, then that GB international is ineligible to play. Holder could be potentially the greatest rider of all time, but its all about meeting the requirements of employment in the UK. The 7 point figure is simply what the BSPA negotiated with the authorities, primarily to ensure the quality of rider arriving in the UK. In Holder's case he firstly has to meet the qualification requirements to be employed in the UK (that may be in doubt anyway), and if he does he's available on a 7.

BSI always quick to respond when their chosen wild card is at risk (Harris, Ward)

You can't do that though. You can't relate a ban to where it has the most 'negative' impact. Any ban (if guilty) should be a fixed amount regardless of when it is. Even the length of the ban shouldn't be swayed by whether its a fit "punishment" based on competition missed. Otherwise it opens open huge future (or previous) issues with consistency. It does illustrate though the big difference between a 6 (or 3) month and 1 year ban to any sportsman. A full year ban not only covers any off season, it is almost guaranteed to hit two different seasons. The effect of a shorter ban varies depending on timing. In the end any ban (if applicable) length should be based on fact and procedure. If its deemed lower end then the ban is short and the impact could be "relatively" minimal. Not trying to put words into your mouth, but the severity you think is correct is more mapped to a 1 year ban. The decision can't be made that way, but the offence itself could link to a 1 year ban. By suspending Ward immediately, I think that hits him quite hard anyway. Quite possibly cost him becoming World Champion and hit his pocket with no prior warning. A six month ban in the European off-season running into the start of the next season would have been less harsh. Still ruled out of the 2015 GP's, but could probably just delay the start of his European season.

But that's the point. Poole aren't going to get very far complaining to the FIM or any legal system on the basis that they may (probably) want to employ him in March for eight months. That's not a Poole bash, it's an asset system bash. To be honest the situation is not clear to me. Is Ward simply suspended awaiting a hearing? Or has Ward challenged the findings and the hearing is effectively an appeal? Or has Ward challenged the current suspension? Or something else? I get the impression that Poole and the British Speedway authorities and media have clouded the waters. The impression (that I've picked up) is that he is challenging the findings. As I've said before, if the readings are deemed invalid, then he should be unconditionally cleared (although he should personally consider his relationship with alcohol as it is appears related to a number of issues he has had). The FIM are then in sticky water as they choose to suspend him whilst he was appealing. If the an appeal is simply an attempt to find a loophole with substance and it fails, then I suspect the punishment will be very harsh. And that's why I'm confused. My impression is he will be challenging the findings. If that's the case, you'd hope is advisors were basing it on a true concern with the procedures/findings rather than a shot in the dark to get off the offence. Quite a few in his career. On occasion though his team mate has mitigated the issue by winning the heat and gaining a 3-3 shared heat !!!

Is he actually employed by anybody though?

Agreed. If there is reasonable doubt that the readings were correct (or even if the procedures were correctly followed) then he should be found not guilty (not the terminology for this case mind).. But my point was about finding a loophole. If he was indisputably over the limit, but the objection was a minor documentation issue, then, in my opinion, that's a very different matter.

Typically legal processes are (frustratingly) time consuming. The view seems to be that Ward's lawyers are responsible in some way. How much this delay is incorporated in to any final decision on length of suspension may depend on whether the lawyers have a reasonable case, or are simply looking for loopholes. If reasonable, then I suspect a reduced final length. If not, then no reduction (beyond what legally is constituted) will be offered. The final outcome must only be decided on fact. However, I can't help feeling Ward would benefit from a guilty decision. He certainly appears to have an issue with alcohol (I don't mean an alcoholic, but his use of it). I can think of four high profile incidents he has been involved in that are linked to alcohol. Worryingly that includes alcohol and motor vehicles. He could really benefit with a mature individual in his corner to focus him going forward. I'm speculating, but because of what we pick-up from those in the know, I assume Ward is attempting to prove is innocence on a technicality. Whilst nobody should be wrongly found guilty, innocence on a technicality is a different matter. There is quite a difference between a faulty measurement and the tester entering the wrong date on the documentation for example. You would hope the objections relate to reasonable doubt he was over limit as opposed to a (non impacting) administrative error.

Interesting info Phil thanks for that. It does leave one problem for BSI. Was it too much rain or was the track not fit for purpose? If the former (which appears to be the way its being portrayed), then the promoter could claim that the meeting was called-off against their wishes over a day before the deadline (Sunday afternoon). Now in terms of getting the GP on that may well be the best (by a long way) chance of success. But not many speedway meetings of this level with the man power available are cancelled so far in advance. Last year at Cardiff an example of the state of a track with 24 hours to go. The promoter wasn't given this chance. A weather forecast being a prime reason for a cancellation with the financial implications to the promoter is dubious to say the least. Better for BSI yes, but not the promoter. The impact on him is probably worse than being cancelled on Sunday, especially if it was chucking it down it the reasons obvious to all. It's interesting that BSI offer the GP's and write the contracts, but don't appear to be able to insist on the FIM being involved in track prep. We've heard more than once of help being offered and the local track refusing.

I think Cardiff costs are higher than London's for hotel rooms mind.

Sadly I think that points to a lot of Speedway's problems. If a crowd of 4,500 (best possibility) is deemed insufficient to be viable for 20 riders that once again the inherent costs of the sport should be questioned.

But that would just make the whole competition look stupid. How an earth would it have any integrity if Holder didn't ride for Piraterna (a club he is riding for this season) and instead rode for Poole (a team he no longer rides for). You may as well enter an Australian team as nationality trumps all in that list.

A promoter states a deal with Sky is done A Sky employee states a deal with Sky is done A journalist states a deal with Sky is done Imagine a rider states to a potential sponsor as part of his negotiations that a deal with Sky is done. Any guesses what would happen to that rider? This is why if you hear of a rumour in speedway, there is a good chance that it may be true.