Grachan

I've been reading about this case now. You're facts are a bit incorrect. First of all, being born in the UK does not automatically make you a British citizen. This is from the Government website: "British citizenship If you were born in the UK on or after 1 January 1983 You don’t automatically get British citizenship if you were born in the UK. If you were born on or after 1 January 1983, you’ll be a British citizen if your mother or father was either: a British citizen when you were born ‘settled’ in the UK when you were born In most cases you’ll be a British citizen if your mother or father was born in the UK or naturalised there at the time of your birth. If you were born before July 2006, your father’s British nationality will normally only pass to you if he was married to your mother at the time of your birth." The boy's mother was told in 2007 she was inelibible to be in the UK. She had the boy after that. He is not a British citizen. She has also been in prison for obtaining false documentation and working illegally. She's been using the appeals system ever since, which prevented her being deported before.

Who is being punished? Nobody is being punished. The whole sport is being told it has to do things properly, and they are offering a "workshop" to educate them. Ineligible riders may find themseves without work permits, but that's not punishment. That's because they are not entitled to one. The maximum penalty for employing illegals is 2 years in prison and a £20,000 fine. Have any club promoters been given that? I haven't heard of any. Just visas put on ice until they sort out the proper way of doing things and do things by the book. I saw a petition about this, and wondered about that. If he is a British citizen he can't be deported, surely. I'm often suspicious of these casess that come to light, as there is often something in them that doesn't quite add up.

I don't think it's utter rubbish, as there is a certain degree of truth in the government tightening up on immigration in recent times, and I've even fallen foul of that myself and I know how things are constantly changing at present and they are looking more to fail people who put in visa application. However, the answer to that is - do everything by the letter and then they can't fail you if you are eligible. It makes me laugh where Rod Colquhoun says that some teams only had as few as 2 or 3 occasions uncovered. Why do they even have one issue? Just do things properly. That's all. I have to. So should they. Do people really want our speedway teams to have illegal immigrants in them?

Best World Champion ever would, to me, mean which rider was the best rider in a particular year that he won the title against other riders in a particular year. For example, how does Ivan Mauger 1979 fare against Ivan Mauger 1968 or Tony Rickardsson 2001 and so on. And the winner is...... Hans Nielsen 1986.

Although this does slightly contradict that. https://www.gov.uk/tier-5-temporary-worker-creative-and-sporting-visa/eligibility "You’ll also need all of the following: a certificate of sponsorship reference number £945 in savings - this is to prove you can support yourself and you must have had this in your bank account for 90 days before you apply You won’t need £945 in savings if your fully approved (‘A-rated’) sponsor has stated on your certificate of sponsorship that they’ll certify your maintenance and that you won’t claim benefits during your stay." This, I assume, is what barncooseboy was referring to earlier. Although I still don't see how they could claim benefits when it says here: https://www.gov.uk/tier-5-temporary-worker-creative-and-sporting-visa/overview "You can’t: get public funds start your own business" Because benefits are public funds.

I'm not even sure there should be any non-EU riders in the Premier Leagua at all if you read the rules: https://www.gov.uk/tier-5-temporary-worker-creative-and-sporting-visa/eligibility "You need to make a significant contribution to your sport at the highest level in the UK to be eligible for this visa. "

It is the BSPA's responsiility. They endorse the visa applications.

People here on a sport visa can't claim benefits. It is. It is the responsibility of the BSPA, as sports govening body, to approve visa eligibility and endorse applications. https://www.gov.uk/tier-2-sportsperson-worker-visa/overview

i'll be honest. At first I was cynical about this whole thing, and wondered if nothing would get sorted until after the General Election as it was just a ruse to help doctor immigration figures. But more and more breaches of the immigration rules have been flagged up by people - particularly on the thread in Speedway Dicussions - and, if correct, it seems the BSPA have brought this upon themselves.

They were allowing that? Good grief!! No wonder they've been pulled up. And the riders themselves have some responsibility for that, too.

Yes. They are. I guess that being a sport governing body and pleading ignorance they are being given a chance to be educated and to do things properly. I guess this must have all come to light last year after the Jason Doyle visa issue. It became known then that, on the visa he was getting, he couldn't double up or guest.

There would probably be a work permit specifically for riding in the GP at CArdiff, but would not cover other work (eg league speedway). EU visas (Schengen visas) don't cover the UK, because the UK opted out of that agreement. So they will still be able to ride in Sweden and Poland as that will be a different visa than the UK.

This may be a new problem for Australians, but it's not so new for speedway. In the past it was always Swedes and Americans that had problems. I remember Jimmy Nilsen and Per Jonsson had a hell of a job getting work permits despite being two genuine World class prospects. It had to be proved that they were capabpe of getting a 6 point average before they were alowed and Swindon had to get the local MP involved in the end. Then there was Americans, who also needed a 6 point average. Shawn McConnell failed to get a work permit after failing to reach that figure, and by all accounts Rick miller only managed to achieve it after a little help from Shawn nd Kelly Moran in his final match aganst Sheffield. It used to be difficult for not EU (or EEC or whatever it was then) riders to get work permits, but that all seemed to fall by the wayside in the 90s. (Possibly in line with Tony Blair's "open door" immigration that everyone complains about now) Isn't that on the back straight at Blunsdon?

They do at the moment. There are constantly evolving immigration laws going on, as the government try to keep immigration figures down to get hte UKIP vote. This is what it's all about, basically. Making things tougher so that figure can be quoted at those who moan about immigrants. Because, like it or not, that is what Australian Speedway Riders are, even if they do have white skin and speak English. It's tough on riders, but it's even tougher on married couples, many of whom are being kept apart by new immigration rules.

Ah yes, I think I remember something about that and posting at the time that it was dangerous to try and cheat the UKBA these days. So you could be right.

I remember a race at a Swindon v Cradley match. I had it on video. Jimmy Nilsen and John Davis, riding for Swindon, both went forward at the same time and nudged the tapes. Alan Grahame promplty released the clutch and rode straight through them. Grahame excluded. Crowd went wild. Nisen and Davis both moved back and smugly put their back wheels up in the air. Great stuff.

Do you mean this year's Premier League? Perhaps you could clarify that. Do you really think this: 1. Scott Nicholls 2. Matej Zagar. 3. Simon Stead. 4. Craig Cook. 5. Max Fricke 6. Steve Worrall 7. Stefan Nielsen Would struggle against this: 1. Craig Cook 2. Sam Masters 3. Justin Sedgmen 4. Kevin Wolbert 5. Erik Riss 6. Robert Branford 7. Max Clegg (Just taking the first 2 completed teams from each league alphabetically. Cook v Cook would be pretty close. Belle Vue's number 4 vs Edinbugh's number one!)

I think most of the talent was at Cradley Heath in 1983!

We may well have had the World's top riders here in the early 80s but only one of them was at Swindon. Or at least in 1983.

Two then. My main point is he shoud get the rest of the ban suspended and be allowed to continue his career immediately but have a suspended sentence hanging over his head.

I hope this doesn't get dragged into Darcy being cleared on some sort of ridiculous technicality. What I hope happens is he gets, say, a three year ban, with the time he's served out already being counted towards the ban and the rest being suspended. Then he can get on with his racing. He's had a long time out now and missed out on 2 cracks at the World title, which he probably deserved to happen. Hopefully it will teach him the lessons needed and it is clear to him he musn't transgress again.

I would think that most people who want to view a website on Coventry Speedway would type "Coventry Speedway" into Google and then click on the link. I can't see the .co having any real effect on that. how often do you actually type in the full address of a website you wish to view?

Interesting topic. Perhaps there are further categories to be had? But for me: Best gater: Bob Kilby. He didn't always make the gate, but when he did, boy did he! He's be about 3 lengths clear by the first bend. Best racer: Peter Collins. How about best team rider? John Cook. Never seen anything to match his ride with Lance King at Ipswich in the test against GB. Best all rounder: Hans Nielsen.

If you read through, you'll see that some people are saying both should be guilty. You seem to be reading things into it that aren't there. There may be a case for both to have been guilty, but there is certainly a difference in the two scenarios.

You don't know for sure, maybe, but it is enough to cast reasonable doubt. I only know from what is on here. I don't know the full details of the case. But that's how it seems to me. There is a clear difference between the two though. It does seem to me that the first guy is guilty of some form of aiding and abetting, however, with regard to the second case.