bigcatdiary Posted June 7, 2013 Report Share Posted June 7, 2013 Seems a very fair statement, but reveals a very worrying insight into the way the SCB (mis)handle their duties. Very unprofessional behaviour from them in getting simple facts wrong and feeding confidential information to Speedway Star before advising the parties concerned. They've not been so quick in feeding information out about the dodgy and similar (if not worse) Poole call off though. And there lies the problem, as in all things speedway 2 different ways to do it depending on which club is at fault. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil The Ace Posted June 7, 2013 Report Share Posted June 7, 2013 (edited) Im failing to understand why some people have got a problem with the statement. As it happens I do think that we should pay the fans and riders that travelled. And I was one of the aces fans against what happened and I thought we should accept the punishment given 1st of all we are not Appealing the punishment and have accepted the punishment so what's everyone's problem with it Belle vue have clearly just given there thoughts in the handling of the case and if the statement is true then the SCB ought to be ashamed at there handling of it I think it was a fair statement. Clearly wrote by a lawyer Edited June 7, 2013 by Phil The Ace 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fourentee Posted June 7, 2013 Report Share Posted June 7, 2013 To be fair some of the spelling gives it away Like 'council' for 'counsel'? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ouch Posted June 7, 2013 Report Share Posted June 7, 2013 I'm surprised at the statement, I wouldn't have bothered. The more they know it bugs us the more they will keep bashing us. There is nothing new here just a statement that in the latter half takes issue with the SCB's handling of the whole episode. The current promotion were naive to think they could pull this off like so many before (and after) them, and receive a nod and a wink whilst its brushed under the carpet. The fact they were all nattering with glee between themselves and to the press about what they were going to do to the Aces now they finally had something after all these years just confirms that Belle Vue bashing is alive and well. Rise above it and move on, don't give them the oxygen of publicity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kester Posted June 7, 2013 Report Share Posted June 7, 2013 Exactly. Had the judge in the April Jones case leaked the summing up and verdict to the press before officially announcing the verdict the murderer's counsel would have had a field day. Then there would have been a split. The moronic Jeremy Springer watching type of low life would have been spouting stuff like 'unreal statement you get fought murdering and then start blaming others' or 'Love it. A quick gloss over the murdering bit and then have a big moan about the judge' or even 'When in a hole - STOP DIGGING! He is just not doing himself any favours with that statement.'. To be fair some of the spelling gives it away never mind the content. The more intellectual types would hope and accept that the correct judgement had been reached but would consider the wider implication of possibilities such as corruption, improper payments or bribes, miscarriages of justice or simply the unethical behaviour of someone in authority demonstrated by someone who is prepared to pass information to the press, innocently or otherwise. Just like on this forum then! Jerry! Jerry, jerry, We can only hope to follow your intellectual lead. I'll let you get back to the Bertrand Russell 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ouch Posted June 7, 2013 Report Share Posted June 7, 2013 Are they the two blokes in the box on The Muppet Show. Bert is my favourite. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kester Posted June 7, 2013 Report Share Posted June 7, 2013 Are they the two blokes in the box on The Muppet Show. Bert is my favourite. They're Stadler and Waldorf (spelling may be wrong). I can just see them in Wulfsport jackets having a good whinge about Simon Stead or somesuch. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCB Posted June 7, 2013 Report Share Posted June 7, 2013 They're Stadler and Waldorf (spelling may be wrong). I can just see them in Wulfsport jackets having a good whinge about Simon Stead or somesuch. Why did you come and say hi? As I'm sure it's me you've just described! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kester Posted June 7, 2013 Report Share Posted June 7, 2013 Why did you come and say hi? As I'm sure it's me you've just described! The acid test would be to say the name Zetterstrom and see if the facial muscles start twitching. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mdmc82 Posted June 8, 2013 Report Share Posted June 8, 2013 @BmthEchoSport: Pirates: Ford shocked over SCB's postponement probe http://t.co/QjVF2J2bPv Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveLyric2 Posted June 8, 2013 Report Share Posted June 8, 2013 (edited) @BmthEchoSport: Pirates: Ford shocked over SCB's postponement probe http://t.co/QjVF2J2bPv Don't you just love headlines on a slow news Saturday?! As already announced, the SCB are to 'discuss' the matter at their July 10 meeting!! Graham Reeve will probably announce how the discussion is to go by July 9th!! Edited June 8, 2013 by Skidder1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ouch Posted June 8, 2013 Report Share Posted June 8, 2013 The announcement that they intend to discuss the matter was made purely to placate fans who commented on here that one club gets fined and docked three points whilst another gets off scot free. I can even trump Reeve on his early calls by announcing that Poole will get off scot free. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCB Posted June 8, 2013 Report Share Posted June 8, 2013 "no rule was broken" - well actually, if BV broke the rule that says the staging promoter can only call off a meeting if racing is impossible then Poole broke tbe sane rule. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LisaColette Posted June 8, 2013 Report Share Posted June 8, 2013 'But the Hammers chief added: “There has been a little bit of confusion created by the use of the word agreed. We didn’t agree, yet we didn’t object.” 'Surely you either agree or you don't!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BluPanther Posted June 8, 2013 Report Share Posted June 8, 2013 'But the Hammers chief added: “There has been a little bit of confusion created by the use of the word agreed. We didn’t agree, yet we didn’t object.” 'Surely you either agree or you don't!! Must agree, Mr Cook appears to be sitting on a big wide fence... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCB Posted June 8, 2013 Report Share Posted June 8, 2013 'But the Hammers chief added: “There has been a little bit of confusion created by the use of the word agreed. We didn’t agree, yet we didn’t object.” 'Surely you either agree or you don't!! I didn't agree that my neighbours could paint the wall in their living room. I didn't stop them doing it though. You can do both. It's a moot point, even if Lakeside agreed that's NOT a reason to postpone a meeting. The only reason is if racing is impossible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Blachshadow Posted June 8, 2013 Report Share Posted June 8, 2013 (edited) "no rule was broken" - well actually, if BV broke the rule that says the staging promoter can only call off a meeting if racing is impossible then Poole broke tbe sane rule. As opposed to the insane ones? Won't be a problem though - Ford'll just tell the SCB what he'll settle for and that's what he'll get. Worked last time. 'But the Hammers chief added: “There has been a little bit of confusion created by the use of the word agreed. We didn’t agree, yet we didn’t object.” 'Surely you either agree or you don't!! Quite. Didn't like it but wouldn't upset Ford. Edited June 8, 2013 by Vincent Blackshadow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCB Posted June 8, 2013 Report Share Posted June 8, 2013 Won't be a problem though - Ford'll just tell the SCB what he'll settle for and that's what he'll get. Worked last time. By then he'll know if losing 3 points doesn't matter as the play off dream may be over by then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveLyric2 Posted June 9, 2013 Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 I didn't agree that my neighbours could paint the wall in their living room. I didn't stop them doing it though. You can do both. It's a moot point, even if Lakeside agreed that's NOT a reason to postpone a meeting. The only reason is if racing is impossible. There you have it then With the team Poole were being forced to go with, on the poor Poole track - racing would have been impossible!! QED - no rule broken - nothing to answer! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uk_martin Posted June 9, 2013 Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 interesting article here about punishments handed out to two Polish teams after last week's farce over there...divide the amounts of the fines by 5 to give a rough sterling equivalent - http://www.sportowefakty.pl/zuzel/362981/na-moj-znak-dajemy-surowe-kary-dla-pge-marmy-rzeszow-i-fogo-unii-leszno 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.