Ipswich V Edinburgh 25/7/13

[Nutz]

Nobody has said in this thread that Ben is innocent, no doubt he did provoke Cook but words are words and fists are fists. Ben used words, Cook used fists and ultimately Cook took Barker's bait hook, line and sinker.

He *should* of let his racing do the talking, scoring as much as he could to help his team knock us out of the final - instead he did the polar opposite and handed us the Cup Final place on a silver platter.

Cook was outsmarted by Barker, it's as simple as that.

 

Congratulating someone for making an apology after they have done wrong? It's the absolute minimum of an apology he should of given, if I commit a crime and go to court where I plead guilty - should I expect praise and thanks from the judge and jury?

What a bizarre thing to say, also interesting that in his (much anticipated but ultimately underwhelming) "statement" he can't even use Ben's name, seems pretty childish.

He goes on to state there was "significant" initial provocation, no, there wasn't - it was totally insignificant and should of just been ignored, as any decent professional would have done - from that statement and trying to use that as some form of justification, I'd suggest that Cook still hasn't really taken on board what happened or learned any lessons from it at all.

 

First paragraph I totally agree with.

 

Next, unless you know what was said that started the fracas, you can't say it was insignificant. I'd say the way Cook has reacted since Thursday would suggest he has taken it on board and already learned from it.

[Ipswich Jules]

 

 

But you're missing the point... Cook isn't apologising to Barker and I don't see why he should. He was apologising to the supporters of both teams. The statement was a personal admission of guilt and apologised accordingly. Barker hasn't offered any apology and he's as guilty of making the tie a non-spectacle as Cook was.

 

Why should Barker apologize? Who to? You say yourself Cook shouldn't apologize to Barker so by the same token Barker shouldn't apologize to Cook.

Both were fined for the handbags - that's all both parties are guilty of, but Barkers involvement in that had no impact on the outcome of the meeting and the spectacle for the spectators - it was Cook's actions that followed that fine which took care of that and, as you said yourself, is what he has - rightly - apologized for.

 

Next, unless you know what was said that started the fracas, you can't say it was insignificant. I'd say the way Cook has reacted since Thursday would suggest he has taken it on board and already learned from it.

 

What was said is of no significance at all, Cook should of been professional enough to rise above it. However, he wasn't and he paid the price - except that price was also paid by the Edinburgh fans (that both traveled and stayed at home), fellow teammates, management and sponsors.

[Arson fire]

 

 

A bit like Barker then as he keeps getting himself involved in these situations.

you keep saying this like its very often?? Is it?? I'm not so sure??

[Nutz]

Why should Barker apologize? Who to? You say yourself Cook shouldn't apologize to Barker so by the same token Barker shouldn't apologize to Cook.

Both were fined for the handbags - that's all both parties are guilty of, but Barkers involvement in that had no impact on the outcome of the meeting and the spectacle for the spectators - it was Cook's actions that followed that fine which took care of that and, as you said yourself, is what he has - rightly - apologized for.

 

 

 

What was said is of no significance at all, Cook should of been professional enough to rise above it. However, he wasn't and he paid the price - except that price was also paid by the Edinburgh fans (that both traveled and stayed at home), fellow teammates, management and sponsors.

 

Of which I was one that travelled so feel as aggrieved as the next man. I'm not saying Barker should apologise to Cookie... But he should have the decency to acknowledge his part in the melee by offering an apology rather than go to a tabloid which makes him out to be a totally innocent party in it.

 

And why say what was said to start it was insignificant when you don't know what was said?

 

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree, but we both agree that the real losers were the supporters who travelled to the meeting.

Edited July 27, 2013 by Nutz

[Ipswich Jules]

 

 

Of which I was one that travelled so feel as aggrieved as the next man. I'm not saying Barker should apologise to Cookie... But he should have the decency to acknowledge his part in the melee by offering an apology rather than go to a tabloid which makes him out to be a totally innocent party in it.

 

And why say what was said to start it was insignificant when you don't know what was said?

 

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree, but we both agree that the real losers were the supporters who travelled to the meeting.

 

Because it doesn't matter what was said, he could of said his mum was a something something who likes to something with sailors, or he could of said he thought Cook's haircut looked rubbish - it really doesn't matter, or justify, the results.

[SCB]

Because it doesn't matter what was said, he could of said his mum was a something something who likes to something with sailors, or he could of said he thought Cook's haircut looked rubbish - it really doesn't matter, or justify, the results.

Probably told him his wheels look rubbish. It's true.

 

Barker didnt cause his team to go with a blank in 2 races so has nothing to apologise for.

[Ipswich Jules]

Probably told him his wheels look rubbish. It's true.

 

It's careless comments like that, that result in heaters being kicked off walls young man!

[Baldyman]

Blimey, is all this cook and Barker rubbish still going on.

[comebackkings]

 

 

Of which I was one that travelled so feel as aggrieved as the next man. I'm not saying Barker should apologise to Cookie... But he should have the decency to acknowledge his part in the melee by offering an apology rather than go to a tabloid which makes him out to be a totally innocent party in it.

 

And why say what was said to start it was insignificant when you don't know what was said?

 

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree, but we both agree that the real losers were the supporters who travelled to the meeting.

 

So he should apologise for getting hit? That's a new one.

[Dekker]

lovey never gives up

[Ipswich Jules]

 

 

I put a wink after my comment - it's called humour. Your reply is simply childish.

 

 

 

You are missing the point - Cook doesn't have to apologise to Barker. They were both fined for what happened in the pits - or have you still failed to comprehend that?

 

There is no-one else to blame for Cook's behaviour in the meeting with Dan Holt, which ultimately led to Cook's ejection from the meeting, but Cook himself. Cook had a choice, and he made the wrong one.

 

I suggest you read about Cognitive Behavioural Therapy - it has some brilliant, provenly effective uses, for issues such as lack of confidence, all the way to other end of the spectrum, e.g. anger management. It's all about understanding your own reaction to "trigger" events, and learning how to deal with them in a more positive manner.

 

CBT didn't really do anything for me, I've been moved on to CAT(analytic) now.

 

True story but totally off topic!

[Arson fire]

See midnight lady had a rant on fb about had enough.... Love...ely.... Lol

 

Unless dekker is midnight lady then I'm as confused as him/her

Edited July 27, 2013 by Arson fire

[jenga]

I'm just waiting for an English translation

yer = you, as in NOT me. the rest IS plain ENGLISH.. should have stuck in at school instead of playing truant in the bike sheds..

Edited July 27, 2013 by jenga

[Young51]

PS..if this thread goes on much longer will it go to extra time & a penalty shootout? Ipswich don't have a very good record in those if I recall..Just wonderin'... Sweet dreams peeps

Edited July 28, 2013 by Young51

[BluPanther]

you keep saying this like its very often?? Is it?? I'm not so sure??

Altercations with North and an innocent Hougaard at Boro last Monday, Cook on Thursday. That's 3 incidents in four heats that I witnessed...

[Arson fire]

Altercations with North and an innocent Hougaard at Boro last Monday, Cook on Thursday. That's 3 incidents in four heats that I witnessed...

you only witnessed 4 heats?? Have you any before that?? This season?? Last season?? Genuine question.

[BluPanther]

you only witnessed 4 heats?? Have you any before that?? This season?? Last season?? Genuine question.

No not personally..

[tyretrax]

Don't know what Barker said but it couldn't have been very professional. As for being a professional rider he comes across as a bit of a twit.

Edited July 28, 2013 by tyretrax

[Catalan]

Having had to deal with both riders they both seem to feel they can do as they please as far as officials are concerned.

[Hamish McRaker]

Ben Barker seems from all accounts to have the knack for being able to "push buttons" and get others to react, so he probably likes to play little games, in the style of a little boy who's yet to mature fully into an adult. This trait is far from uncommon among males, especially those in their 20's.

Craig Cook, from what I've seen of him, is quite a focused young man, in fact very focussed indeed and in that respect rather different from the majority of British riders. That's why he's good, and Barker knows that and he's carrying a fair bit of envy around with him against Cook.

The best advice I can give to Cook is to keep up the focus and intensity, and learn to not allow the game-players to get to you. Also, it could help if you were to chill out a bit more (I'm talking about speedway-wise here) as being 100% focussed can be counterproductive at times!