Halifaxtiger Posted June 22, 2014 Report Share Posted June 22, 2014 (edited) I believe the County Ambulances are at various locations in the County when not in use.In previous incidents sometimes the Ambulance can arrive promptly but we still have a lengthy due to paperwork ect.Being honest even as a diehard supporter I am getting fed up with all the delays if there is a crash ,after all there is a big probability there will be one given the nature of the sport.The situation definately has to be looked into at most Tracks in the Country. Can take bloody ages. In the Rye House case above, the hospital is only a few miles from the track and it is my understanding why that is why it took so long (although, to be fair, the track ambulance actually went to the hospital) Edited June 22, 2014 by Halifaxtiger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orderly Posted June 22, 2014 Report Share Posted June 22, 2014 They absolutely are - as the company in charge then any paid (or indeed unpaid) persons operating under their authority are their responsibility. If they failed to take due diligence as to whether persons under their control were fit and able to carry out their assigned duties then they are the ones liable for any litigation and/or law suits resulting as a result of said employee being unable to carry out their assigned duties. The Doctor or the Paramedic is answerable only to the referee or the BSPA & SCB not the promoter or the clerk of the course but in saying that I hope that the people on here & Twitter or Face Book have a emergency fund at their disposal because if the accusations that have been made against the Paramedic are wrong then there could be a lot of summons to appear in court in the post very soon, But if the Paramedic was found to be intoxicated then he will have to answer to the Health Profession's Council (Paramedics ruling body) and will invariably struck off the paramedics register and banned from practicing as a paramedic for life 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulco Posted June 22, 2014 Report Share Posted June 22, 2014 The Doctor or the Paramedic is answerable only to the referee or the BSPA & SCB not the promoter or the clerk of the course but in saying that I hope that the people on here & Twitter or Face Book have a emergency fund at their disposal because if the accusations that have been made against the Paramedic are wrong then there could be a lot of summons to appear in court in the post very soon, But if the Paramedic was found to be intoxicated then he will have to answer to the Health Profession's Council (Paramedics ruling body) and will invariably struck off the paramedics register and banned from practicing as a paramedic for life Dont be silly . After the twitter post , everybody else was just having a giggle . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halifaxtiger Posted June 22, 2014 Report Share Posted June 22, 2014 Dont be silly . After the twitter post , everybody else was just having a giggle . Star shooter either was a paramedic or was in the support crew, so I can understand her reaction. I'd say its pretty serious to publicly accuse a paramedic of being plastered in the course of his duties and some on here seem to have taken Lawson's word as the truth when it could be anything but. I certainly didn't think that most of those remarks made were in jest. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulco Posted June 22, 2014 Report Share Posted June 22, 2014 Star shooter either was a paramedic or was in the support crew, so I can understand her reaction. I'd say its pretty serious to publicly accuse a paramedic of being plastered in the course of his duties and some on here seem to have taken Lawson's word as the truth when it could be anything but. I certainly didn't think that most of those remarks made were in jest. I was talking more about the posts last night immediately after Son of God's revelations 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bandit59 Posted June 22, 2014 Report Share Posted June 22, 2014 I see Lawsons first twitter remark has been removed if he wants more than 2 rides up to heat 10 when a result can be called maybe he should have a word with Havvy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulco Posted June 22, 2014 Report Share Posted June 22, 2014 Think if i owned a speedway club , i would ban my riders from using social media sites 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arson fire Posted June 22, 2014 Report Share Posted June 22, 2014 I see Lawsons first twitter remark has been removed if he wants more than 2 rides up to heat 10 when a result can be called maybe he should have a word with HavvyJudging by his last tweet he's been told to remove it.... Either way it needs clarifying, but I doubt we will hear of it again. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lioness Posted June 22, 2014 Report Share Posted June 22, 2014 Dont be silly . After the twitter post , everybody else was just having a giggle . and that 'giggle' could rightly or wrongly cost an individual their career or livlihood as Starshooter has explained. it is a very serious allegation and one that stretches way beyond speedway and will have to be dealt with as such. Berwick are right (did I just type that? lol) not to make any comment on it just now. if it turns out to be a wrongful accusation Mr Lawson could find himself in very serious trouble. Thats the payback of social media 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
screm Posted June 22, 2014 Report Share Posted June 22, 2014 When Ash Birks was injured at Plymouth last season (seriously, as it turned out) the meeting was delayed for 15 minutes while they repaired the fence. Plymouth are one of the teams who have additional cover. I can imagine that the wait at Berwick would be horrendous. Doesn't the county ambulance come from/go to Galashiels ? Stand to be corrected here, but I think the nearest ambulance station is literally 5mins from the track, of course that is presuming the ambulance isn't out on call. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arson fire Posted June 22, 2014 Report Share Posted June 22, 2014 and that 'giggle' could rightly or wrongly cost an individual their career or livlihood as Starshooter has explained. no it couldn't?? The truth or investigation will decide that surely not some allegation.... Unless the powers that be go around sacking folk on the say so of a post on twitter..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
screm Posted June 22, 2014 Report Share Posted June 22, 2014 I believe the County Ambulances are at various locations in the County when not in use.In previous incidents sometimes the Ambulance can arrive promptly but we still have a lengthy due to paperwork ect.Being honest even as a diehard supporter I am getting fed up with all the delays if there is a crash ,after all there is a big probability there will be one given the nature of the sport.The situation definately has to be looked into at most Tracks in the Country. Absolutely, which is why I hope the promotion at Berwick addresses any delays. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DSC67 Posted June 22, 2014 Report Share Posted June 22, 2014 Think if i owned a speedway club , i would ban my riders from using social media sites Until recently I was under the impression that the use of mobile phones at all tracks was banned from the pits area during racing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KEITH M Posted June 22, 2014 Report Share Posted June 22, 2014 I see Lawsons first twitter remark has been removed if he wants more than 2 rides up to heat 10 when a result can be called maybe he should have a word with HavvyYour rider with highest average has to ride at number 1 .. I am pretty sure Havvy didn't design the race format where an away number one has his third ride in heat 11 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HadrianDog Posted June 22, 2014 Report Share Posted June 22, 2014 (edited) As usual, you make fair point but I do think the consequences of not having adequate cover need to be considered. Incidents like the one at Workington - where the meeting was called off prior to heat 10 - are rare but the cost to the promotion of re-running that meeting would probably pay for additional cover for an entire season. The effect on fans also needs to be considered. As a die hard, I find it annoying but just about tolerable. A newbie, though, sat around waiting for ages - at Rye House last year, it was about 90 minutes delay - would probably be put off altogether and to those who are already becoming disenchanted it would merely hasten their departure. Just because he looked drunk doesn't mean he was drunk and its extremely serious to make such an allegation without knowing it for sure. It could easily be that his behaviour was due to illness. He almost certainly wasn't swigging medical alcohol during the meeting, so if what Lawson has said is true he must have been inebriated before hand. You would have thought that others would have noticed it and reported it to the match referee given the potentially lethal consequences. Screm is right. This needs to be looked into and a public announcement made. As with the 'health and safety' issue at Peterborough, I somehow doubt if that will happen - especially if it reflects badly on the promotion. If it is the case that Lawson is wrong, he should be heavily fined. Lawson seemingly quoted what was in his opinion a paramedic who appeared drunk. He is no medical expert for sure, but how many on here seeing someone experiencing the signs relating to the conditions which mimic a drunken state, would not draw the same conclusion. The bottom line here though is irrespective of the cause behind the medico's withdrawal, several hundred fans were adversely affected thanks to the BSPA's rules on minimal medical cover. While we at Newcastle are blessed in this area, are we to judge how other clubs balance their finances by merely adhering to those rules. In recent weeks this has bitten both Worky and Berwick, but for the grace of god who will be next. Edited June 23, 2014 by HadrianDog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Team Man Posted June 22, 2014 Report Share Posted June 22, 2014 Until recently I was under the impression that the use of mobile phones at all tracks was banned from the pits area during racing SCB Rule 4.4.1 A mandatory ban on the use, from 15 minutes before Heat 1 until the end of the Official Meeting of all Mobile telephones, iPads, Laptops, Tablets etc. and other external communication equipment within the Pits/Paddock area and the Referee / Announcer room.The exceptions are:the recording of Heat/Meeting Results,the playing of music via the Stadium PA system,approvedlive broadcasts or to summon the Emergency Services 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevePark Posted June 22, 2014 Report Share Posted June 22, 2014 Until recently I was under the impression that the use of mobile phones at all tracks was banned from the pits area during racing Richard Lawson's tweet was made long after the meeting had finished. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBSC Posted June 22, 2014 Report Share Posted June 22, 2014 shame that this thread has now became the story of what happened off track not on track. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fromafar Posted June 22, 2014 Report Share Posted June 22, 2014 shame that this thread has now became the story of what happened off track not on track.Let's face it more happened off the track than on it.There is an answer that would put this post to bed,but as yet it has not been given. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HadrianDog Posted June 22, 2014 Report Share Posted June 22, 2014 And presumably if it wasn't down to illness then Berwick Speedway should be heavily fined and made to recompense those present? If you in good faith employ someone to do a job and they come with the right bits of paper saying they are competent to do it, you then have taken the necessary steps to cover yourself surely. If he was drunk then he is at fault, illness another matter entirely. Real point here is RULES SAY NO BACK-UP NEEDED. Which is twaddle. 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.