iris123 Posted August 10, 2014 Report Share Posted August 10, 2014 Personally i would let him off in the best interests of the sport anyway.He is exciting and rides in green.Now if he was a boring rider then i'd ban him.That's how it works with me 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starman2006 Posted August 10, 2014 Report Share Posted August 10, 2014 you need to realise that when you have a clown of a manager who makes moronic comments on twitter that from time to time it will keep popping back up You need to realise how stupid your making yourself look with your on-going infatuation with Matt and Neil.. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OGT Posted August 10, 2014 Report Share Posted August 10, 2014 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheReturn Posted August 10, 2014 Report Share Posted August 10, 2014 Good to see all the drug experts passing their analysis on the BSF. That's why it's so highly respoected by administrators in the sport, along with riders who enjoy the critical near-destruction messages as to their worth with a team. All great reading for the layman like me. It's amazing that every now and again some moron brings out the 'BSF is not respected by the speedways bosses' all because fans dare to have and share opinions. Maybe that's why the sport is in the mess it is, because people don't bother to listen to the fans. Sure there is some crap on here, but also many good and sensible opinions and ideas. You need to realise how stupid your making yourself look with your on-going infatuation with Matt and Neil.. He's not wrong though, Middlo's comment was stupid. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f-s-p Posted August 11, 2014 Report Share Posted August 11, 2014 Was there any need to be abusive? You could have said some poster instead. Your comment typifies why I made my original comment.Moron was pretty much spot on. Rmc to the rescue again. Maybe you 2 have some actual input to this subject? 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salty Posted August 11, 2014 Report Share Posted August 11, 2014 Thought this thread was pretty reasonable until Gustix started his usual moaning. For someone who never misses an opportunity to denigrate the BSF he spends an awful lot of time on here. BSF not highly regarded by Speedways administrators? Thank goodness for that - the feeling is largely mutual. 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gee jay Posted August 11, 2014 Report Share Posted August 11, 2014 Danny Bird - 2 year ban springs to mind as an old racers fan (and most previous riders got at least 12 months), be interesting to see how Dudek is treated... frank smart and i think roger lobb both got 2 yr bans ? he's definately in trouble if he's done what middlo seems to be hinting at , but i hope there'll be help for him not just the elbow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCB Posted August 11, 2014 Report Share Posted August 11, 2014 frank smart and i think roger lobb both got 2 yr bans ? he's definately in trouble if he's done what middlo seems to be hinting at , but i hope there'll be help for him not just the elbow. Franks was 18 months for pleading guilty and Roger was 24 months. The stupid thing was Franks ban ended mid-September while Rogers run until March - in effect both were banned for 2 years as by the time Franks ban was over there was only 6 weeks of the season left in 2001 - he did get a few bookings in challenge and individual meetings though. And they were taking recreational drugs - if it makes any difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Star Lady Posted August 11, 2014 Report Share Posted August 11, 2014 au contraire. I am too busy moderating other forums. It's just that I know where a BSF topic interests me and go there. Most of the BSF Forums I have never visited. It's just that sometimes I see a topic that is of interest to me and pass a comment. On most forums, when you contact a Mod they usually respond to you. I have tried MANY times to do this on the BSF and just been ignored. One of them has, what I think is, a block on contacting them! - but I might be misunderstanding that Mods reply system. Very strange that just about every thread you post on ends up with adverse comments about the mods of this forum. In it's way just as if not more annoying than the multi alias member. I've asked before why if you don't like the way this forum is run you don't set up your own but you tried that and no one was interested. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pugwash Posted August 11, 2014 Report Share Posted August 11, 2014 You need to realise how stupid your making yourself look with your on-going infatuation with Matt and Neil.. Too true and most appropriate on this particular thread as he's suffering from Poole addiction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wackie Posted August 11, 2014 Report Share Posted August 11, 2014 Saw yesterday the bank invovled in the Ecclestone matter has refused to accept £20 million settlement - so be interesting where it goes next. He went back with an offer of £60M which they've accepted! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruiser McHuge Posted August 13, 2014 Report Share Posted August 13, 2014 Riders were always given a booklet and at the back was a list of every banned substance ...it was a long list and was a bit mind boggling but everything on it could easily be checked on any medication about to be taken...it wasn't difficult to do...and it is the riders responsibility at the end of the day... Wad it Eric Monaghan that failed a test for Night Nurse once !.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevehone Posted August 13, 2014 Report Share Posted August 13, 2014 You seem to have this ongoing fasination with Neil Middleditch and Matt Ford you see, Starman isn't stupid after all, he does irony 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostwalker Posted August 14, 2014 Report Share Posted August 14, 2014 I read in an article today that the Swedish motorcycle sports federation (Svemo) will not deduct any of Dudeks points in the meetings he have ridden since he was tested. Imo this is a pretty strange decision. He have been caught (pending test result of b-test) using a forbidden substance which means that he is presumed to have gotten an advantage of it. Then why should his points till count? It's not like only had an advantage of it in individual events. Perhaps Svemo doesn't want to deduct any points because it would mean that Dackarna would miss the play-offs. I can understand that a possible appeal and such would take some time which might mean that it won't be finished before the play offs, but again I wouldn't be so hard to just decide that if the b-test is positive all of Dudek's points from individual and team events since the time of the test occasion should be removed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racers and royals Posted August 14, 2014 Report Share Posted August 14, 2014 I read in an article today that the Swedish motorcycle sports federation (Svemo) will not deduct any of Dudeks points in the meetings he have ridden since he was tested. Imo this is a pretty strange decision. He have been caught (pending test result of b-test) using a forbidden substance which means that he is presumed to have gotten an advantage of it. Then why should his points till count? It's not like only had an advantage of it in individual events. Perhaps Svemo doesn't want to deduct any points because it would mean that Dackarna would miss the play-offs. I can understand that a possible appeal and such would take some time which might mean that it won't be finished before the play offs, but again I wouldn't be so hard to just decide that if the b-test is positive all of Dudek's points from individual and team events since the time of the test occasion should be removed. Can`t agree- how can you say that for the meetings subsequent to the test he would have failed a drugs test for those meetings. He`s failed a test and will be no doubt punished for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveLyric2 Posted August 14, 2014 Report Share Posted August 14, 2014 I'm sure I've read somewhere that the 'banned substance' in Poland is not 'banned' in Sweden?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phillipsr Posted August 14, 2014 Report Share Posted August 14, 2014 Again it's au contraire. I have four extremely busy FACEBOOK pages with some well known and RESPECTED "under their own name" members. Get with it! Kindly go back there then 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The White Knight Posted August 14, 2014 Report Share Posted August 14, 2014 Kindly go back there then Naughty. :nono: :angry: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostwalker Posted August 14, 2014 Report Share Posted August 14, 2014 (edited) Can`t agree- how can you say that for the meetings subsequent to the test he would have failed a drugs test for those meetings. He`s failed a test and will be no doubt punished for it. Actually it is the complete opposite and removed results are retroactive from the time of the test. Here are a couple of example of an athlete that got her results from several years removed: http://www.svt.se/sport/friidrott/rysk-maratonstjarna-i-dopningsskandal http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/07/us-athletics-russia-abitova-idUSBRE8A61LS20121107 I'm sure I've read somewhere that the 'banned substance' in Poland is not 'banned' in Sweden?? I don't think that is correct. It is the same substance as Evy Sachenbacher was found guilty of using and it is on Wada's list. http://list.wada-ama.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/2014-Prohibited-List-ENGLISH-FINAL.pdf Page 8 under S6. STIMULANTS b: Specified Stimulants (examples). methylhexaneamine. Edited August 14, 2014 by Ghostwalker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racers and royals Posted August 14, 2014 Report Share Posted August 14, 2014 Actually it is the complete opposite and removed results are retroactive from the point of the test. Here are a couple of example of an athlete that got her results from several years removed: http://www.svt.se/sport/friidrott/rysk-maratonstjarna-i-dopningsskandal http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/07/us-athletics-russia-abitova-idUSBRE8A61LS20121107 I don't think that is correct. It is the same substance as Evy Sachenbacher was found guilty of using and it is on Wada's list. http://list.wada-ama.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/2014-Prohibited-List-ENGLISH-FINAL.pdf Page 8 under S6. STIMULANTS b: Specified Stimulants (examples). methylhexaneamine. Can you show me a team sport however where points have been removed-the instance you have quoted are "individual " athletes 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.