Guest Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 Problem comes that numerous other people, riders & officials, all passed the test that was administered by the same official with the same equipment whereas Darcy failed on multiple occassions Is that an actual fact? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sommelier Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 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. Well said Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavan Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 No pal, many on here have stated Darcy was Drunk, so I take it they were their then ? There is a massive, difference between being DRUNK and just over the limit. Even a clown like you should know that... do yourself a favour and go away mate. you are plainly and simply a troll looking to inflame a situation and get a response. And yes im responding by telling you that you are quite a sad little man who feels he has to do this. NOBODY HAS SAID DARCY WAS DRUNK!!!!!!!!! GET THAT INTO YOUR HEAD!!!!!!!!! If all you can contribute is crap and calling names do us all a favour and shut up 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sommelier Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 Still cant get my head round the reasoning of some people. FACT - Darcy Ward was over the limit to ride a speedway bike. That is the black and white of it all. Trying to find of some legal loophole or technacaility to get out of it will not teach Ward a lesson at all. So what if it was an off-duty Policeman? You telling me he wandered in to the pits and randomly tested people? Of course not he was supposed to be there. The talk of banning him for 2 or 3 years is to harsh. I said 8 months would suffice. However i cant get my head round people looking for any little flaw in the proceedure to get Darcy off. If you were true Darcy/speedway/Poole fans you should want the right thing for the sport and for Ward and that would be to ban him for failing a breath test Right or wrong, thats what lawyers are paid to do! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHILIPRISING Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 Is that an actual fact? NO... MANY are still missing the point. Plenty of guilty people 'get off' in all walks of life through technicalities. I am certainly not defending DW, far from it, but the longer this goes on the more likely it is that the FIM case is not water-tight and, whether we like it or not, that could result in him walking away without any ban. As to Gavan's point about the off-duty policeman. No one is suggesting he was randomly walking about testing people but the fact is whoever is charged with carrying out the tests has to have the right credentials and it is possible that this man did not according to the letter of the FIM regulations. As one who was there, the actual metre readings were not publicly disclosed but the informed chatter was that Ward was not dramatically over the limit and may well have passed had the test taken place later. It is not hard to see why a lawyer charged with getting his client off would grasp at anything that he believes nullified the prosecution's evidence. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pugwash Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 Looks like the FIM may be 'digging a hole'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starman2006 Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 Good question. Maybe due to the confusion of the GP being urgently rescheduled the official FIM tester was not present and this guy was drafted in at short notice as he had some experience. Rubbish, there should ALWAYS be an FIM official present at every GP. That statement would NEVER hold up in a court of law. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Central Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 It makes me smile to think that the whole of the FIM apparatus on the day. The jury, the referee, the Race Director; everyone, in fact, took the word of a cack-handed imbecile with dodgy testing equipment and almost jumped at the chance of removing the star attraction from the series just an hour before the meeting. What odd behaviour on their part when his lack of qualifications now seems so obvious to so many. I, for one, am eternally grateful to the Daily Star for unearthing such a travesty 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norbold Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 Either the official concerned was a properly authorised official or he wasn't. Either the testing equipment used was properly calibrated or it wasn't. What do the F.I.M. hope to gain by postponing the date of the hearing? I can't help feeling that neither of those reasons are the cause of the delay. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Central Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 (edited) Either the official concerned was a properly authorised official or he wasn't. Either the testing equipment used was properly calibrated or it wasn't. What do the F.I.M. hope to gain by postponing the date of the hearing? I can't help feeling that neither of those reasons are the cause of the delay..Careful Norbold, you are in danger of using too much intelligent thought on this matter. It will only be held against you. . Edited January 12, 2015 by Grand Central Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iris123 Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 If this case isn't water tight then i think this time Castagna must fall on his sword and walk........... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHILIPRISING Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 It makes me smile to think that the whole of the FIM apparatus on the day. The jury, the referee, the Race Director; everyone, in fact, took the word of a cack-handed imbecile with dodgy testing equipment and almost jumped at the chance of removing the star attraction from the series just an hour before the meeting. What odd behaviour on their part when his lack of qualifications now seems so obvious to so many. I, for one, am eternally grateful to the Daily Star for unearthing such a travesty NOW you are being silly ... who said he was a cack-handed imbecile with dodgy testing equipment jumping at the chance to remove the star attraction? If this case isn't water tight then i think this time Castagna must fall on his sword and walk........... NOTHING to do with Armando, who wasn't there and the whole matter was taken out of the hands of the CCP commission months ago. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Central Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 NOW you are being silly ... who said he was a cack-handed imbecile with dodgy testing equipment jumping at the chance to remove the star attraction? I thought from the manner of some posts today. That silliness was the only currency of value here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starman2006 Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 do yourself a favour and go away mate. you are plainly and simply a troll looking to inflame a situation and get a response. And yes im responding by telling you that you are quite a sad little man who feels he has to do this. NOBODY HAS SAID DARCY WAS DRUNK!!!!!!!!! GET THAT INTO YOUR HEAD!!!!!!!!! If all you can contribute is crap and calling names do us all a favour and shut up Many on here have stated Darcy was DRUNK, that could never be further from the truth. even someone of your limited intelligence can see theres a difference.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norbold Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 Many on here have stated Darcy was DRUNK, that could never be further from the truth. even someone of your limited intelligence can see theres a difference.. As if to prove Grand Central's point, along comes Starman..... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iris123 Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 NOTHING to do with Armando, who wasn't there and the whole matter was taken out of the hands of the CCP commission months ago. Now you are being silly.Of course it has a lot to do with Castagna.He is the top man(won't even ask why he wasn't there being one of the top speedway meetings of the season at a new venue etc)and the buck stops with him after a series of faux pas' during his reign.And if the case isn't water tight he should have made sure it was dropped before it got taken out of the CCP's hands. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wealdstone Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 Of Course not he he merely failed to re hydrate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starman2006 Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 (edited) As if to prove Grand Central's point, along comes Starman..... Really, and my last two posts are rubbish, are they ? I just think your trying to convince yourself and scratching around for something to say for the sake of saying it... Edited January 12, 2015 by Starman2006 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveLyric2 Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 No matter what side of the argument you are on, surely it can be seen as possible that Ward 'admitted he was slightly over', based upon an incorrect reading if there was anything at all wrong with the tester and/or the test!? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCB Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 Many on here have stated Darcy was DRUNK, that could never be further from the truth. even someone of your limited intelligence can see theres a difference.. Drunk - to be intoxicated by alcohol. Yes, he was drunk. 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.