John Leslie Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 Unless the same site also includes a vote for how many are not supporting Darcy then your point is not really worth much. Still, at least we now know how many Poole fans are out there, 2,315 by the looks of it Not many then really. Cheryl Cole writes "I luv my soldiers", or some such inane crap, on facebook and twitter and immediately gets about 4 million likes and twitter repeat thingies. All it proves is that even the most intellectually challenged of sheep-like kiddywinks can use an iphone. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OveFundinFan Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 Within 24 hours of its establishment the Social Media site has won 2,315 likes to support Darcy Ward. Even if it was 122,315, do you think the FIM would care? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 The site is there TO FIND OUT WHO SUPPORTS Darcy Ward. Why should they then ask who does not support him - that would be destructive to the site's purpose. Fine, but the fact 2,315 support him means idiot all if 4,000 people think he is a total dick for drinking so close to a GP. Even if it was 122,315, do you think the FIM would care? Two points: the first - it would be excellent if there was an alternative site giving 4,000 alternative opinions on Darcy Ward. The second point - I do not in any way think the FIM care how many people support Darcy Ward - it's just a debate topic. The FIM would take about as much notice of the support for Darcy Ward site as they do in regard to the ever-growing amount of drivel that appears on the BSF in regard to the matter. I doubt very much if the FIM even know that the support site or the BSF exist. And your point is? You quite clearly advocate drinking before racing a speedway bike? For a supposed ex-speedway journalist you are a disgrace to the sport. Where have I said that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BWitcher Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 (edited) Two points: the first - it would be excellent if there was an alternative site giving 4,000 alternative opinions on Darcy Ward. The second point - I do not in any way think the FIM care how many people support Darcy Ward - it's just a debate topic. The FIM would take about as much notice of the support for Darcy Ward site as they do in regard to the ever-growing amount of drivel that appears on the BSF in regard to the matter. I doubt very much if the FIM even know that the support site or the BSF exist. What you seem to fail to understand it, opinion is irrelevant. Darcy Ward failed a test, he broke the rules of the sport and is being punished accordingly (until proven otherwise). The 'drivel' that has been appearing on the site regarding this subject is driven by 2 or 3 posters. Yourself and Starman being the main two. It is therefore amusing to effectively see you mocking yourself, but I guess you can't get out of those old habits. Edited January 14, 2015 by BWitcher 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Chris Brown Posted January 14, 2015 Popular Post Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 If the 'technicality' is about wrongly calibrated equipment and/or an incorrect test reading, then it is perfectly legitimate to have a support group. perish the thought that if he had not drunk ANY alcohol the day before a GP then it would not matter about calibration of the machine Geez the point is being horrendously missed here 14 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norbold Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 (edited) Points to consider: (1) Was the policeman said to have carried out the test on Darcy Ward sanctioned to conduct it by the FIM? Was he a bona fide FIM official? So who do you think he was then? Some oik who just wandered in off the street, took a breath test and then got the FIM to accept his findings even though they had no idea who he was? Edited January 14, 2015 by norbold 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post salty Posted January 14, 2015 Popular Post Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 Because they have an alternative opinion to some of the dross that appears in BSF Posts? ever-growing amount of drivel that appears on the BSF in regard to the matter. : Yet again you go out of your way to denigrate the quality of the posts on this forum. For someone who currently has just under 4,000 posts (under your Gustix name not to mention those under your other aliases in the past) I find it strange that you would spend so much time sharing forum space with people whose posts you constantly claim are "dross". I have been a member of this forum for over 10 years and whilst there is a level of debate which sometimes degenerates to that of the playground, the vast majority of posts and posters on here I find to be sensible and thoughtful (especially compared to other sporting forums). The biggest dross on this thread I would suggest belongs to a certain poster who has made many unsubstantiated claims that people want to see Darcy "hung" because he claims they think he was "drunk". Maybe if the BSF doesn't reach your lofty standards then you should confine yourself to your beloved social media? 11 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 (edited) Points to consider: (1) Was the policeman said to have carried out the test on Darcy Ward sanctioned to conduct it by the FIM? Was he a bona fide FIM official? So who do you think he was then? Some oik who just wandered in off the street, took a breath test and then got the FIM to accept his findings even though they had no idea who he was? Not like you to miss the point Norbold! Of course I realise the person who made the test on Darcy Ward didn't "walk in off the street". What I was asking is: was he actually present at the GP on that day in an official capacity or did he just get called forward to make a test when suspicions in regard to Darcy Ward arose. Alternatively, had he previously at the same meeting also used the testing equipment on other riders and could there possibly have been because of this some contamination that might have given an adversely high reading in regard to Ward? Edited January 14, 2015 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Central Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 (edited) Not like you to miss the point Norbold! Of course I realise the person who made the test on Darcy Ward didn't "walk in off the street". What I was asking is: was he actually present at the GP on that day in an official capacity or did he just get called forward to make a test when suspicions in regard to Darcy Ward arose. Alternatively, had he previously at the same meeting also used the testing equipment on other riders and could there possibly have been because of this some contamination that might have given an adversely high reading in regard to Ward? Good grief! Have you even been following this debate? How can you come out with such ill informed rubbish after all this discussion. There were NO suspicions about Ward. He was tested along with the others drawn 'out of the hat'. He was the ONLY person of those tested to be 'positive' .. so how could the 'negatives' tested have 'contaminated' it for a guy who admitted drinking the night before? Edited January 14, 2015 by Grand Central 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E I Addio Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 Not like you to miss the point Norbold! Of course I realise the person who made the test on Darcy Ward didn't "walk in off the street". What I was asking is: was he actually present at the GP on that day in an official capacity or did he just get called forward to make a test when suspicions in regard to Darcy Ward arose. ? Ah yes that must be what happened. They probably made an announcement over the PA : "Er...we have suspicions that Darcy Ward has been at the Old Jollop again. If there is anyone in the crowd that happens to have a breathalyser with them would he please come forward and conduct a breath test" Sounds plausible to me. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Leslie Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 So today's lesson seems to be that drinking and operating motorised vehicles can be viewed as less of an offence if you have a lot of likes on a naff facebook group. I shall remember this and will be opening a facebook support group the next time I get a parking fine or a speeding ticket. You may say this will never work, but remember a lot of magistrates are also senile old duffers, so they may well share this view. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norbold Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 Ah yes that must be what happened. They probably made an announcement over the PA : "Er...we have suspicions that Darcy Ward has been at the Old Jollop again. If there is anyone in the crowd that happens to have a breathalyser with them would he please come forward and conduct a breath test" Sounds plausible to me. Now you come to mention it, that must be exactly what happened. Why haven't we all seen this before? It is the only possible reasonable explanation for the events of that day. Where do I join the Darcy Ward Support Group? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 Now you come to mention it, that must be exactly what happened. Why haven't we all seen this before? It is the only possible reasonable explanation for the events of that day. Where do I join the Darcy Ward Support Group? Do you REALLY want to join that group Norbold? I can get you listed there if you like. But I don't think you are serious...! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norbold Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 Not like you to miss the point Norbold! Of course I realise the person who made the test on Darcy Ward didn't "walk in off the street". What I was asking is: was he actually present at the GP on that day in an official capacity or did he just get called forward to make a test when suspicions in regard to Darcy Ward arose. Alternatively, had he previously at the same meeting also used the testing equipment on other riders and could there possibly have been because of this some contamination that might have given an adversely high reading in regard to Ward? So can I just get this straight. This off-duty policeman was called in in an unofficial capacity specially to test Darcy Ward because there were suspicions that he had been drinking. Yet somehow this unofficial off-duty policeman had already tested other riders. Was that in an unofficial capacity as well? And if so why was he called on to test them? In addition, the story being put round - and in spite of protestations by Starman to the contrary - disputed by no-one that Darcy Ward was only just over the limit, he now seems to have been acting in such a suspicious manner that he needed to be tested. So more than just a little over the limit then? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Leslie Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 Yet somehow this unofficial off-duty policeman had already tested other riders. Was that in an unofficial capacity as well? And if so why was he called on to test them? When you're an off-duty version of Clouseau using an uncalibrated breathalyser from the pound shop it's always best to practise on a couple of others first! 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Leslie Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 Nice of Gluestix to take part in the Crimewatch reconstruction of Darcy's breath test https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEQiZpwLxm0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theflyingkiwi Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 Some of the arguments and statements on the 'support group' are beyond belief. Personally what I think is quite sad is the amount of pictures that have been posted with his younger fans who idolize Ward and that while he let himself down massively, he also let down all of his fans. What is even worse is people like Middlo, Ford numerous fans etc. making every excuse under the sun for someone who has consistently let each and everyone down. Regardless of the hearing and the decision by the FIM, what message are those people sending out? That as long as you are extremely talented you can get away with anything that you want? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norbold Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 I give up on you Norbold. I'm gutted. 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BWitcher Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 I give up on you Norbold. I no longer give a fXX! about the policeman. You reach your own conclusions and stick to them. ...and so are many of the Posts on here. Utter drivel. We know, you keep making them. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Humphrey Appleby Posted January 15, 2015 Report Share Posted January 15, 2015 Even if it was 122,315, do you think the FIM would care? And since when does justice come down to a popular vote? 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.