Arson fire Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 If the test was done wrongly, or was inconclusive, and or not performed by an FIM official, or performed by A N Other person who is not a bonified FIM official, then the FIM could find themselves in very deep water. and if found at fault could be liable for substantial damages.. That said, should the possibility of Darcy being cleared to ride then he could, well be advised to leave it at that. BUT, like the police when somebodys Alledgedly put one over them or been seen to be proven wrong they do not like that, and the same will apply with the FIM, Darcy will need to be whiter than white, because he will have to accept he will be a marked man from then on in...And should, he put a foot out of place, which I don't believe he will they will bounce him from one end of the pits to the other..you could have saved typing all that by simply posting... What? If? And maybe!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wackie Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 Ward will be a marked man now anyway whatever the outcome on Friday after admitting he'd drunk excessively the night before the GP. Wouldn't be surprised if testing ALL riders before FIM meetings is brought in as an amended rule, won't bother the majority of GP riders, they're professional and smart enough to know you shouldn't have a skinful the night before a GP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Central Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 If the F.I.M. thought they might be wrong and that they could be sued for loss of earnings what possible reason could they have for hanging the case out? So they can pay even more in compensation? That makes absolutely no sense at all. Quite right. Tsunami and Starman have the bizarre logic that an 'unlawful' suspension, that would generate a compensation claim, is best handled by dragging out the length of the suspension as long as possible so that the claim would be much bigger than needed. Odd thinking. The North-South divide is ended. And we have two very strange bedfellows. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacques Posted January 29, 2015 Report Share Posted January 29, 2015 (edited) But what would you do if the senior organisation of the sport, is going to take your livelihood away from you, when/if there is evidence that would possibly not be legal in a proper Court of Law. A desperate decision needs desperate reaction. We have to, but it's taking rather a long time to simply decide a, was the machine calibration correct, b, was the person taking the test legally allowed to take the test given the FIM/GP rules, c, was the result positive or negative. Three questions , none of them very hard to answer, so why no decision. As you say, we have to wait, and it's going to be very interesting. " Senior organisation of the sport" Don't you mean the ruling body of Motorsport. We're not talking about your BSPA mates that change rules on a whim! I doubt the FIM will be buying the pathetic attempts to try it on. I'd guess they'll not be bullied or bought either Edited January 29, 2015 by Jacques 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f-s-p Posted January 29, 2015 Report Share Posted January 29, 2015 Uk martin - darcy wasnt drunk when tested How do you define that? What would be the alcometer number that tips ypur scale from not-drunk to being drunk? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waiheke1 Posted January 29, 2015 Report Share Posted January 29, 2015 How do you define that? What would be the alcometer number that tips ypur scale from not-drunk to being drunk?surely a starting point would be the legal road drink drive limit, which I believe he was well under?to be considered"drunk" id say maybe 50% over. to be clear, that it no way mitigates ward, clearly unacceptable to be ready to race with any alcohol in his system. but to describe him as drunk is imho totally inaccurate. From what ive heard the danno case was quite different? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
500cc Posted January 29, 2015 Report Share Posted January 29, 2015 If the test was done wrongly, or was inconclusive, and or not performed by an FIM official, or performed by A N Other person who is not a bonified FIM official, then the FIM could find themselves in very deep water. and if found at fault could be liable for substantial damages.. That said, should the possibility of Darcy being cleared to ride then he could, well be advised to leave it at that. BUT, like the police when somebodys Alledgedly put one over them or been seen to be proven wrong they do not like that, and the same will apply with the FIM, Darcy will need to be whiter than white, because he will have to accept he will be a marked man from then on in...And should, he put a foot out of place, which I don't believe he will they will bounce him from one end of the pits to the other.. I think your views on potential outcomes are correct; although I admire your confidence that he won't put a foot wrong going forward. I thought legal controversy was an annual event for Ward, something you could pencil in like your tax return. Ward's lawyers need to focus on clearing their client. Any attempts to push it beyond that will negatively impact both Ward and the sport. The danger for Ward if his lawyers were to be threatening the FIM with compensation claims, is that if he were not cleared, the FIM are likely to respond with a ban to the limit of their powers. You'd assume the lawyers are sensible enough not to have raised this in any form at this stage. The FIM will be very awkward going forward if they themselves were 'threatened'. You only have to look at the current Visa situation, but the FIM's response would involve retribution. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostwalker Posted January 29, 2015 Report Share Posted January 29, 2015 (edited) surely a starting point would be the legal road drink drive limit, which I believe he was well under? to be considered"drunk" id say maybe 50% over. to be clear, that it no way mitigates ward, clearly unacceptable to be ready to race with any alcohol in his system. but to describe him as drunk is imho totally inaccurate. From what ive heard the danno case was quite different? Ok, which country's limit then? UK? Latvia? Sweden? Poland? You do realize that the legal limit, for driving with alcohol in your system, varies from one country to another and that the UK is one of the most generous countries in Europe when it comes to drunk driving limits? The limit the Latvia is: 0.02% for drivers with less than 2 years of experience and 0.05% for those with more than 2 years of experience. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drunk_driving_law_by_country#Europe Edited January 29, 2015 by Ghostwalker 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Central Posted January 29, 2015 Report Share Posted January 29, 2015 Ok, which country's limit then? UK? Latvia? Sweden? Poland? You do realize that the legal limit, for driving with alcohol in your system, varies from one country to another and that the UK is one of the most generous countries in Europe when it comes to drunk driving limits? The limit the Latvia is: 0.02% for drivers with less than 2 years of experience and 0.05% for those with more than 2 years of experience. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drunk_driving_law_by_country#Europe So, in Latvia ... I imagine that the equipment needed for the testing of such low levels at the roadside would have to be accurate, well maintained and well-calibrated. I would also think that it would be administered by well trained and acredited Police Officers who could be relied upon to know, better than anyone, how to perform such testing correctly. I do hope that the Speedway authorities made use of this expertise at the Latvian GP. Perhaps one of these Police officers, who was off duty, could have been employed? 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f-s-p Posted January 29, 2015 Report Share Posted January 29, 2015 surely a starting point would be the legal road drink drive limit, which I believe he was well under?You (or anyone else) believing is the problem. Hopefully we will KNOW tomorrow. When I used to go out for a drink, after three pints of lager (in 60-90 minutes depending on thirst and company) I would feel slightly intoxicated and "merry", but since I'm 190cm/95kg I would be ok to drive since the limit in Finland is 0,05 %. Thats just to point put that the grey area is quite wide. Now I just drink at home. = ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waiheke1 Posted January 29, 2015 Report Share Posted January 29, 2015 (edited) Ok, which country's limit then? UK? Latvia? Sweden? Poland? You do realize that the legal limit, for driving with alcohol in your system, varies from one country to another and that the UK is one of the most generous countries in Europe when it comes to drunk driving limits? The limit the Latvia is: 0.02% for drivers with less than 2 years of experience and 0.05% for those with more than 2 years of experience. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drunk_driving_law_by_country#Europe to consider someone drunk I would say they would have to be over uk limit. Lets say reading at least 0.1%. A practiced drinker may need to be higher. as an utterly irrelevant side note, nz drink drive limit just got reduced from 0.08% to 0.05% which after two months is already making noticeable change to people's drink/drive behaviour(I.e. less beers at lunch or afterwork). Edited January 29, 2015 by waihekeaces1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E I Addio Posted January 29, 2015 Report Share Posted January 29, 2015 But its fact!!! Don't know, but I read it on here. Surely the whole thing has been delayed because of something like that, otherwise it would be completed by now. Hi Jacques. I read it on here as well but I have read all kinds of rubbish on here that is mere speculation with no factual basis. A few questions for those who insist there is a substantial compensation claim:- 1. What country does Darcy''s cause of action arise in, Latvia , Switzerland or somewhere else ? How exactly do the laws of whoever country it is make provision for this sort of claim ? 2 . Who exactly is Darcy going to sue? Is it the FIM , or the body that organised the event, or the race director , the referee or whoever conducted the alleged incorrect test ? 3. How does Darcy establish his loss of earnings? How for example does he prove that in a dangerous sport he wouldn't have been injured in his first race of the GP and missed the rest of the season anyway ? 4.How does he show that notwistanding the allegedly faulty breathalyser he was not over the limit anyway. There are a multitude of similar hurdles to be overcome and whilst I agree they could potentially be answered my point is that whatever potential claim Darcy's lawyers could allegedly make there are plenty of obstacles that could be thrown in the way by equally skilled lawyers opposing him. I obviously don't know all the details but nor does anybody else on here but I do know that any potential claim would not be the sort of plain sailing that Starman and a few others seem to imagine. Unless there are some relevant facts not in the public domain I very much doubt that there will be a serious legal claim, 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacques Posted January 29, 2015 Report Share Posted January 29, 2015 Does anyone know what time the hearing is tomorrow and where it is? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norbold Posted January 29, 2015 Report Share Posted January 29, 2015 4.How does he show that notwistanding the allegedly faulty breathalyser he was not over the limit anyway. I'm sure the FIM have a recording of the TV interview where he admitted not rehydrating enough handy.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
screm Posted January 29, 2015 Report Share Posted January 29, 2015 Does anyone know what time the hearing is tomorrow and where it is? And wouldn't it be fun if we could watch it. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pugwash Posted January 29, 2015 Report Share Posted January 29, 2015 You (or anyone else) believing is the problem. Hopefully we will KNOW tomorrow. When I used to go out for a drink, after three pints of lager (in 60-90 minutes depending on thirst and company) I would feel slightly intoxicated and "merry", but since I'm 190cm/95kg I would be ok to drive since the limit in Finland is 0,05 %. Thats just to point put that the grey area is quite wide. Now I just drink at home. = ) Make that 20-30 minutes and don't forget the Jagermeisters!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCB Posted January 29, 2015 Report Share Posted January 29, 2015 How do you define that? What would be the alcometer number that tips ypur scale from not-drunk to being drunk? "Drunk - Caused or influenced by intoxication." Now I'd argue that if the FIM/WADA feel they need to ban anyone with any alcohol in their system they think that any reading other than 0 means you'll be influenced by intoxication, thus drunk. Darcy was drunk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E I Addio Posted January 29, 2015 Report Share Posted January 29, 2015 "Drunk - Caused or influenced by intoxication." Now I'd argue that if the FIM/WADA feel they need to ban anyone with any alcohol in their system they think that any reading other than 0 means you'll be influenced by intoxication, thus drunk. Darcy was drunk. The FIM anti doping code state that it is the riders personal responsibility to ensure that no prohibited substance enters his body. Elsewhere they recommend that a rider should take alcohol before an event Whether you label it "drunk " or not is irrelevant. The point is he chose to allow alcohol into his body. That puts into sharp perspective his excuse that he didn't hydrate properly. He shouldn't have had the stuff in his body in the first place. Bottom line is Darcy is a bit of an idiot and if you read Muddlo's inane ramblings in Speedway Star over the last few weeks he his not much more informed than Darcy. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsunami Posted January 29, 2015 Report Share Posted January 29, 2015 (edited) Quite right. Tsunami and Starman have the bizarre logic that an 'unlawful' suspension, that would generate a compensation claim, is best handled by dragging out the length of the suspension as long as possible so that the claim would be much bigger than needed. Odd thinking. The North-South divide is ended. And we have two very strange bedfellows. Whooops, and there's me thinking this was a discussion forum where posters can put alternative views. You and I don't have the answers to the three questions that I posed. They should be simple questions to answer, so if they haven't been answered, and have not made a decision in 4 months, there presumably is a major reason why not. I'd guess something procedural and there is a challenge. I don't know, and neither do you. So what is that problem. Hopefully we will hear tomorrow, or in subsequent days. 'Very strange bedfellows' Yikes, we hardly know each other. Edited January 29, 2015 by Tsunami Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavan Posted January 29, 2015 Report Share Posted January 29, 2015 Sorry ive read It all now! Darcy Ward should get compensation for loss of earning!!!! Please people get in the real world 4 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.