Darcy Ward

[Wackie]

Goes both ways Tsunami - I've had a pro-ward supporter telling me a reply I made to a post "says alot about me", but they won't tell me what it says, and that I should keep taking the tablets! Personally I think I may have to double them to put up with some of the views on here.

[Gavan]

Oh Dear :-

 

Illustrious Sycophants

Lackeys

Deluded folk

Downright fools

Diddleswitch

Stupid

Dumb card

Fiddlesnitch

Darcy Love Crew

Befuddled Alex

Utter ignorance.

 

.....and just because someone has a different point of view.

 

Who said the art of debate is dead.

But we are not talking about opinions as such are we.

 

You believe Darcy and Middlo had been told 7 days or why would they say this.

 

Yet quite clearly the rest of the speedway world knows it is anything up to 45 days.

 

That leads to either they are mis advised, thick, or basically playing the sympathy vote.

 

There is no way they are mis advised lawyers dont do that.

They arent exactly brains of Britain

 

But it sems like they are going for the sympathy vote. The lemmings on twitter would rather believe Middlo or Ward than the normal way a process works. You can see from the responses like 'fim are a joke' and 'its dragging on' and 'how can they do this' that these people who write this are uneducated in the way this works and are basically just lovers of Ward who know no different.

 

So this isnt about opinion really its about who you believe. Ward and Middlo or the sensible members of the speedway world and the process the fim take.

 

I know what side i sit

[BWitcher]

Oh Dear :-

 

Illustrious Sycophants

Lackeys

Deluded folk

Downright fools

Diddleswitch

Stupid

Dumb card

Fiddlesnitch

Darcy Love Crew

Befuddled Alex

Utter ignorance.

 

.....and just because someone has a different point of view.

 

Who said the art of debate is dead.

 

It's not a point of view.

 

It's simply being wrong.

 

The simple reality is a verdict is given, in writing, within 45 days of the hearing.

 

That is the be all and end all, it matters not one jot what Ward tweets on Twitter, what Middleditch spouts in the press. They aren't the governing body, they don't make the rules. Until the FIM say otherwise, the ruling is within 45 days.

 

Simple.

[salty]

I actually think the 4 to 5 days theory could be a winner here.

[John Leslie]

perhaps he misunderstood his legal team at the end of the hearing.

 

Lawyer says "Darcy we expect a verdict within fortyfive days"

 

Darcy hears "Darcy we expect a verdict within four to five days"

Good job they didn't ask him to buy four candles.

[pugwash]

Oh Dear :-

 

Illustrious Sycophants

Lackeys

Deluded folk

Downright fools

Diddleswitch

Stupid

Dumb card

Fiddlesnitch

Darcy Love Crew

Befuddled Alex

Utter ignorance.

 

.....and just because someone has a different point of view.

 

Who said the art of debate is dead.

Which category do you fit into?

Maybe we could get one of the above 'haters' to categorise us 'lovers'.

I rather fancy myself as an Illustrious Sycophantic, Deluded, Downright foolish, Stupid, Dumb,Diddleswitching, Fiddlesnitching, Befuddled, Ignorant, Darcy Love Crew Lackey.

Edited February 11, 2015 by pugwash

[Tsunami]

But we are not talking about opinions as such are we.

 

You believe Darcy and Middlo had been told 7 days or why would they say this.

 

Yet quite clearly the rest of the speedway world knows it is anything up to 45 days.

 

That leads to either they are mis advised, thick, or basically playing the sympathy vote.

 

There is no way they are mis advised lawyers dont do that.

They arent exactly brains of Britain

 

But it sems like they are going for the sympathy vote. The lemmings on twitter would rather believe Middlo or Ward than the normal way a process works. You can see from the responses like 'fim are a joke' and 'its dragging on' and 'how can they do this' that these people who write this are uneducated in the way this works and are basically just lovers of Ward who know no different.

 

So this isnt about opinion really its about who you believe. Ward and Middlo or the sensible members of the speedway world and the process the fim take.

 

I know what side i sit

 

 

To be fair to Middlo and Ward the reports after the hearing were that they would be told within a week what the outcome was. Although again that has only been reported via the Ward camp, nothing from the FIM.

Quote from Middlo in last weeks Star "They did say they would give a decision this week"

However, Middlo also says they "could take two months if they want - it's up to them" which suggests numeracy might not be his strongest subject.

 

 

To be fair I did stress that the report only came from the Ward camp. The sub judice nature of the case has meant that all we have learned (or been told) since last August has come from the Ward side.

 

 

But of course if the FIM did say the Ward camp will hear a decision in a week you would expect them to deliver, but no one on here seems to want to criticise them.

 

Try reading what folks say, and not state things for your own benefit that are not true. It was salty reporting what was said and i used the word IF.

[PHILIPRISING]

They have up to 45 days to give him an answer so haven't done anything wrong. Hearing was only last week.

OF course they haven't done anything wrong but do they really need 45 days to make and announce a decision? You wouldn't expect a jury at the Old Bailey to take that long. Leaving aside whether it is Darcy Ward or Old Tom Cobley surely this whole matter could and should have been expedited far more swiftly than it has.

[Star Lady]

OF course they haven't done anything wrong but do they really need 45 days to make and announce a decision? You wouldn't expect a jury at the Old Bailey to take that long. Leaving aside whether it is Darcy Ward or Old Tom Cobley surely this whole matter could and should have been expedited far more swiftly than it has.

 

That is a different issue from the one being debated on this thread, or it should be from the title!

 

Maybe the time scale of FIM deliberations could be the subject of an SS editorial feature, after all it wouldn't upset the BSPA would it

Edited February 11, 2015 by Star Lady

[The White Knight]

 

That is a different issue from the one being debated on this thread, or it should be from the title!

 

Maybe the time scale of FIM deliberations could be the subject of an SS editorial feature, after all it wouldn't upset the BSPA would it

Ouch!!!!!

[Tsunami]

 

That is a different issue from the one being debated on this thread, or it should be from the title!

 

Maybe the time scale of FIM deliberations could be the subject of an SS editorial feature, after all it wouldn't upset the BSPA would it

Quite pathetic.

[SCB]

OF course they haven't done anything wrong but do they really need 45 days to make and announce a decision? You wouldn't expect a jury at the Old Bailey to take that long. Leaving aside whether it is Darcy Ward or Old Tom Cobley surely this whole matter could and should have been expedited far more swiftly than it has.

Honestly, 45 days to write up a report one someone guilt or not is a joke, I agree. But, the rules allow 45 days, the FIM have used the 45 days before. So it's difficult to criticize it.

 

Maybe the thinking is the 45 days is to make people sweat, to make the whole process so horrible people don't want to go through it again.

[Star Lady]

Quite pathetic.

 

Why pathetic?

Do you think the timescale is acceptable?

Or

Do you think the BSPA think the timescale is acceptable?

 

If you answer yes to either of those I accept your opinion that my comment was pathetic. However if the answer to either is no, how can my comment be pathetic?

[Tsunami]

 

Why pathetic?

Do you think the timescale is acceptable?

Or

Do you think the BSPA think the timescale is acceptable?

 

If you answer yes to either of those I accept your opinion that my comment was pathetic. However if the answer to either is no, how can my comment be pathetic?

NO. I don't think the timescale is acceptable and SCB also agrees, along with many others including some who have no sympathy for Ward.

 

I have no idea what the BSPA think of the timescales, try asking them.

 

Your attempt to have a go, and try to implicate the SS and BSPA was pathetic and irrelevant.

[Star Lady]

NO. I don't think the timescale is acceptable and SCB also agrees, along with many others including some who have no sympathy for Ward.

 

 

 

 

I don't think the timescale is acceptable either and I have absolutely no sympathy for Darcy Ward. Not sure why you bring SCB into it, but as it happens I'm well aware of his view on this as I tend to read his posts because he is usually balanced and non abusive.

 

 

I have no idea what the BSPA think of the timescales, try asking them.

 

I have better things to do with my time, but I assume they are right minded individuals so therefore think the timescale is unacceptable also.

 

 

Your attempt to have a go, and try to implicate the SS and BSPA was pathetic and irrelevant.

 

Exactly where did I try to implicate anything between the SS and The BSPA? You may think that's what I had in mind but only I know. That's the trouble with forums, people think they know what others are thinking from words that are written. Use slightly the wrong word and world war 3 breaks out. i.e someone says Darcy was "drunk" meaning over the limit allowed by law and forum members go off as if he has been accused of and committed murder.

[BWitcher]

NO. I don't think the timescale is acceptable and SCB also agrees, along with many others including some who have no sympathy for Ward.

 

I have no idea what the BSPA think of the timescales, try asking them.

 

Your attempt to have a go, and try to implicate the SS and BSPA was pathetic and irrelevant.

 

I think you are confusing the issue.

 

The timescale IS acceptable as that is the timescale laid down by the rules. I'm afraid that's one of those facts that some seem to want to overlook.

 

Now, whether the rules governing the timescale are reasonable is another matter.. but they are the rules as it stands now and are therefore the rules by which Ward must comply.

[Ghostwalker]

OF course they haven't done anything wrong but do they really need 45 days to make and announce a decision? You wouldn't expect a jury

at the Old Bailey to take that long. Leaving aside whether it is Darcy Ward or Old Tom Cobley surely this whole matter could and should

have been expedited far more swiftly than it has.

 

Who says they do? They just says that they have the right use the time frame specified in the rules.

 

You like Darcy's fans seems to forget that the rules are written from a general perspective, there might be cases where

this time span is needed to make sure the proper ruling is given and/or that unforeseen events such as temporarily illness

or similar does not prevent the involved decision makers from issuing a ruling, Simply put if the rules have

a too short time frame (lets say two weeks) someone getting the flu might cause the ruling to get postponed.

Then the likes of you and Darcy's fans would complain anyway.

 

You just have to realize that the writings such as the "within 45 days" are there for a reason (and it have nothing to do with laziness or etc).

 

As for rulings in courts, it is not uncommon for Swedish courts (at least for Hovrätterna and Högsta domstolen) to give

the judge's/s' verdict at a later date and not at the end of the trial.

Edited February 11, 2015 by Ghostwalker

[Devilforever]

253 pages - Really !!!!

[Wackie]

Which category do you fit into?

Maybe we could get one of the above 'haters' to categorise us 'lovers'.

I rather fancy myself as an Illustrious Sycophantic, Deluded, Downright foolish, Stupid, Dumb,Diddleswitching, Fiddlesnitching, Befuddled, Ignorant, Darcy Love Crew Lackey.

 

You and Starry related then pugwash?

[Gavan]

NO. I don't think the timescale is acceptable and SCB also agrees, along with many others including some who have no sympathy for Ward.

 

I have no idea what the BSPA think of the timescales, try asking them.

 

Your attempt to have a go, and try to implicate the SS and BSPA was pathetic and irrelevant.

Your missing the point.

 

Anything in the legal world takes to long we all know that.

 

This case has took no longer than any other similar case.

 

I agree its to long but that is always the case.

 

The fim rules state up to 45 days. So what is daft is all the idiots saying its taking to long should be resolved sooner. I agree 45 days is to long but they are within their rights so why people keep banging on about length of time its taken is beyond me.