PHILIPRISING Posted February 26, 2015 Report Share Posted February 26, 2015 If a prize is the reward for endeavour, then points money is the prize you get for each race. It may be called something else, but I think that the FIM will seek to make sure that Darcy does not "profit" from his time between 17-28 August. As for clubs/teams being penalised, you could argue that teams could / should have taken pre-emptive measures and suspended Darcy in the way that Man United suspended Erik Cantona, well before the FA handed out their punishment for his infamous king fu kick. Let that be a lesson to those promoters who live in a land of denial of what goes on in the real world. Let it also be a lesson to the BSPA and PZM for not taking immediate action against a rider who brought the sport into disrepute (at the very least). Fair enough but all would have been avoided had the FIM acted immediately. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uk_martin Posted February 26, 2015 Report Share Posted February 26, 2015 (edited) Fair enough but all would have been avoided had the FIM acted immediately. We are where we are now. How we got here will fade into the past. Edited February 26, 2015 by uk martin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHILIPRISING Posted February 26, 2015 Report Share Posted February 26, 2015 We are where we are now. How we got here will fade into the past. Hopefully along with the 300 plus pages on here ... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bazlux Posted February 26, 2015 Report Share Posted February 26, 2015 Can't see any points money being returned or requested by his promotions. He rode with valid licence, people paid to see him and he got paid for riding. The ban is the punishment and the couple of weeks worked in August 2014 is offset by couple of weeks added at end of ban. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BWitcher Posted February 26, 2015 Report Share Posted February 26, 2015 Hopefully along with the 300 plus pages on here ... And the utter diatribe that has been published regarding the issue, instead of manning up and pointing out quite categorically that Ward was in the wrong and there shouldn't be a place in the sport for riders riding whilst under the influence of alcohol, REGARDLESS of the amount. Even now, it's still a case of trying to blame someone else. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Central Posted February 26, 2015 Report Share Posted February 26, 2015 (edited) A consistent feature of this debate has been the predilection for 'diversionary' chatter that takes away from the central issue. OK Ward should have been suspended from the first moment he failed the test. But he wasn't. When he was suspended ten days later. Ward actually appealed to avoid such action ahead of a hearing. This was rightly denied. He has now been judged fairly and properly. And banned for HIS misbehaviour. The judge says he must forfeit the gains made during those ten days of freedom. Damned right. Let's all just applaud the judge on getting the whole thing right. In the end. As someone once said. Rejoice! Rejoice! . Edited February 27, 2015 by Grand Central 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHILIPRISING Posted February 26, 2015 Report Share Posted February 26, 2015 IT was up to the FIM to determine whether or not Ward was guilty not Speedway Star or any other publication and neither should SS censor publicly made comments just because some people find them disagreeable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Jones Posted February 26, 2015 Report Share Posted February 26, 2015 And the utter diatribe that has been published regarding the issue, instead of manning up and pointing out quite categorically that Ward was in the wrong and there shouldn't be a place in the sport for riders riding whilst under the influence of alcohol, REGARDLESS of the amount. Even now, it's still a case of trying to blame someone else. Survival within British Speedway = Not creating waves? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BWitcher Posted February 26, 2015 Report Share Posted February 26, 2015 IT was up to the FIM to determine whether or not Ward was guilty not Speedway Star or any other publication and neither should SS censor publicly made comments just because some people find them disagreeable. The Speedway Star should report both sides of the story It should make it clear that riders riding intoxicated should not in any way be tolerated. I trust now the ban has been laid down and Wards guilt has been confirmed we will see a story condemning Ward for his actions? 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHILIPRISING Posted February 26, 2015 Report Share Posted February 26, 2015 The Speedway Star should report both sides of the story It should make it clear that riders riding intoxicated should not in any way be tolerated. I trust now the ban has been laid down and Wards guilt has been confirmed we will see a story condemning Ward for his actions? HAVE posted here numerous times that the FIM had no comment to make. Surely doesn't need anyone to make it clear that intoxicated riders should and cannot be tolerated in any way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phlipphlopp Posted February 26, 2015 Report Share Posted February 26, 2015 I trust now the ban has been laid down and Wards guilt has been confirmed we will see a story condemning Ward for his actions? Why the hell should they ? The SS is a reporting publication , nothing more nothing less. Who are they to condemn , they are not judge and jury. Just the news will do , not some sanctimonious twaddle about ethics etc. Its not up to the SS to become agony aunt to speedway riders. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BWitcher Posted February 26, 2015 Report Share Posted February 26, 2015 (edited) HAVE posted here numerous times that the FIM had no comment to make. Surely doesn't need anyone to make it clear that intoxicated riders should and cannot be tolerated in any way. I must disagree. One glance at social media shows just how influential the misleading and quite frankly bordering on outright lies that the magazine has been printing has been. You say you shouldn't censor publically made comments? So you will just print anything? You don't bother to investigate if there is any credence behind it? If Middleditch tweeted tomorrow Greg Hancocks a cheat, he used illegal machinery last year, you'd just happily go with that and run the story? Oh wait.. You would! You've done it before! Our old friend Barry Briggs sat on his sofa at home was suddenly able to detect that riders were cheating with their dirt deflectors! Hey presto, big story in the Speedway Star with the accusations. Was there ever any follow up? Did the matter not concern the publication that riders were getting way with cheating? No.. of course not. It was simply left. As said before, are we now going to see a story that explains that the claims from the Ward camp turned out to be false? Why the hell should they ? The SS is a reporting publication , nothing more nothing less. Who are they to condemn , they are not judge and jury. Just the news will do , not some sanctimonious twaddle about ethics etc. Its not up to the SS to become agony aunt to speedway riders. Why the hell should they? Perhaps to give the magazine some credibility, rather than reporting one sided twaddle/lies which is what they have done throughout this case. Edited February 26, 2015 by BWitcher 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCB Posted February 26, 2015 Report Share Posted February 26, 2015 (edited) The Speedway Star is just speedways propaganda supplier. Have they mentioned yet that Ward was in court for sexual assault 2 years ago? They'll probably gloss over this ban too. Heaven forbid someone should mention anything negative about Pooles speedways blue eyed boy. Edited February 26, 2015 by SCB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orion Posted February 26, 2015 Report Share Posted February 26, 2015 Why the hell should they ? The SS is a reporting publication , nothing more nothing less. Who are they to condemn , they are not judge and jury. Just the news will do , not some sanctimonious twaddle about ethics etc. Its not up to the SS to become agony aunt to speedway riders. I Agree in a way ...Just like your local paper the Star is only likely to report on what the result is nothing more nothing less .. rather than making judgements and express opinions like a big daily paper might do . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Central Posted February 27, 2015 Report Share Posted February 27, 2015 (edited) The Star is stuffed full of 'Opinion pieces' just about every week. Each of the Track Reviews has a separate section giving the partisan view of a fan, there is a page devoted to Readers letters, the 'Star Guest' Feature gives the view of a different guest columnist each week plus Question and answer sessions with riders in the 'Behind the Helmet feature'. All winter long we have had long features on various personalities of today and way back in the day. All chock full of opinion. Not just factual reporting. Most of the features requiring quotes and interviews to be sought out. And true journalism used to good effect. But on the Darcy Ward matter. Nothing of the sort. Just the Muddlo line. Week after Week. Edited February 27, 2015 by Grand Central 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHILIPRISING Posted February 27, 2015 Report Share Posted February 27, 2015 The Speedway Star is just speedways propaganda supplier. Have they mentioned yet that Ward was in court for sexual assault 2 years ago? They'll probably gloss over this ban too. Heaven forbid someone should mention anything negative about Pooles speedways blue eyed boy. WE carried reports of the court case but being a weekly publication were hamstrung about what we could carry at press time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BWitcher Posted February 27, 2015 Report Share Posted February 27, 2015 (edited) I Agree in a way ...Just like your local paper the Star is only likely to report on what the result is nothing more nothing less .. rather than making judgements and express opinions like a big daily paper might do . Except they haven't been reporting on 'only what the result is'. They've been giving tonnes of coverage to the lunatic bleatings of Middlo without even stopping to question whether its all fabricated. As others have said, there are some excellent articles in the Star, but in the Ward case, its been shocking. Edited February 27, 2015 by BWitcher 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
screm Posted February 27, 2015 Report Share Posted February 27, 2015 IT was up to the FIM to determine whether or not Ward was guilty not Speedway Star or any other publication and neither should SS censor publicly made comments just because some people find them disagreeable. I subscribe to Speedway Star and will continue to do so but IMO the magazine jumped on the Ward bandwagon and gave him a vehicle for him and his supporters the pedal their ill informed statements virtually from the start. 9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 27, 2015 Report Share Posted February 27, 2015 I subscribe to Speedway Star and will continue to do so but IMO the magazine jumped on the Ward bandwagon and gave him a vehicle for him and his supporters the pedal their ill informed statements virtually from the start. There are two sides to every debate - and "both are usually right!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E I Addio Posted February 27, 2015 Report Share Posted February 27, 2015 IT was up to the FIM to determine whether or not Ward was guilty not Speedway Star or any other publication and neither should SS censor publicly made comments just because some people find them disagreeable. That's ok if a quote is given stating who made the comment, but Speedway Star for example carried a story that there were potential claims against the FIM by sponsors clubs and mechanics on the back of faulty procedure. That comment was rubbish then and it is rubbish now. There is a legal principle of remoteness of loss that would have excluded such claims even if the FIM procedures were faulty, although we now know the procedures were in order. That was just space filling journalism based on gossip that added fuel to groundless speculation. 8 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.