Jump to content
British Speedway Forum

Recommended Posts

Its now the 4th of November and still no date has been set, there was a rumour of the 8th November which is incorrect. The FIM need to get there acts together on this. Regardless if his legal team have been putting excuses in, ignore and simply give him his punishment, his Polish, Swedish and British team can then move on with or with out him.

Edited by Pirates Of Poole
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its now the 4th of November and still no date has been set, there was a rumour of the 8th November which is incorrect. The FIM need to get there acts together on this. Regardless if his legal team have been putting excuses in, ignore and simply give him his punishment, his Polish, Swedish and British team can then move on with or with out him.

I thought it was still going ahead then...........seen nothing to suggest otherwise.............

 

RP

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its now the 4th of November and still no date has been set, there was a rumour of the 8th November which is incorrect. The FIM need to get there acts together on this. Regardless if his legal team have been putting excuses in, ignore and simply give him his punishment, his Polish, Swedish and British team can then move on with or with out him.

I was told that the FIM have now had to pass this over to the World Doping Council and that is where the delay is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its now the 4th of November and still no date has been set, there was a rumour of the 8th November which is incorrect. The FIM need to get there acts together on this. Regardless if his legal team have been putting excuses in, ignore and simply give him his punishment, his Polish, Swedish and British team can then move on with or with out him.

Strikes me, the longer they drag it out the less likely the punishment..Although what he's lost in a POSIBLE, World championship Poland Sweden and Poole, that will be punishment enough..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And by someone who by his posts is extremely close to Poole Speedway ;)

I was told by one of DW's sponsors that it was the 8th and it was widely reported by others to be scheduled for 'early November' - but as 'theknow2' states, it has now been delayed further.

 

Whatever people think of Ward's situation, the whole thing has been very poorly handled by the governing bodies.

Edited by Skidder1
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Typically legal processes are (frustratingly) time consuming. The view seems to be that Ward's lawyers are responsible in some way. How much this delay is incorporated in to any final decision on length of suspension may depend on whether the lawyers have a reasonable case, or are simply looking for loopholes. If reasonable, then I suspect a reduced final length. If not, then no reduction (beyond what legally is constituted) will be offered.

 

The final outcome must only be decided on fact. However, I can't help feeling Ward would benefit from a guilty decision. He certainly appears to have an issue with alcohol (I don't mean an alcoholic, but his use of it). I can think of four high profile incidents he has been involved in that are linked to alcohol. Worryingly that includes alcohol and motor vehicles. He could really benefit with a mature individual in his corner to focus him going forward.

 

I'm speculating, but because of what we pick-up from those in the know, I assume Ward is attempting to prove is innocence on a technicality. Whilst nobody should be wrongly found guilty, innocence on a technicality is a different matter. There is quite a difference between a faulty measurement and the tester entering the wrong date on the documentation for example. You would hope the objections relate to reasonable doubt he was over limit as opposed to a (non impacting) administrative error.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Typically legal processes are (frustratingly) time consuming. The view seems to be that Ward's lawyers are responsible in some way. How much this delay is incorporated in to any final decision on length of suspension may depend on whether the lawyers have a reasonable case, or are simply looking for loopholes. If reasonable, then I suspect a reduced final length. If not, then no reduction (beyond what legally is constituted) will be offered.

 

The final outcome must only be decided on fact. However, I can't help feeling Ward would benefit from a guilty decision. He certainly appears to have an issue with alcohol (I don't mean an alcoholic, but his use of it). I can think of four high profile incidents he has been involved in that are linked to alcohol. Worryingly that includes alcohol and motor vehicles. He could really benefit with a mature individual in his corner to focus him going forward.

 

I'm speculating, but because of what we pick-up from those in the know, I assume Ward is attempting to prove is innocence on a technicality. Whilst nobody should be wrongly found guilty, innocence on a technicality is a different matter. There is quite a difference between a faulty measurement and the tester entering the wrong date on the documentation for example. You would hope the objections relate to reasonable doubt he was over limit as opposed to a (non impacting) administrative error.

Middlo ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm so bored with the " I was told" " I heard" posts.

 

Who actually IS in the know.

Thats why I keep checking the thread...

 

Someone that was actually in the same bar the night before must be bursting by now to spill the beans. I mean the rumours that have travelled to me are so good, that the reality must have been excellent entertainment for those sitting on the side...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you think about this logically - which I know can be an issue for some posters :wink: - IF there was some sort of irregularity with the FIM breath testing procedure in the rearranged Latvian GP, then it would also be highly irregular for the FIM to adjudicate and/or pass judgement on a case involving their own procedures!!?

 

Hence it would be logical that any decision-making process was passed to a 3rd-party organisation. eg the WDC. - although that still doesn't explain why the delay has been so long!!?

Edited by Skidder1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you think about this logically - which I know can be an issue for some posters :wink: - IF there was some sort of irregularity with the FIM breath testing procedure in the rearranged Latvian GP, then it would also be highly irregular for the FIM to adjudicate and/or pass judgement on a case involving their own procedures!!?

 

Hence it would be logical that any decision-making process was passed to a 3rd-party organisation. eg the WDC. - although that still doesn't explain why the delay has been so long!!?

Possibly ....

 

But then if the FIM were to know that the testing procedure was not watertight. Then surely they would have come to that conclusion in the time that elapsed after the Latvian GP and before the end of August when they decided to press ahead with action that invoked the suspension.

They could have just dropped the whole thing.

 

Is it not just as logical that they formed the opinion then that they had quite reasonable confidence in the procedure and are happy enough to hand final judgement in the matter over to an outside body who they fully expect to find in their favour?

 

Don't you just love speculation?

 

.

Edited by Grand Central
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whilst nobody should be wrongly found guilty, innocence on a technicality is a different matter.

Not really. If there's a technical problem then you can't definitively prove that a person was guilty given no other evidence.

 

Yes, sporting cases are decided on 'balance of probabilities' rather than 'beyond reasonable doubt', but Darcy Ward was clearly not steaming drunk at the GP, and was likely well below what's considered an acceptable limit for driving. That's obviously not a defence if the acceptable limit for riding speedway is zero, but if the testing procedure was faulty or not carried out properly, then it is possible that an erroneous reading was taken.

 

That he publicly admitted to having a few drinks the previously evening doesn't really prove much if there's some doubt over whether he was actually over the limit by the time of the GP. What is ridiculous though, is the amount of time taken to resolve this.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy