Jump to content
British Speedway Forum

Melbourne 2016


Recommended Posts

For anyone who doesn't get the Speedway Star (you lucky people) here's a brief summary of their (non) reporting of Hancock's cheat-gate.

 

Cover page - Picture of Hancock - headline "Grin, and Grin, and Grin, and Grin" (?) (not sure what that means.... Grin and Grim may have summed it up better).

 

pages 2&3 - Main story (by Paul Burbridge) from Hancock perspective - how the poor sod was "hard done to". how he was "hurt" and "bizarrely excluded from heat 9". (think they mean he was disqualified from heat 9 after bizarrely cheating). It repeats all the Hancock Bull-excrement excuses about the clutch, but doesn't challenge this nonsense with any facts. It doesn't go into any detail about Hancock spitting his dummy and walking out

 

To the left of this main article is "Holder - Shocked" (by Paul Burbridge). Holder is reportedly "shocked" by Hancock's disqualification. It repeats the clutch nonsense without pointing out that it is nonsense.

 

To the right of the main article is - "FIM Stand by decision" (by Paul Burbridge). It basically reports that the FIM investigated Hancock's actions. The jury viewed replays of the race, examined the bike, decided unanimously that Hancock had broken the rules, and disqualified him as per the rules. It doesn't report any FIM comments on Hancock's walking out of the meeting. Mr Burbridge doesn't seem interested in this side of the story.

 

Page 6 - The meeting report (by Paul Burbridge) Tells us "American legend Greg Hancock underlined why he's one of speedway's all time class acts on and off the track as he rose above FIM accusations to celebrate his fourth World title"

 

Yes...Mr Burbridge believes blatant cheating, failing to own up to cheating, and them throwing toys out of the pram makes you a "class act". Mr Burbridge tells us that Hancock's cheating and spoilt brattishness will "vanish into the mists of time" (so that's ok) but his great record in joining Hans Nielsen and Barry Briggs on 4 titles won't ever vanish.

 

(This arse-licking drivel continues onto page 8.)

 

 

Page 9 brings us an article "Jury Justice?" It tells us "What should have been one of the greatest night's of Greg Hancock's storied career was unfortunately tarnished by the bizarre decision to boot him out of heat 9"

 

It doesn't tell us who wrote this drivel (but we could guess his initials may be P.B.). Basically this is more "woe is me" stuff. It's not Hancock's fault he cheated. Not his fault he spat his dummy....etc etc It is totally the FIM jury's fault for upholding the rules.

 

Page 10 and we have some (selective) social media comments (compiled with a certain bias by who other than the ubiquitous Mr P.B.) Of course we have the tweets of those two empty vessels Middleditch and Havelock, and they are surprisingly joined by Hans Nielsen who thinks the exclusion was a farce.

The hundreds of tweets and other social media comments from all of those who thought Middlo and Havvy were talking out of their backsides, don't make it into the Star. The only one who slightly dares to side with commonsense and integrity is Chris Louis who "agrees with the FIM for upholding the integrity of the sport".

 

Page 14 gives us a meeting report from long-serving Aussie correspondent Peter White. His view on Hancock's cheating is... "We'll forget the Hancock issue entirely in this column and focus on the good"...... Well that's bloody helpful! Someone who may be able to give an unbiased opinion ducks out. All we know is that he doesn't rate that part of events as being part of the "good".

 

And that's it....that's all the Star give us. it's almost as if no one cheated......no one gave a bull-excrement excuse for cheating...no one spat a dummy, threw toys or walked out.

 

After all it will all soon be forgotten in the mists of time...

 

Ah, Paul Burbidge,the Poole fan and fawner, say no more! :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It headlines there was controversy then gives the opinions of those involved. What more were they supposed to do? Can't just accuse people because that would satisfy some people.

 

There are no accusations to make. He cheated. It was investigated. His bike was checked. He cheated. Guilty as charged.

 

He's lucky it's speedway, haven't you noticed the severity in other sports for 'fixing' or 'throwing' a match/game/result?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There aren't any alternatives, so it has no competition. If you don't like your newspaper you can try another.

 

If you think it's rubbish then the alternative is to stop buying it. Everything is available on line nowadays anyhow. Seems like some just need something to whinge about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I genuinely feel if there was another GP at the Etihad within the next month they would get close to 30k after that racing and of course an Aussie winner. Whether or not it will carry on to 1 years time we shall have to wait and see.

Atmosphere was pretty good too. Put it this way there was as much noise when the Aussies did well as there was in Warsaw when the poles did well and it was half the crowd..

Unfortunately this GP venue is showing the traits of many others before it on temporary tracks in big stadiums. Encouraging to start with attendance wise which gradually diminishes year on year eventually becoming extinct, read Parken and Stockholm. As Phil Rising says speedway is a minority sport with the only 2 serious markets being in Poland and Great Britain.There are numerous reasons why Cardiff and Warsaw shouldn't work but they do due the loyalty and enthusiasm of the fans in both countries

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

If you think it's rubbish then the alternative is to stop buying it. Everything is available on line nowadays anyhow. Seems like some just need something to whinge about.

Agreed (I stopped). I think some get them out of habit and to catch up on a few things you don't see on line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...and they are surprisingly joined by Hans Nielsen who thinks the exclusion was a farce.

 

Perhaps not so surprising when you consider he wouldn't use Denmark's best option for the World Cup race-off squad, and the reasons he gave for that decision, which ultimately cost Denmark their place in the final. Great rider, but questionable opinions.

Edited by June01
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are no accusations to make. He cheated. It was investigated. His bike was checked. He cheated. Guilty as charged.

 

He's lucky it's speedway, haven't you noticed the severity in other sports for 'fixing' or 'throwing' a match/game/result?

As did several others that were smarter than Mr Grin, it was obvious but more difficult to prove. In addition the WTC couldn't have been more fixed in certain races, did the culprits become 'ineligible'? The rule is not CLEAR (using your favoured word) but as we learn you know best.

 

You've made your point several times, created your own thread campaign, but what do you want? Hancock to be disqualified (oh,,, that wasn't in the rule but expect your usual response) so your golden child becomes the champion by default?

 

Going into Melbourne Hancock was the deserved WC after the sad loss of Doyle's participation. Albeit concluding in a severe impact on his reputation. I think that's enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never read that the bike was checked. In the Star Holder said "The took the cover off Gregs bike, hit clutch arm came off and the clutch was burnt out"

 

Funny that it never stopped the bike though,next he will be saying it was dangerous but he nursed it to the finish.He certainly dug a big hole for himself with his excuses.
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What more should they have written?

Not being facetious, genuine question.

John Leslie has written plenty but here is my Q&A. Why no questioning about why GH appeared to gain speed after Holder went past him. Why no questioning about why GH rode tight with Holder around bends 3 and 4 on Lap 4 when he stated he went wide in the race in case he lost a chain, fell and got run over. How can he question the FIM jury's inspection of the bike as they know what works on a bike, what doesn't, what slows it down. They didn't believe GH.

 

A less bias article you will struggle to find but if you see Burbidge's twitter feed you'll see why. He loves his mate Grin. It was poor journalism.

 

There are no accusations to make. He cheated. It was investigated. His bike was checked. He cheated. Guilty as charged.

 

Correct

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You've made your point several times, created your own thread campaign, but what do you want? Hancock to be disqualified (oh,,, that wasn't in the rule but expect your usual response) so your golden child becomes the champion by default?

 

Not disqualified, ineligible for the championship. Which is in the rule.

 

Obviously the powers that be have interpreted the rule differently, but trying to pretend that isn't a reasonable reading of the rule is deliberately obtuse.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not disqualified, ineligible for the championship. Which is in the rule.

 

Obviously the powers that be have interpreted the rule differently, but trying to pretend that isn't a reasonable reading of the rule is deliberately obtuse.

'Considered' and 'Remainder' always conveniently left out. Hancock was guilty in my opinion but so were a number of others that changed / fixed the outcome. Why no campaign to ban them all?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

read speedway star last nite have to say very very poor reporting of the gp, totally biased and unbalanced, the articles could have been written by the monster (ugh) pr dept.No questioning or analysis of hancocks bewildering and somewhat ridiculous explanations.ps will not cancel my subscription as i invariably thoroughly enjoy the publication

Link to comment
Share on other sites

'Considered' and 'Remainder' always conveniently left out. Hancock was guilty in my opinion but so were a number of others that changed / fixed the outcome. Why no campaign to ban them all?

 

People are referring to Hancock pulling out of the meeting, not engineering the race positions.

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