Should Monster Joe Be Banned From The Grand Prix Pits By The Fim?

[lucifer sam]

The Speedway Grand Prix is a sporting contest, where each competitor should have an equal opportunity.

 

I believe a representative of the main series sponsor being down the pits, but only helping certain sponsored riders, can lead to a conflict of interest.

 

Not only that, but it could lead to a situation where that representative asks certain team members to drop points to aid other team members. Some may even suggest that this already happened in the recent Australian Grand Prix.

 

I would be interested in reading other people's thoughts.

 

All the best

Rob

Edited November 1, 2016 by lucifer sam

[speedibee]

Big money sponsors ,swan about in all sorts of sports .speedway can ill afford to turn Monster joe away , sure his presence has led to cheating at the Aussie GP , but having been caught with his pants down because Hancock is not much of an actor and having his

brand associated with cheating ,possibly his presence will have the reverse effect now

[Star Lady]

Agree 100% Rob.

 

Even IF there is no collusion the very fact that he is there gives credence to any accusations.

 

Apart from that a middle aged man acting like a 14 year old is nauseating

[Grand Central]

I understand the sentiment and reasoning.

But have doubts about what even attempting to 'ban' him would actually achieve.

 

Everything about him screams to me 'keep him away' and 'steer clear'.

But that is quite irrelevant.

 

The trouble is he seems well liked by many of those that matter.

And there will be absolute zero understanding among them at what, to me, seems so obviously odious about the creature.

You won't change the prevailing culture by calling for action against him that no one will even consider.

 

We would just get 'Martyr Joe' rather than 'Monstrous Joe'

 

After all, he IS the sponsors representative so, hideous though he seems, one has to hold one's nose and accept him.

 

.

Edited November 1, 2016 by Grand Central

[foamfence]

I think riders, named mechanics and officials, should be the only people permitted to be in the pits during a meeting. If they wish to allow sponsors or guests before the start time, that would be adequate. Personally I don't even like media interviews during racing, if they must have it, make sure it's only in a designated space away from all the pits activities.

[Mark]

Speedway cannot afford to lose big sponsorship so lets not lose Monster. As a sponsor they have rights to be in places where others cannot go. But maybe some ground rules need to be set out regarding where they can go and there involvement. A failure by those who brokered the deal in the outset.

 

Realistically there is nothing stopping Hancock employing Joe as a mechanic and cheerleader. I doubt we'll see less of him. He knows it gets under other teams skin.

[robert72]

They wanted a monster 123 but thankfully it didn't happen, I think monster Joe will add another one or two riders to his team to make it happen next season.

 

You cannot ban a main sponsor when so many hangers ons are in the pits at every event.

 

I was a big admirer of Greg sadly that has long gone and I feel he is an embarrassment now since his involvement with monster.

[pugwash]

What does banning him achieve? Could he not just phone a rider and tell him to 'take a dive'?

[speedibee]

What does banning him achieve? Could he not just phone a rider and tell him to 'take a dive'?

Theres so many hangers on in the speedway Gp Pits . some even pose as riders managers !!! just to get in and be seen on TV

[TheReturn]

Yep, I agree with others. Look at F1, if you tell sponsors they can't be in the pits on race weekend I imagine many of them would take their money. It shouldn't matter, provided the SGP officials are strong and firm and not influenced by sponsors, rider officials etc.

[RPNY]

Doesnt the fact Greg got excluded show they arent just pandering to Monster?

[foamfence]

Doesnt the fact Greg got excluded show they arent just pandering to Monster?

No that was the decision of the referee. There shouldn't be the potential for 'words in ears' and whatever else might be offered in the way of 'extras.'

[lucifer sam]

No that was the decision of the referee. There shouldn't be the potential for 'words in ears' and whatever else might be offered in the way of 'extras.'

 

It was the decision of the FIM Jury, not solely the referee. The FIM Jury at each Grand Prix consists of:

* Armando Castagna

* A local official

* The FIM referee

 

All the best

Rob

[Tsunami]

Doesnt the fact Greg got excluded show they arent just pandering to Monster?

Maybe in this case yes, but the backlash of this and it's consequences could make FIM officials a bit more lenient in their treatment of powerful sponsors and their contracted riders. That's not good for the sport or certain opposition riders, i.e, Nicki.

As speedibee says, there are far too many hangerson in the GP pits who add nothing to the show. Think back and remember the Holder clan getting stuck in to support Chris a couple of years ago. Nicki's ex girlfriend, preening herself and taking selfies during GP's and even in Swedish TV meetings. Sponsors could/should be penned in an allocated area adjacent to the pits, but not inside it.

Edited November 1, 2016 by Tsunami

[foamfence]

 

It was the decision of the FIM Jury, not solely the referee. The FIM Jury at each Grand Prix consists of:

* Armando Castagna

* A local official

* The FIM referee

 

All the best

Rob

You are absolutely right. I apologise.

[PHILIPRISING]

 

It was the decision of the FIM Jury, not solely the referee. The FIM Jury at each Grand Prix consists of:

* Armando Castagna

* A local official

* The FIM referee

 

All the best

Rob

FOR the record ... It is the Jury President (not always Aramndo, often Tony Steele or Wolfgang Glas), the referee and the local FIM delegate. Race Director sits on the Jury but has no vote.

[lucifer sam]

FOR the record ... It is the Jury President (not always Aramndo, often Tony Steele or Wolfgang Glas), the referee and the local FIM delegate. Race Director sits on the Jury but has no vote.

 

Thanks for the clarification.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but surely Wolfgang Glas was the worst-ever referee for a Grand Prix? I'm sure he was the referee to the Swedish round in 2000, when he totally missed Loram clatter into Rickardsson, excluded Rickardsson, tried to reverse his decision... but a FIM Jury declared he couldn't do that.

 

All the best

Rob

[Mark]

FOR the record ... It is the Jury President (not always Aramndo, often Tony Steele or Wolfgang Glas), the referee and the local FIM delegate. Race Director sits on the Jury but has no vote.

I'm sure you're right but I think the Star article said it was Castagna & Phil Morris plus Ref. Both Castagna and Morris had quotes about the ban.

[BangerBoy]

Why are we making such a fuss over this with Greg.

 

All the times it's happened before at other meetings both World Cup and League meetings and more apparent to everybody watching but nothing said or done at the time.

[Grand Central]

I'm sure you're right but I think the Star article said it was Castagna & Phil Morris plus Ref. Both Castagna and Morris had quotes about the ban.

 

Actually within the burburblings of Burbidge are two references to the correct make up of the FIM Jury in Melbourne.

Not even HE could get that wrong.

 

But in the spread across P2/3 with quotes from Hancock and the unattributed 'comment' piece entitled 'Jury Justice?' Morris is mentioned by name more than once. Plus is the Page 3 FIM column there are comments & quotes by him that are all about the Jury actions.

 

At no point is it actually written "Race Director sits on the Jury but has no vote" as PR has done just here; which is so easy to do just for clarity.

 

.

Edited November 1, 2016 by Grand Central