Jump to content
British Speedway Forum

Plymouth Vs Birmingham (2/8/22)


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, baiden said:

I appreciate what you're saying, and I don't mean any disrespect by this, by a lot of this is based on what 'you believe'. Do you know for a fact that speedway testing is not at that level? You're probably right, but it's all speculation isn't it unless you know otherwise?

And I'm not saying Barker has necessarily done anything intentionally wrong, it might be exactly as Plymouth describe, but that doesn't mean he's innocent. He's still guilty of taking the drug, whether he knowingly took it or not. And I can't understand how people can think otherwise. It's like the situation with the skiier Alain Baxter that somebody else mentioned on here before.... he tested 'positive' for using a Vicks inhaler in the US. It was an accident, he didn't know it differed from what was sold in the UK and he his ban was overturned - but that didn't change the fact he was guilty of using the product and producing a positive test result. He never got his bronze medal back for the simple reason that he should have declared he was using it - just like Barker should have declared he was using Co-codamol.

The Barker situation will mostly likely go like following way. His 'B sample' is positive, but the SCB will accept his explanation of the use of prescribed medication and he'll get a 'slap on wrists' and be allowed to continue racing. And if his 'B sample' is positive, he's guilty. End of.

Agreed 

It would actually be good to know what the criteria of speedway testing is and just as important what's not covered

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, HGould said:

I can't argue re athletics but the point I'm making is that I think they are different sports testing for different things. 

Maybe good if the SCB or BSPL could actually say what is tested for and what isn't. 

Think you assumption is incorrect.Drug Testing is Standard carried out by Independent Body nothing to do with what Sport it is.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Plymouth team tomorrow.. surprised Pickering isn’t riding for us the brummies tomorrow. 
 

Richie Worrall (for Edward Kennett)

R/R for Alfie Bowtell

Lewis Kerr (for michael Palm Toft)

Danyon Hume (for Hans Andersen)

Josh Pickering (for Ben Barker)

Ben Morley

Harry McGurk

 

anyone got news on brummies team yet??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Brummies23 said:

Plymouth team tomorrow.. surprised Pickering isn’t riding for us the brummies tomorrow. 
 

Richie Worrall (for Edward Kennett)

R/R for Alfie Bowtell

Lewis Kerr (for michael Palm Toft)

Danyon Hume (for Hans Andersen)

Josh Pickering (for Ben Barker)

Ben Morley

Harry McGurk

 

anyone got news on brummies team yet??

Whoever’s left.!,

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, baiden said:

What's not complex is the fact you're defending someone who produced a 'non-negative' sample. It's extremely rare for a 'B sample' to produce a different result from an 'A sample'. So rare in fact that the former Director General of WADA - David Howman - wanted the whole 'B sample' process scrapped when he was in power as, in his words, "the number of times the second sample contradicts the first is almost zero".

What's up for debate is actually whether he knowingly took something banned or not. That's what Plymouth are arguing, not whether he'll be positive or not...because he will be.

I think you may have quoted the wrong post? Nowhere in mine do I defend anyone.

Neither do I add opinion on adequacy of testing.  

Merely pointed out that interpretation and application of the rules as they currently stand aren’t complex. And are they only thing that matter on a thread discussing tomorrow’s meeting.
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, MalDon45 said:

I think you may have quoted the wrong post? Nowhere in mine do I defend anyone.

Neither do I add opinion on adequacy of testing.  

Merely pointed out that interpretation and application of the rules as they currently stand aren’t complex. And are they only thing that matter on a thread discussing tomorrow’s meeting.
 

 

Nope, haven't got the wrong post. You're banging the 'innocent until proven guilty' drum of somebody who produced a 'non-negative' sample - i.e of somebody who had a banned substance in their system. It's not like a 'maybe it was' in his system, it 'was' in his system. I'm pretty sure that would construe a defence in most people's eyes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MalDon45 said:

Only people who don’t know what defence means, and bizarrely confuse it with a statement of fact… 

 

If you want to hide behind the statement of fact argument, feel free. I can see now you're a Plymouth fan, who definitely isn't defending Ben Barker, but just stating some facts! :D

Edited by baiden
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, baiden said:

If you want to hide behind the statement of fact argument, feel free. I can see now you're a Plymouth fan, who definitely isn't defending Ben Barker, but just stating some facts! :D

I’m sure others are getting as bored of this as I am, so last one from me.

Here’s what I said. If to you its a defence  so be it. Not intended to be. Don’t know any facts so have no opinion. Once concluded, we’ll see.

5 hours ago, MalDon45 said:

Non-negative result = Precautionary suspension of licence, pending findings of the B sample. As such,  presumed innocent until proven otherwise.

Anyway. Great line up for the Gladiators. Well done Gary and Mark. Hopefully the Brummies do well in the guest market too. Here’s to a good competitive meeting.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t no if it’s been said earlier but mr barker and Plymouth speedway must be pretty confident of the outcome as he was at Plymouth argyle on Saturday with young ben trigger showing of there bikes and promoting the club and I’d find that very weird if he’d done anything seriously wrong.

Edited by Mike0310
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Mike0310 said:

I don’t no if it’s been said earlier but mr barker and Plymouth speedway must be pretty confident of the outcome as he was at Plymouth argyle on Saturday with young ben trigger showing of there bikes and promoting the club and I’d find that very weird if he’d done anything seriously wrong.

Yeah saw that on Ben Barker's Instagram. Might have been agreed for him to do it before the failed drugs test though and if Plymouth back him, can't exactly tell him not to do it. I am making a lot of assumptions here though. 

Reading the Ipswich thread looks like they are replacing him? So looks like just be riding for Plymouth when he comes back. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, baiden said:

If you want to hide behind the statement of fact argument, feel free. I can see now you're a Plymouth fan, who definitely isn't defending Ben Barker, but just stating some facts! :D

On Barker it looks like he's been a proper silly BOY from what I was told at Edinburgh last Friday night off a fellow rider .. allegedly 

Edited by Justgotmecpc
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Brummies23 said:

Plymouth team tomorrow.. surprised Pickering isn’t riding for us the brummies tomorrow. 
 

Richie Worrall (for Edward Kennett)

R/R for Alfie Bowtell

Lewis Kerr (for michael Palm Toft)

Danyon Hume (for Hans Andersen)

Josh Pickering (for Ben Barker)

Ben Morley

Harry McGurk

 

anyone got news on brummies team yet??

Pickering's average is too high for him to take the place of one of our absentee's ?

Could of had Basso for Auty though ? (surely its about cost...) nothing to ride for so why go all out?

Edited by GiveusaB
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Brummies23 said:

1) Kyle Thomson 

2) Jacob hook 

3) R/R

4) Broc Nicol

5) Justin Sedgmen 

6) lee complin 

7) James Pearson 

 

Plymouth 62-28 brummies 


 

That score from a brummies fan. I’m a Plymouth fan and most certainly hope it’s a closer score than that. No one likes it when a team runs away with a meeting. 
 

best of luck to both sides tonight 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Brummies23 said:

1) Kyle Thomson 

2) Jacob hook 

3) R/R

4) Broc Nicol

5) Justin Sedgmen 

6) lee complin 

7) James Pearson 

 

Plymouth 62-28 brummies 


 

Plymouth 56 - B'ham 34 :D

Thomson/Hook have both done reasonably well at Plymouth this season (according to results )

Edited by GiveusaB
  • Sad 1
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