Jump to content
British Speedway Forum
Paulco

Edinburgh v Glasgow 28/6/19 CL @19-30

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, racers and royals said:

Surely if the Authorities are at a track testing, then Alcohol test  results are known at track- pass or fail. Drug testing is different and samples are taken under controlled conditions and sent away to the labs for the results.

You would think there is a set procedure... but it's British speedway so anything can go on.. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, racers and royals said:

Surely if the Authorities are at a track testing, then Alcohol test  results are known at track- pass or fail. Drug testing is different and samples are taken under controlled conditions and sent away to the labs for the results.

You'd imagine so. When I arrived at 6.55, I'd only been in the stadium a moment when someone told me Howarth was out the meeting due to failing a drugs test. What annoyed me was that many folk knew the situation by 7.30, so it was ridiculous to then hear it announced he had had to rush away due to a family emergency. Why not simply say what had happened - even if it was pending further investigation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, stewmac said:

You'd imagine so. When I arrived at 6.55, I'd only been in the stadium a moment when someone told me Howarth was out the meeting due to failing a drugs test. What annoyed me was that many folk knew the situation by 7.30, so it was ridiculous to then hear it announced he had had to rush away due to a family emergency. Why not simply say what had happened - even if it was pending further investigation?

You can`t fail a drugs test on the night- you can refuse to take one- or pull out of a meeting before they pick what riders will be tested.(done before)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, racers and royals said:

You can`t fail a drugs test on the night- you can refuse to take one- or pull out of a meeting before they pick what riders will be tested.(done before)

Thanks for clarifying. What I heard though suggested he'd been tested in some way and failed. Would that be a urine test, or what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The announcement of a new signing by Wolves this morning suggests either:

a) They had word of what was going on or

b) They have had the ability to react unbelievably quickly...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the benefit of Mr Blobby, as I predicted Coles scored more than Ruddick, Victor more than Sedgmen. As for Kyle Howarth he helped us win :cheers:

Well done to the lads for proving me wrong :drink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, stewmac said:

You'd imagine so. When I arrived at 6.55, I'd only been in the stadium a moment when someone told me Howarth was out the meeting due to failing a drugs test. What annoyed me was that many folk knew the situation by 7.30, so it was ridiculous to then hear it announced he had had to rush away due to a family emergency. Why not simply say what had happened - even if it was pending further investigation?

Probable legal reasons they couldn’t announce. The  “Drug test story” was flying round stadium  quicker than Lawson on his push bike. Hard to think of what they could actually announce what was credible. Howarth let down promotion, fans and team. Cost us the match along with lamentable secret weapon reserve.

On another topic. Really enjoying Liam and John presenting. Still miss Scott Wilson but they are going from strength to strength every week.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really any excuse for professional sportsmen failing drug test. WADA publish info freely available to all sports. In the past included things to watch out for in day to day medicines. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, racers and royals said:

You can`t fail a drugs test on the night- you can refuse to take one- or pull out of a meeting before they pick what riders will be tested.(done before)

If a rider refuses to take a test isn't that regarded the same as a fail ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Endeavour said:

Not really any excuse for professional sportsmen failing drug test. WADA publish info freely available to all sports. In the past included things to watch out for in day to day medicines. 

Absolutely, there is only one person responsible for what they take and in this case its Howarth, if he has done anything wrong, but lets face it he pulled out the meeting last night and now Wolverhampton are making a team change, that could be Howarth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They now have a machine that tests your urine and gives the  results straight away some company’s now use these  quite regularly for staff checks 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had to laugh after the meeting at a conversation with those two notable worthys,  Dick Barrie and Kenny McKinna . I said young Kyle was our man of the match and while Dick agreed , Kenny said " yes he can gate , but he looks slow which is a worry " . 

Kenny son , the lad just scored 10 paid 11 on an away track , and his crucial third place in heat 14 effectively won us the meeting . He can look as slow as he likes if he keeps doing that .

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, racers and royals said:

You can`t fail a drugs test on the night- you can refuse to take one- or pull out of a meeting before they pick what riders will be tested.(done before)

Absolutely R&R,  there is no instant drug test result as you rightly say and i’ve Witnessed riders that have mysteriously ricked their back pre-meeting and even fallen down changing room steps to avoid being tested.   

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, mac101 said:

They now have a machine that tests your urine and gives the  results straight away some company’s now use these  quite regularly for staff checks 

I’m not sure that sort of test is legally binding - i of course maybe wrong - but I think that is more of an indicative test which would still need further analysis.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×

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