Jump to content
British Speedway Forum
Steve Shovlar

Cook, Vissing and Kennett banned.

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, lisa-colette said:

Yes, nice of Lawson to think of the kids and parents and make sure they were okay :)

Rich has posted that he only spoke to his mascot and said that this doesn't usually happen. As Crumpet said , a man of integrity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, tyretrax said:

Rich has posted that he only spoke to his mascot and said that this doesn't usually happen. As Crumpet said , a man of integrity.

Shame, bet a lot of those kids were looking forward to the next meet till they were told that :)

  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, BWitcher said:

Shame, bet a lot of those kids were looking forward to the next meet till they were told that :)

They probably found the speedway pretty dull after the lively rider presentation :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Steve Shovlar said:

I would say that statement was spot on. 

Obviously not,according to Lawson. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, stevebrum said:

A mention of Cook weaving in and out of track staff and kids??? Really. I’ve not seen any comments from those there who said that happened. 

Probably because the statement doesn’t mention that - Because it didn’t happen, which is why you haven’t seen any comments from those who were there.

Edited by woofers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, woofers said:

Probably because the statement doesn’t mention that - Because it didn’t happen, which is why you haven’t seen any comments from those who were there.

It stats that in the statement.

Craig Cook chose to ignore all Red Flags and Lights, did not reduce his speed before riding in to and around the 1st / 2nd turn towards his teammates, the Eastbourne Team and Mascots and Track Officials at his point of departure.

’riding into and around’ could be classified as weaving. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Read it again -

“riding in to and around the 1st / 2nd turn towards...”

“Towards” is the key word here. He didn’t get as far as his team mates, the Eastbourne Team and Mascots.

There was NO “weaving in and out of track staff and kids”

Just accept that you have got it wrong, no matter how you want to classify or interpret it. 

Share this post


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

Read it again -

“riding in to and around the 1st / 2nd turn towards...”

“Towards” is the key word here. He didn’t get as far as his team mates, the Eastbourne Team and Mascots.

There was NO “weaving in and out of track staff and kids”

Just accept that you have got it wrong, no matter how you want to classify or interpret it. 

As I’ve previously discussed the statement is full of holes, and if you have to question what it means then it’s already causing doubts. 

just to be clear I didn’t believe for one minute he rode into or around anyone, not until the have a go hero decided to walk right unto his path.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regardless of the wording, Cook was entering the first bend at a fairly leisurely pace, the group of people were on the back straight. It's ridiculous to suggest he would have caused danger to those on the back straight.

  • Like 3
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, BWitcher said:

Regardless of the wording, Cook was entering the first bend at a fairly leisurely pace, the group of people were on the back straight. It's ridiculous to suggest he would have caused danger to those on the back straight.

He was going very slow and was slowing down and would have never caused an issue to anyone on the back straight

Eastbournes statement just deflects everything away from them....right up to saying marshalls with the flags were at the edge of the track

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Got to love the statements of those that weren't there!

By all means have an opinion, but please don't try to dress it up as factual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, woofers said:

Got to love the statements of those that weren't there!

By all means have an opinion, but please don't try to dress it up as factual.

The statements made by those that were there have been found to be incorrect so they're a pretty poor judge as they got one look at the time and false impressions can be given.

People are giving 'opinions' based upon the video evidence available which is as factual as you can get.

Which funnily enough the SCB did. They didn't ban Cook nor even mention any element of endangering those on the back straight. The three were banned for violent behaviour, which is fair given the evidence provided.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Got to love the statements of those that weren't there!

By all means have an opinion, but please don't try to dress it up as factual.

Well let’s face it that official statement isn’t accurate or factual either, selective facts at best. 

3 minute video footage of the sorry incident means you don’t have to be there to make an informed opinion.

I take it you believe every word of the statement as correct fact because you were there. Which at best makes you comments blinkered.

Its pretty clear the statement put out is at best part fact, part ignore the obvious and part fail to mention the part others who were involved played (notably those from the home side). 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, stevebrum said:

Well let’s face it that official statement isn’t accurate or factual either, selective facts at best. 

3 minute video footage of the sorry incident means you don’t have to be there to make an informed opinion.

I take it you believe every word of the statement as correct fact because you were there. Which at best makes you comments blinkered.

Its pretty clear the statement put out is at best part fact, part ignore the obvious and part fail to mention the part others who were involved played (notably those from the home side). 

Seems a lot more factual and accurate than the statement put out by Craig Cook in the Speedway Star which if you read the statement from Eastie properly it seeks it seems to me to make a non confrontational rebuttal to, and makes point they waited for the Hearing and have accepted by the finding of.. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

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