Plymouth Vs Birmingham (2/8/22)

[GiveusaB 1,136]

2 hours ago, HGould said:

My guess

Nicol, Edwards and Complin (after his performance last time)

 

I think logistics might play a part re: to guests ..... need to keep the costs down ?

[MalDon45 93]

It’s not overly complex, surely?

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

Of course Gladiators entitled to use a guest facility. Of course he retains the clubs support.

Would the forum prefer a firing squad at this stage?

[szkocjasid 3,020]

4 hours ago, HGould said:

I wonder who is left for us?

Plymouth certainly going for a win with this Team

https://plymouth-speedway.com/gladiators-v-the-brummies/

Brennan / Edwards and Paco may be for us??..

 

They've done well with guests, but I'm not sure about using r/r for the 5th highest rider, as it means 11 rides for the reserves 

[baiden 90]

38 minutes ago, MalDon45 said:

It’s not overly complex, surely?

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

Of course Gladiators entitled to use a guest facility. Of course he retains the clubs support.

Would the forum prefer a firing squad at this stage?

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.

Edited August 1, 2022 by baiden
added name of WADA Director General

[szkocjasid 3,020]

4 hours ago, GiveusaB said:

Josh Pickering in for someone suspended for breaching the rules ?  not sure I agree with that one ?

I'm sure rules like this are so the club doesn't get punished for a riders "indiscretion"

[szkocjasid 3,020]

1 hour ago, GiveusaB said:

Think the 8 day rule would apply to Complin? (not sure how that works ) LOL

I think we'd be better off signing him on a short term contract....see the season out in place of Shanes ?

I'd have signed Complin for the rest of the season after his efforts as a guest!

[HGould 2,213]

28 minutes 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 youre100% correct if you were referring to the testing procedures used by elite sports. Those sports testing for steroids and anabolic drugs and masking drugs. 

Soccer, Cycling. Rugby, Athletics, Weight Lifting, etc. 

I don't believe that Speedway is testing to that level or type of substance. 

I believe its more of a recreational drug and alcohol urine test. 

There have been examples of complete innocence like Kyle Howarth due to prescription drugs 

Plymouth PR was very specific about prescription drugs Barker was taking for known and documented injuries. They must have evidence of those prescriptions and GP or Hospital evidence. 

The B Test in this case should be able to distinguish the amount and type of substances genuinely in prescribed medicines and genuinely in illegal recreational drugs. 

Got little to do with WADA type steroid tests although it is under the same umbrella of Sport. 

Like others have said innocent until proven guilty. 

The fact he took the test rather than scarper like Steve Boxhall says something too. 

Edited August 1, 2022 by HGould
Spell

[baiden 90]

25 minutes ago, HGould said:

I think yourec100% if you were referring to the testing procedures used by elite sports. Those sports testing for steroids and anabolic drugs and masking drugs. 

Soccer, Cycling. Rugby, Athletics, Weight Lifting, etc. 

I don't believe that Speedway is testing to that level or type of substance. 

I believe its more of a recreational drug and alcohol urine test. 

There have been examples of complete innocence like Kyle Howarth due to prescription drugs 

Plymouth PR was very specific about prescription drugs Barker was taking for known and documented injuries. They must have evidence of those prescriptions and GP or Hospital evidence. 

The B Test in this case should be able to distinguish the amount and type of substances genuinely in prescribed medicines and genuinely in illegal recreational drugs. 

Got little to do with WADA type steroid tests although it is under the same umbrella of Sport. 

Like others have said innocent until proven guilty. 

The fact he took the test rather than scarper like Steve Boxhall says something too. 

I appreciate what you're saying, and I don't mean any disrespect by this, but 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 something like the following. 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.

Edited August 1, 2022 by baiden

[Fromafar 10,359]

12 minutes ago, HGould said:

I think youre100% correct if you were referring to the testing procedures used by elite sports. Those sports testing for steroids and anabolic drugs and masking drugs. 

Soccer, Cycling. Rugby, Athletics, Weight Lifting, etc. 

I don't believe that Speedway is testing to that level or type of substance. 

I believe its more of a recreational drug and alcohol urine test. 

There have been examples of complete innocence like Kyle Howarth due to prescription drugs 

Plymouth PR was very specific about prescription drugs Barker was taking for known and documented injuries. They must have evidence of those prescriptions and GP or Hospital evidence. 

The B Test in this case should be able to distinguish the amount and type of substances genuinely in prescribed medicines and genuinely in illegal recreational drugs. 

Got little to do with WADA type steroid tests although it is under the same umbrella of Sport. 

Like others have said innocent until proven guilty. 

The fact he took the test rather than scarper like Steve Boxhall says something too. 

 Don’t think that is correct,Drug testing is for everything not specific substances,my daughter was active in Athletics  and it  was standard Doping tests that are administered.Even for Asthma inhalers you needed an exemption Certificate or faced a ban

[HGould 2,213]

1 minute ago, Fromafar said:

 Don’t think that is correct,Drug testing is for everything not specific substances,my daughter was active in Athletics  and it  was standard Doping tests that are administered.Even for Asthma inhalers you needed an exemption Certificate or faced a ban

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. 

[HGould 2,213]

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

 

[Fromafar 10,359]

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.

[Brummies23 37]

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??

[Fromafar 10,359]

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.!,

[MalDon45 93]

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.