Crazy robin 2,966 Posted October 12, 2014 Sod Darcy & get Emil back in the series whatever it takes. 9 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Daniel Smith 5,672 Posted October 12, 2014 The point is if he gets away without a ban. Which he desrves at least a straight 12 months. Then will Monster and his other major sponsers want anything to do with him. That question has already been answered as he was part of their crew at the TorunSGP this weekend. They're clearly standing by him. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
iris123 21,036 Posted October 13, 2014 Of course Monster will have an influence! Do you really expect anyone to think differently? Monster are headline sponsor, they'll want as much exposure as they can get for their money, which will including as many of their riders as they can get into the series. Wasn't Monster Joe out with Ward the night before his failed breath test? Could it be he feels a little responsible for encouraging, or not stopping Ward getting leathered the night before the GP? If Ward isn't banned, you can almost guarantee he'll get a wild card for 2015. Think it would be a very rare case if major sponsors didn't have a lot of influence.Not only do we have the word of a meeting sponsor who posted that he could have his choice of wildcard,but we also have many many cases of influence by sponsors in football.I know for instance Millwall supporters were upset when the club was sponsored by Lewisham Copuncil and a Council member was given a place on the board.The fans said they should also have a place considering the money they spend,but no chance.Also over the past few weeks we have had problems here in Hamburg with the main football club.They have a rich supporter who gives them millions,he has no official position within the club,but has for instance coughed up for the signing of Van der Vaart.Now one or two officials have recently left on bad terms and are blaming their problems partly/largely on this outside "sponsor" who made things difficult for them within the club and often spilt stories to the press I' d say it would be quite unique and not a bit crazy if Monster didn't use their position to get what they wanted.There have been stories before that had some substance to them according to people within the sport.NKI some years back getting a WC because of his Dansk Metal sponsorship and Pepe because of his sponsorship are two that come to mind.This is a financial venture as well as a sporting one and even Phil will sometimes tell us that you cannot ignore the financial side of things....... 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skidder1 7,651 Posted October 13, 2014 Darcy would have if he wasnt caught. It hardly makes it better Didn't say it makes anything better - its simply a different offence which would/should get a different punishment. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PHILIPRISING 7,298 Posted October 13, 2014 Think it would be a very rare case if major sponsors didn't have a lot of influence.Not only do we have the word of a meeting sponsor who posted that he could have his choice of wildcard,but we also have many many cases of influence by sponsors in football.I know for instance Millwall supporters were upset when the club was sponsored by Lewisham Copuncil and a Council member was given a place on the board.The fans said they should also have a place considering the money they spend,but no chance.Also over the past few weeks we have had problems here in Hamburg with the main football club.They have a rich supporter who gives them millions,he has no official position within the club,but has for instance coughed up for the signing of Van der Vaart.Now one or two officials have recently left on bad terms and are blaming their problems partly/largely on this outside "sponsor" who made things difficult for them within the club and often spilt stories to the press I' d say it would be quite unique and not a bit crazy if Monster didn't use their position to get what they wanted.There have been stories before that had some substance to them according to people within the sport.NKI some years back getting a WC because of his Dansk Metal sponsorship and Pepe because of his sponsorship are two that come to mind.This is a financial venture as well as a sporting one and even Phil will sometimes tell us that you cannot ignore the financial side of things....... IF Ward isn't banned and available I am sure he would get a wild card whether he is a Monster rider or not... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ghostwalker 1,859 Posted October 13, 2014 Didn't say it makes anything better - its simply a different offence which would/should get a different punishment. From a rule/legal point of view Darcy was riding under the influence. I agree that it is different though since Darcy consumed the illegal substances on purpose while Dudek (in theory) could have consumed the illegal substances by mistake, so yes the punishment should be different (=stronger). 6 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skidder1 7,651 Posted October 13, 2014 From a rule/legal point of view Darcy was riding under the influence. I agree that it is different though since Darcy consumed the illegal substances on purpose while Dudek (in theory) could have consumed the illegal substances by mistake, so yes the punishment should be different (=stronger). But he wasn't riding under the influence, because he didn't ride and he didn't put any other rider at risk, because the test was carried out beforehand!! Alcohol is not an illegal substance!! Not trying to defend Ward (see my signature) just to suggest that the punishment is appropriate based on facts rather than opinion!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fullbore 129 Posted October 13, 2014 But he wasn't riding under the influence, because he didn't ride and he didn't put any other rider at risk, because the test was carried out beforehand!! But he had every intention of riding, so to say he shold receive a lesser punishment just because he got caught is rediculous. Niamh Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
OveFundinFan 4,145 Posted October 13, 2014 (edited) Darcy would know that riding with a certain amount of alcohol in his body would incur a penalty if found out. The logical thing to do is not drink within a certain time period before a meeting. Obviously he had drunk alcohol the night before (hes admitted that), and (thankfully) he was tested and tested positive. More fool for him not using his brain and abstain from drinking. He will have known what the penalties are, now he has to pay the price. You reap what you sow. Edited October 13, 2014 by OveFundinFan Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ghostwalker 1,859 Posted October 13, 2014 (edited) But he wasn't riding under the influence, because he didn't ride and he didn't put any other rider at risk, because the test was carried out beforehand!! Alcohol is not an illegal substance!! Not trying to defend Ward (see my signature) just to suggest that the punishment is appropriate based on facts rather than opinion!! You miss the point. From the rule/legal point of view Darcy was riding under the influence from the moment that he arrived at the track. Regardless if he was standing in the pit area or out on the track on a bike, he was considered being under the influence of alcohol in conjunction with a meeting. Alcohol (ethanol) is prohibited In-Competition only, in the following sports. Detection will be conducted by analysis of breath and/or blood. The doping violation threshold is equivalent to a blood alcohol concentration of 0.10 g/L. http://list.wada-ama.org/prohibited-in-particular-sports/prohibited-substances/ The competition starts when Darcy arrives at the track and ends when he leaves the track. So from the moment that he arrived at the track, he was considered being under the influence of alcohol "In competition" and thus should receive a punishment for that. Edited October 13, 2014 by Ghostwalker 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheReturn 1,724 Posted October 13, 2014 The logical thing to do is not drink within a certain time period before a meeting. Logic and common sense are not things you can associate with Darcy Ward. I noticed over the weekend when browsing the after GP twitter reactions Ward retweeted somebody else's tweet which was being critical of Nicki. I don't call that professional. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ghostwalker 1,859 Posted October 13, 2014 Logic and common sense are not things you can associate with Darcy Ward. I noticed over the weekend when browsing the after GP twitter reactions Ward retweeted somebody else's tweet which was being critical of Nicki. I don't call that professional. It's not the first time Darcy does that. He have done it on several occasions. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dornier 797 Posted October 13, 2014 Ward's a knob. Now Now knobs are usefull Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Red Panda 366 Posted October 13, 2014 It's not the first time Darcy does that. He have done it on several occasions. And your proof of this is??????????? RP Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
waiheke1 4,295 Posted October 13, 2014 And your proof of this is??????????? RP I presume he has seen darcy's twitter feed? Do you follow darcy on twitter, snd if so are u denying it is true? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
