Jacques 3,114 Posted February 5, 2015 (edited) If there were issues with the test as the Ward camp keep alluding to, why did we get as far as the hearing, why has any of it got this far, why is there a 45 day window for a verdict since the hearing last week? The case would have been dropped or thrown out last Friday surely? Edited February 5, 2015 by Jacques 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The White Knight 9,039 Posted February 5, 2015 It's about time we got some real investigative journalism, other than than the boring party line dirge that most of us know weeks before the SS prints it.. All the reporters I know of, are kissing Wards arse Mr Rising, rubs shoulders with the Speedway establishment on a daily/weekly basis and is not going to piss in his pot, so to speak . I'm being polite here I am sick to death of reading the same old sh!!t day in day out on here..Year on year! It's time to get rid of the old boys network.. ! This sport fails time and time again, because it's incestuous and seedy! REALLY? :shock: Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wackie 938 Posted February 5, 2015 I expect Wards camp have gone through the FIM anti-doping code with a fine tooth comb looking for a way out for their client, which is probably why dates have been pushed back. Looking at section 5.9. could it be that there was reading material provided for Ward in the test facilities, but the lack of Roger Red hat and Billy Blue hat books meant it wasn't suitable for him - he was therefore discriminated against by the FIM? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Barrycuda 184 Posted February 5, 2015 (edited) Post removed Edited June 2, 2015 by Barrycuda Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
f-s-p 832 Posted February 5, 2015 Surely your not implying or suggesting those seedy mens magazines that Rodney Trotter reads are you. You know those exotic art magazines. Also it does say that they must keep away from methanol to do the test so it does not effect the test result. One would think you could get high on methanol fumes. It has happened (methanol fumes) and thats probably why it's now in the book. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Starman2006 2,354 Posted February 5, 2015 If he was breathalysed twice at the track then thats an A and B sample. You did state IF... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BWitcher 12,453 Posted February 5, 2015 You did state IF... He might not have been breathalysed at all. Perhaps they just made it up, Darcy just thought he'd go along with it for a laugh. Then go to the time and expense of having a hearing, and not only that, writing up a verdict. All If's in your little world isn't it. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Starman2006 2,354 Posted February 5, 2015 He might not have been breathalysed at all. Perhaps they just made it up, Darcy just thought he'd go along with it for a laugh. Then go to the time and expense of having a hearing, and not only that, writing up a verdict. All If's in your little world isn't it. Yep, a lot of IF's there mate !! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
orion 7,615 Posted February 5, 2015 I've said for years, my biggest issue with the speedway star is most of it is just them printing the BSPA (either as a collective or individuals) propaganda. There no investigation, there no finding out the truth, there no asking of questions. It's a shame because when the Star does write some of it's articles they're a great read. The Garry Stead article from a few months back is one I think every speedway fan should be made to read - a few of us commented on how it brought us close to tears reading about the experiences of Garry and his poor mum and dad. So they can do it. Speedway is just one big gang and that includes the tv people and the Speedway star . All in it together . Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wackie 938 Posted February 5, 2015 Yep, a lot of IF's there mate !! Actually there's only one! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
OveFundinFan 4,142 Posted February 5, 2015 but it was in the plural. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Odds On 373 Posted February 6, 2015 so then has there been a decision made?....or does anybody else smell a rat? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jacques 3,114 Posted February 6, 2015 He's still convinced he'll know his fate today from tweet he sent yesterday.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skidder1 7,637 Posted February 6, 2015 If he was breathalysed twice at the track then thats an A and B sample. A 'B' sample cannot be a Breath test sample as it must be available to be tested/re-tested at a later date if required - either at the rider's request or by the FIM/WADA. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Grand Central 2,654 Posted February 6, 2015 He's still convinced he'll know his fate today from tweet he sent yesterday.. I suppose it all depends how literally one takes things. Darcy may say 'The FIM said they would contact me in a week' Whether that turns out to be exactly ONE week is moot. Darcy may have said 'The GP is postponed let's go for a drink'. Whether that turned out to be many, many more than just ONE Drink, is not so moot. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
