dj350z 2,266 Posted May 18, 2015 Would not be surprised if Ward ends up at Swindon this year, him & Nick Morris, wow what a pair, we all know how well they ride together!!! Naughty!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Starman2006 2,359 Posted May 18, 2015 (edited) Yes... I check spelling,grammar and punctuation. Yeh you may do, but i bet little boy blue doesn't. Although he's bound to say he does.. Edited May 18, 2015 by Starman2006 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Steve0 5,517 Posted May 18, 2015 (edited) Ah Steve0, I was just having a bit of fun - something this forum is sadly lacking in lately!! I was hoping for a few 'wooooshes'............. If you've followed my posts that closely, you'll know I'm a big fan of Adrian - even from well before I told you he was available and was going to sign for you!!. We all know what you were doing If you've followed my posts that closely, you'll know I'm NOT any kind of fan of Adrian Edited May 18, 2015 by Steve0 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mdmc82 2,878 Posted May 20, 2015 (edited) It's been confirmed today that any points gained after ward was suspended from the GP will be removed. This means that Janowski will have to be getting maximums in all his meetings if he's any chance of averaging 9 to swap places with Ward in the team. Edited May 20, 2015 by mdmc82 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BWitcher 12,453 Posted May 20, 2015 It was also confirmed today that the full reasons were given to Wards camp back on April 7th. So all the moaning and whinging regarding the long wait are once again shown to be lies. As regards the deducting of his pts, of course this means Kings Lynn were the rightful table toppers and as it's not possible now to rerun the playoffs should be awarded the league title as the playoffs to all intents and purposes were null and void. Of course, this is speedway so I have no doubt the SCB/BSPA will bury their heads and ignore an official ruling. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Red Panda 366 Posted May 20, 2015 It was also confirmed today that the full reasons were given to Wards camp back on April 7th. So all the moaning and whinging regarding the long wait are once again shown to be lies. As regards the deducting of his pts, of course this means Kings Lynn were the rightful table toppers and as it's not possible now to rerun the playoffs should be awarded the league title as the playoffs to all intents and purposes were null and void. Of course, this is speedway so I have no doubt the SCB/BSPA will bury their heads and ignore an official ruling. I had a really eloquent post written out to reply to this but I really can't be bother to post it............because as usual you will twist and turn everything to suit your purpose.............which is exactly the same as you accuse Poole of doing...............peas in a pod springs to mind............ Shame really............... RP Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skidder1 7,669 Posted May 20, 2015 It's been confirmed today that any points gained after ward was suspended from the GP will be removed. This means that Janowski will have to be getting maximums in all his meetings if he's any chance of averaging 9 to swap places with Ward in the team. He doesn't have to be averaging 9. It was also confirmed today that the full reasons were given to Wards camp back on April 7th. So all the moaning and whinging regarding the long wait are once again shown to be lies. As regards the deducting of his pts, of course this means Kings Lynn were the rightful table toppers and as it's not possible now to rerun the playoffs should be awarded the league title as the playoffs to all intents and purposes were null and void. Of course, this is speedway so I have no doubt the SCB/BSPA will bury their heads and ignore an official ruling. Old news! It was stated at the time that Ward had requested the decisions before they were made public. Just for clarification, the punishment is for Ward, NOT any of his clubs - other than the effect it may have on his personal racing average. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mdmc82 2,878 Posted May 20, 2015 He doesn't have to be averaging 9. . He will for a like for like swap Ward's average is 8.70, if the meeting points are removed for the Leicester meetings then he would be closer to 9 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BWitcher 12,453 Posted May 20, 2015 (edited) He doesn't have to be averaging 9. Old news! It was stated at the time that Ward had requested the decisions before they were made public. Just for clarification, the punishment is for Ward, NOT any of his clubs - other than the effect it may have on his personal racing average. Old news says the guy who has been bleating about Ward not receiving the reasoned decisions. So where is the FIM statement that Ward was going to respond to?? Stuck in the same desk drawer in Geneva that the FIM investigation into Warsaw GP will go?! As evidenced above. Bleating about it almost a month after Ward has received it. So no, NOT old news. Just yet more lies from the Ward camp that you are either a party too or gullible enough to fall for. As for your 'clarification', that's just you making things up again. Edited May 20, 2015 by BWitcher Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Red Panda 366 Posted May 20, 2015 Old news says the guy who has been bleating about Ward not receiving the reasoned decisions. So no, NOT old news. Just yet more lies from the Ward camp that you are either a party too or gullible enough to fall for. As for your 'clarification', that's just you making things up again. That is utter b******s....................yes it is old news................get over it RP Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BWitcher 12,453 Posted May 20, 2015 I had a really eloquent post written out to reply to this but I really can't be bother to post it............because as usual you will twist and turn everything to suit your purpose.............which is exactly the same as you accuse Poole of doing...............peas in a pod springs to mind............ Shame really............... RP There's nothing that needs twisting or turning. The FIM has very clearly spelt it out. That is utter b******s....................yes it is old news................get over it RP Ward received the full reasoned decision on the 7th April. His lackeys were bleating about the FIM on the 2nd May asking where it was. So either they were lying, or it wasn't old news? Which one do you prefer? 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Red Panda 366 Posted May 20, 2015 There's nothing that needs twisting or turning. The FIM has very clearly spelt it out. Ward received the full reasoned decision on the 7th April. His lackeys were bleating about the FIM on the 2nd May asking where it was. So either they were lying, or it wasn't old news? Which one do you prefer? So why was that information released when the initial hearing results came out in February then................. Like I said before you are reading what you want to into the report............not what the report really says............ RP RP Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BWitcher 12,453 Posted May 20, 2015 So why was that information released when the initial hearing results came out in February then................. Like I said before you are reading what you want to into the report............not what the report really says............ RP RP What are you talking about? The statement on the FIM website states that the relevant parties were given the full reasoned decision on the 7th April. Now, when I read 7th April, I take it to mean 7th April. Perhaps I am twisting things and it's wrong to think 7th April means 7th April.. I'd be interested to hear what your unbiased (cough) opinion of the meaning of 7th April is? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Red Panda 366 Posted May 20, 2015 (edited) What are you talking about? The statement on the FIM website states that the relevant parties were given the full reasoned decision on the 7th April. Now, when I read 7th April, I take it to mean 7th April. Perhaps I am twisting things and it's wrong to think 7th April means 7th April.. I'd be interested to hear what your unbiased (cough) opinion of the meaning of 7th April is? Yes but when Ward was punished for what he did and the initial details were released on that at the end of February all that you have said was mentioned................... If you did not read the initial reports that were released before the full reports were released that is not my problem............ It was well publicised at the time and well documented.................. Perhaps you should think before you write stuff............all Poole fans knew what you describe as new news almost 3 months ago.............. There is no talking to some people............... RP Edited May 20, 2015 by Red Panda Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BWitcher 12,453 Posted May 20, 2015 Yes but when Ward was punished for what he did and the initial details were released on that at the end of February all that you have said was mentioned................... If you did not read the initial reports that were released before the full reports were released that is not my problem............ It was well publicised at the time and well documented.................. Perhaps you should think before you write stuff............all Poole fans knew what you describe as new news almost 3 months ago.............. There is no talking to some people............... RP Perhaps if you knew what you were commenting on you might get somewhere. The claim is that it is 'old news' that Ward was in possession of the full reasoned decisions on April 7th. Please point to me in the initial summary in February where it said Ward had received the full reasoned decisions on April 7th. Did they have a time machine? Of course not, it wasn't there so all of your waffle is redundant. Secondly, with regards to the deduction of Ward's points, this had been challenged by Darcy himself as confirmed by his team in Sweden. The results of said challenge had not been documented anywhere so again, most definitely were not 'old news'. However, the statement on the FIM website now clearly states that the matter is closed hence any appeal has failed. So again, not old news. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
