Melbourne 2016

[R87 476]

Lets be honest GH wouldn't be a 4x WC if the likes of Trick, Crumpy & Gollob were still around, the current batch seem to look up to him like he's some god like being, those three didn't wave him by, they pushed him out the way, all this grin and monster bollocks gets on my wick, just a facade to get preferential treatment, roll on next season when hopefully Doyley gets to be the WC he should have been and the others stop waving the old timer through.

 

No doubt Gollob in his prime was a fabulous rider who may have been more successful in the world final system than the GP. Bottom line he was only good enough to win it once.

 

I will say that Hancock seems to have more of a star-status over the rest of the field than Rickardsson had. Certainly Rickardsson never mucked about in the pits with the younger riders and thrust drink bottles in front of the camera every interview. He was ice-cool and had a hold over the others by psyching them out, not by trying to be peoples best mate.

Edited October 28, 2016 by mb1990

[Mark 1,497]

Hancock's image is ruined in the eyes of the fans. The Star can paint there own picture. But fans know the real story.

[Hodgy 976]

Tell me which other riders were excluded for cheating. When you can, you have an argument.

 

You don't seem to grasp that the debate is regarding a rider who was excluded and subsequently walked out of the meeting. Not who may or may not have done something.

As per usual you totally deflect an opinion to suit. You don't seem to grasp a ruling is open to interpretation - because you are always right, it's SIMPLE, CLEAR, FACT, blah blah blah so many times. You are so obsessed and self opioniated with this subject you are surpassing the Poole stalker. 'Only me!!!!!!, now I don't believe you wanted to do it like that'.

[BWitcher 12,453]

As did several others that were smarter than Mr Grin, it was obvious but more difficult to prove. In addition the WTC couldn't have been more fixed in certain races, did the culprits become 'ineligible'? The rule is not CLEAR (using your favoured word) but as we learn you know best.

 

 

 

 

As per usual you totally deflect an opinion to suit. You don't seem to grasp a ruling is open to interpretation - because you are always right, it's SIMPLE, CLEAR, FACT, blah blah blah so many times. You are so obsessed and self opioniated with this subject you are surpassing the Poole stalker. 'Only me!!!!!!, now I don't believe you wanted to do it like that'.

 

I didn't 'deflect' your opinion. You've staggeringly questioned why other riders you claim 'cheated' didn't become 'ineligible'.

 

Well that's quite simply because cheating, throwing a race doesn't make you ineligible.

 

The discussion is regarding Hancock withdrawing from the meeting, as such your post was entirely irrelevant.

 

In an attempt to humor you I asked you to name me these other riders who you seem keen to bracket alongside Hancock i.e. excluded for cheating. Unable to name a single one you have come back with some childish petulance.

[tyler42 150]

Lets be honest GH wouldn't be a 4x WC if the likes of Trick, Crumpy & Gollob were still around, the current batch seem to look up to him like he's some god like being, those three didn't wave him by, they pushed him out the way, all this grin and monster bollocks gets on my wick, just a facade to get preferential treatment, roll on next season when hopefully Doyley gets to be the WC he should have been and the others stop waving the old timer through.

Couldn't agree more. Yes riders in years gone by would show respect to each other, but how the young GP riders of today praise Hancock off track and then they give him far too much respect on track is quite farcical.

 

Hancock's game plan imo is to gain all the young guys friendship. So that they all think he is some kind of living legend and hey presto, when it comes to the racing side of things, they all give him an easy ride.

 

Regarding PB and the SS. It's so piss poor journalism, how do they let him get away with it?. Surely someone should make sure it is a balanced article. Not a 'all hail Greg who shall do no wrong' It would have been nice to read a article telling it how it is from the other point of view.

 

Lastly regarding Monster. Yes its good that a product which is well known is sponsoring the GP series, But it really doesn't help matters when their marketing director is hugging the sponsored riders and giving silly faces to the camera, but then again the t.v cameras should stop filming him or it's in his contract!! lol.

[Humphrey Appleby 13,961]

Regarding PB and the SS. It's so piss poor journalism, how do they let him get away with it?. Surely someone should make sure it is a balanced article. Not a 'all hail Greg who shall do no wrong' It would have been nice to read a article telling it how it is from the other point of view.

I reserved judgement until I'd had a chance to read this week's Spar, but I have to say that the reporting of the GP was absolutely ridiculous biased waffle. I'd be embarrassed to put that out as a journalist.

 

Lastly regarding Monster. Yes its good that a product which is well known is sponsoring the GP series, But it really doesn't help matters when their marketing director is hugging the sponsored riders and giving silly faces to the camera, but then again the t.v cameras should stop filming him or it's in his contract!!

What are they actually paying though? BSI's reported revenue has been declining over the past few years, and there's been no increase in the amounts coming out North America. The sponsorship may be coming via a European subsidiary, but normally sponsors and organisers alike to trumpet how much they're investing.

[Mark 1,497]

I would fully agree there are others that are tough. Doyle last year and Lindgren this year for sure.

However there was about a 5 year spell where Nicki regularly stepped over the line. Unfortunately then that led to EVERYTHING he did being treated harshly.

I love hard racing. Doyle wasn't dirty in 2015, he was impatient by going for a small gap when it wasn't always there. Lindgren has done nothing dangerous in my eyes but he does shut the door firmly when needed and he doesn't shut off the gas. The race him and Holder had in the SWC Final was tremendous and a credit to both riders bravery. Pedersen is the same as Lindgren.

 

There are plenty of 'good mates' riding in the series so they will give each other room. Maybe those without a big team sponsor or those who ride without trying to be too friendly will ride harder than the rest ?

[Trees 2,814]

Nicki has never considered the consequences of his racing moves on the other riders and so you have to say he does it deliberately.

He's not so bad as he was these days, perhaps he's heeded some of the words the riders and fans throw at him ...

[billywamill 32]

Bottom line is Hancock is the World Champion - just move on.

 

It might keep some people awake at night but nothing is going to change the situation.

[Fromafar 10,389]

I reserved judgement until I'd had a chance to read this week's Spar, but I have to say that the reporting of the GP was absolutely ridiculous biased waffle. I'd be embarrassed to put that out as a journalist.What are they actually paying though? BSI's reported revenue has been declining over the past few years, and there's been no increase in the amounts coming out North America. The sponsorship may be coming via a European subsidiary, but normally sponsors and organisers alike to trumpet how much they're investing.

Your right about Star Report absolute waffle,must have been worried about their invitation to end of season booze up.Water of a ducks back springs to mind.

[JoeW 46]

Just read this week's Star. Seems all (apart from Peter White who does't say anything much about the meeting) is written by Paul Burbidge and it is all "Grin this and Grin that'". Seems he can't do anything wrong despite cheating and pulling out of a meeting because he apparently didn't feel right. And, amazingly, getting no punishment at all.No comment at all from Rising, Clark & Skeels? Hope next week's edition includes a more balanced view. Or do Monster Energy actually control world speedway and the press these days? Been buying the Star since 1961 and it is sad to see what it has become. Just renewed my subscription three weeks ago and I have serious doubts if I will bother next year. The rules in British Speedway over the last twenty years are bad enough without our only weekly magazine not giving a balanced view.

[PHILIPRISING 7,298]

YOU want a comment? Okay, Paul did a brilliant job. Spoke to all parties concerned as he should have done. He reported what went on and while you and others might think that was with a biased eye I certainly wouldn't agree. It was not Paul's job to be judge and jury or give what the end of the day would simply be a personal view, no different to mine or anyone on here. Those of you bitterly complaining about what he wrote are only doing so because you don't agree with what Hancock says and what action the FIM took. As I say, plenty do.

 

I have watched a rerun of Heat 9 several times and can understand why many on here, but certainly no all in the great big world out there, think Hancock pulled over. I get that impression too but it has not in my view been proven beyond all reasonable doubt even if the FIM Jury decided so. Had it gone to an appeal in a Court of Law the outcome may have been very different.

 

But, playing Devil's Advocate for a moment: why would he actually do that? Why so early in the meeting gift Holder a point when Chris was assured of a top eight place and still had two rides to compete to qualify for the semis and two more to actually win the final? So much could have happened to make that race irrelevant. Did the result of that race actually have any bearing on the outcome of the meeting? It was not as though it was a semi-final or final. So, I repeat, why do it?

 

Without what Hancock perceived as a gross miscarriage of justice he would not have taken the subsequent action that he did and this whole furore would not have taken the form that it has.

 

And comments like those made by Fromafar are as petty as they are ridiculous. End of season booze up? We should be so lucky.

[False dawn 2,305]

Well let's review this sensibly. We all know that the odds are on that Jason Dolye would have won the championship had he not been in the wrong place at the wrong time. Come back fighting, we want someone to challenge Emil for the championship next year. Yes I'm a big Greg fan. He always give opponents racing room even when it costs him points/meeting wins. Jumping in on others interviews, letting others through (?), walking out on world championship meetings, are all silly, even unacceptably. You've lost a big chunk of that admiration the general speedway public had for you winning a fourth WC at 46.

But forget any idea that the FIM is going to strip Greg of his title. You can debat the rules till you're blue in the face. The 2016 World Champion is Greg Hancock.

[JoeW 46]

Thanks for the response Philip. Hancock had enough points to win the World Championship. He did not need anymore so let Holder past - simple as that. He was rightly excluded from the race. So I don't understand the point you are trying to make. In years gone by most of the Star's reporters (and I am aware some had more than one name) had articles on finals. I just think Paul is biased towards Hancock (Grin) and that your magazine is also biased because of this. No reference at all to Nikki Pedersen's thoughts which I believe were before your printing deadline. Monster Energy have too much influence with sponsoring (or perhaps running) a competition and sponsoring three riders who appear therein. This should not happen.

[waiheke1 4,295]

YOU want a comment? Okay, Paul did a brilliant job. Spoke to all parties concerned as he should have done. He reported what went on and while you and others might think that was with a biased eye I certainly wouldn't agree. It was not Paul's job to be judge and jury or give what the end of the day would simply be a personal view, no different to mine or anyone on here. Those of you bitterly complaining about what he wrote are only doing so because you don't agree with what Hancock says and what action the FIM took. As I say, plenty do.

 

I have watched a rerun of Heat 9 several times and can understand why many on here, but certainly no all in the great big world out there, think Hancock pulled over. I get that impression too but it has not in my view been proven beyond all reasonable doubt even if the FIM Jury decided so. Had it gone to an appeal in a Court of Law the outcome may have been very different.

 

But, playing Devil's Advocate for a moment: why would he actually do that? Why so early in the meeting gift Holder a point when Chris was assured of a top eight place and still had two rides to compete to qualify for the semis and two more to actually win the final? So much could have happened to make that race irrelevant. Did the result of that race actually have any bearing on the outcome of the meeting? It was not as though it was a semi-final or final. So, I repeat, why do it?

 

Without what Hancock perceived as a gross miscarriage of justice he would not have taken the subsequent action that he did and this whole furore would not have taken the form that it has.

 

And comments like those made by Fromafar are as petty as they are ridiculous. End of season booze up? We should be so lucky.

No comment at all on the key issue, which is the withdrawal from the meeting which would seem to make Hancock inelegible for the world chsmpionship?

 

And seriously questioning why do it? surely that was blatantly obvious, to give a sponsored mate an extra point in his quest for a medal. surely irrelevant what stage of the meeting it was, a point is a point. It was about the Championship not the meeting itself.

And no mention that Greg's explanation didn't match either the fim inspection of his bike or his behaviour as soon as passed by Holder?

Edited October 29, 2016 by waihekeaces1