lucifer sam 3,953 Posted October 24, 2016 I think a few people on here have demonstrated the inability to read a rulebook properly. This is what it says: “Ineligible for the FIM Speedway Grand Prix World Championship for the remainder of the season". This is what it does NOT say: “Excluded from the FIM Speedway Grand Prix World Championship". So Greg is “ineligible” for “the remainder of the season”. But guess what? They aren’t any more rounds. I can see no mention within that rule where it states he will be excluded from the series or that points already scored will be deducted. There’s obviously a world apart from the word "ineligible" (which is there) and "excluded" (which isn't and indeed any variant such is “disqualified” isn’t there either). I’m not defending Greg for a moment, because I don’t believe he was right to withdraw from Saturday’s meeting, but there’s no way he can be excluded from this year’s World Championship according to that rule. Whether the FIM decide to extend any future “ineligibility” into next season is a different matter… All the best Rob 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BWitcher 12,453 Posted October 24, 2016 Do try and learn the English language before making such nonsense posts. When you've learnt what ineligible actually means, come back. It doesn't have to mention points.. they are completely irrelevant.. why? Because HE IS INELIGIBLE. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Joe Beevers 207 Posted October 25, 2016 I think a few people on here have demonstrated the inability to read a rulebook properly. This is what it says: “Ineligible for the FIM Speedway Grand Prix World Championship for the remainder of the season". This is what it does NOT say: “Excluded from the FIM Speedway Grand Prix World Championship". So Greg is “ineligible” for “the remainder of the season”. But guess what? They aren’t any more rounds. I can see no mention within that rule where it states he will be excluded from the series or that points already scored will be deducted. There’s obviously a world apart from the word "ineligible" (which is there) and "excluded" (which isn't and indeed any variant such is “disqualified” isn’t there either). I’m not defending Greg for a moment, because I don’t believe he was right to withdraw from Saturday’s meeting, but there’s no way he can be excluded from this year’s World Championship according to that rule. Whether the FIM decide to extend any future “ineligibility” into next season is a different matter… All the best Rob I am suprised you even responded to be honest as this is more of a wind up than Beadles About. One rose tinted Wolves fan who is desperate for Tai to win against a host of common sense posters. I would love to see Tai win too BWitcher but this really is taking the biscuit now and you have had the bite to be fair. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lucifer sam 3,953 Posted October 25, 2016 (edited) Do try and learn the English language before making such nonsense posts. When you've learnt what ineligible actually means, come back. It doesn't have to mention points.. they are completely irrelevant.. why? Because HE IS INELIGIBLE. No, you need to learn English and also learn that posting repetitively on the same subject doesn't make you right. The key word is remainder. The definition of remainder is: "A part that is still to come." So Greg is ineligible only for the part of the FIM Speedway Grand Prix World Championship this season still to come - not for the whole of it. For example, had this not been the final Grand Prix and there had been a further two rounds, he would have been stuck on his 139 points. At no point, does it mention key words such as "exclusion" or "disqualification" from the series. And neither does it mention taking off points retroactively. This is my second and final post on the matter. If you choose to post 100 times on it, that's your choice, but it still makes you wrong, simply because you are not reading the full sentence, just the part of it you wish to be true. All the best Rob Edited October 25, 2016 by lucifer sam 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JoeW 46 Posted October 25, 2016 No, you need to learn English and also learn that posting repetitively on the same subject doesn't make you right. The key word is remainder. The definition of remainder is: "A part that is still to come." So Greg is ineligible only for the part of the FIM Speedway Grand Prix World Championship this season still to come - not for the whole of it. For example, had this not been the final Grand Prix and there had been a further two rounds, he would have been stuck on his 139 points. At no point, does it mention key words such as "exclusion" or "disqualification" from the series. And neither does it mention taking off points retroactively. This is my second and final post on the matter. If you choose to post 100 times on it, that's your choice, but it still makes you wrong, simply because you are not reading the full sentence, just the part of it you wish to be true. All the best Rob You cannot look at the sentence in isolation. The key word is the first word "Furthermore" which means that the previous sentence also is relevant. This states "A rider who has entered the FIM Speedway Grand Prix World Championship and refuses or is unable to take part is deemed to be suspended competing internationally for a period of a day before and up to 3 days after the Grand Prix meetings concerned." The sentence after the one you quote says "A rider who has started ....must participate therein unless prevented from doing so by injury ..." Hancock pulled out of the meeting and was not injured. In my opinion he should be deemed as suspended from 21 to 25 October, his points gained in Melbourne be deducted and he made himself ineligible for the world championship. Why does the regulations include the last sentence if this is not to be the case? He surely has to be punished (although FIM obviously want to ignore their regulations for some "monstrous" reason) for walking out on the meeting. With regard to your argument re "remainder of the season" surely this is included so that he can compete next season ie not ineligible from the championship for ever? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BWitcher 12,453 Posted October 25, 2016 No, you need to learn English and also learn that posting repetitively on the same subject doesn't make you right. The key word is remainder. The definition of remainder is: "A part that is still to come." So Greg is ineligible only for the part of the FIM Speedway Grand Prix World Championship this season still to come - not for the whole of it. For example, had this not been the final Grand Prix and there had been a further two rounds, he would have been stuck on his 139 points. At no point, does it mention key words such as "exclusion" or "disqualification" from the series. And neither does it mention taking off points retroactively. This is my second and final post on the matter. If you choose to post 100 times on it, that's your choice, but it still makes you wrong, simply because you are not reading the full sentence, just the part of it you wish to be true. All the best Rob It can be your second and final post on the matter, it makes no difference. He is INELIGIBLE for the remainder of the season for the FIM Speedway Grand Prix World Championship. What happened at the end of the Grand Prix? Ah yes, they award the World Championship to the winner of the FIM Speedway Grand Prix World Championship, something Hancock is now INELIGIBLE for. It really isn't rocket science unless you are either a Hancock lackey or just arguing for the sake of it. Whether or not that was the intention of the rule is another matter, but that is what the rule says. I am suprised you even responded to be honest as this is more of a wind up than Beadles About. One rose tinted Wolves fan who is desperate for Tai to win against a host of common sense posters. I would love to see Tai win too BWitcher but this really is taking the biscuit now and you have had the bite to be fair. Don't blame me, I didn't write the rule. It's been reported in the Danish media the rule is very clear. Nicki Pedersen has stated the rule is clear and although he doesn't feel Hancock should be stripped of the title, that rules should be followed. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skidder1 7,637 Posted October 25, 2016 I think GH actually followed the rule to the letter. He made himself 'ineligible for the remainder of the series' (ie the rest of the final meeting of the series) and at the end was rightly crowned World Champion as he was not 'ineligible' for all the preceding rounds of the Championship during which he accrued more points than any other rider!! 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shale Searcher 1,264 Posted October 25, 2016 In the leagues a rider only needs to look over his shoulder and Pearson ejaculates about team riding. Is this not the same scenario? In the Golden Era of Speedway, looking behind you was an excludable offence!!! You simply weren't allowed to look back..... End Of!!!!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Joe Beevers 207 Posted October 25, 2016 I think GH actually followed the rule to the letter. He made himself 'ineligible for the remainder of the series' (ie the rest of the final meeting of the series) and at the end was rightly crowned World Champion as he was not 'ineligible' for all the preceding rounds of the Championship during which he accrued more points than any other rider!! Basically this post puts this topic to bed. Plus also even if Gregory's points were deducted from the meeting due to whatever, he would still be champion. I think even it went to a kangaroo court it would be laughed out of court and also.....who is going to appeal because knowing Tai Woffinden, he won't appeal against his friend and he would want to win the title fair and square knowing his honest ethics. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BWitcher 12,453 Posted October 25, 2016 Basically this post puts this topic to bed. Plus also even if Gregory's points were deducted from the meeting due to whatever, he would still be champion. I think even it went to a kangaroo court it would be laughed out of court and also.....who is going to appeal because knowing Tai Woffinden, he won't appeal against his friend and he would want to win the title fair and square knowing his honest ethics. No it doesn't. It's another post that has added something that isn't there. It does not mention any rounds or pts, these are things people are creating to suit their point. It is very clear. He is ineligible for the FIM Grand Prix World Speedway Championship. So tell me, how can you win something you are ineligible for? I'll save your time... you can't. The GP season ends when the World Championship trophy is presented. Hancock is still ineligible for that championship as per the rules, stupid as they may be. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skidder1 7,637 Posted October 25, 2016 So as others have pointed out you still choose to not recognise the word 'remainder'?! Its a shame really as your last 5 words in your post above pretty much sum you up on this thread!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BWitcher 12,453 Posted October 25, 2016 So as others have pointed out you still choose to not recognise the word 'remainder'?! Its a shame really as your last 5 words in your post above pretty much sum you up on this thread!! Of course I am recognising the word remainder.. He is INELIGBLE for the REMAINDER of the season. Quite simple. So when you come to award the winner of the FIM Grand Prix World Speedway Championship, Hancock doesn't qualify.. as he is ineligible for the REMAINDER of the season. It's not even complicated. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bonzo 59 Posted October 25, 2016 As another poster discovered.. Regulation 077.3.3 of FIM Grand Prix World Championship states - "A rider who has entered the FIM Speedway Grand Prix World Championship and refuses or is unable to take part, is deemed to be suspended competing internationally for a period of 1 day before and up to 3 days after the Grand Prix meetings concerned. Furthermore, he shall be considered as ineligible for the FIM Speedway Grand Prix World Championship for the remainder of the season. A rider who has started in the FIM Speedway Grand Prix World Championship must participate therein unless prevented from doing so by injury or other force majeure. A suitably qualified medical practitioner must certify injury or illness in writing to that effect." It is crystal clear. Once Hancock withdrew from the GP he was rendered INELIGIBLE for the FIM Speedway Grand Prix World Championship. It does not state any single event. Simply he is ineligible for that event. As such he cannot win it. Holder should get a bronze after all! Mr BWitcher is absolutely correct here I'm afraid. Ineligible means he is no longer considered a part of the competition as soon as he breaks the rule. The reason the wording states 'remainder of the season' is for a scenario where, for example, a rider says 'I'm not competing in x round because I feel the referee is incompetent, but I'll do the rest'. The regulation wording prevents that. BWitcher is correct that 'ineligible for the FIM Speedway Grand Prix World Championship' means exactly that. Legally, if the FIM did decide to take the title from him, Greg could use the 'force majeure' part of the regulation, which for those unfamiliar with the term basically means exceptional circumstances, because he has been accused of cheating in a roundabout way and even though he allowed his machine to be examined by the race director, the jury decided he was guilty without even checking the bike, which could be a big error on their part. Greg could argue he has a right of appeal against such an accusation and since they couldn't be arsed to check the facts, he is in a good position. I personally wouldn't want a title decided this way and if I was Tai I wouldn't want to accept the trophy, it would feel very hollow. Even though technically Greg should be ruled out, I don't think it will happen because like I said, he has a good argument for exceptional circumstances and someone in the jury would have to answer questions as to why a proper investigation wasn't made. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ghostwalker 1,859 Posted October 25, 2016 IMO force majeure is not applicable here. Greg caused this from the beginning by not racing. No jury would agree with Greg if he claimed force majeure. GH should have predicted that his behaviour could lead to further consequences and thus it is not force majeure. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bonzo 59 Posted October 25, 2016 I think he could because as he has already, maybe smartly said, the incident left him furious and he didn't feel in a correct mental state to be racing. I think the FIM would be unwise to take the title from him because it could get messy. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
