Berwick v Glasgow , BSN thingy , 6/4/24 @7pm

[Lioness 1,455]

11 hours ago, Nickinho said:

You do realise that he lives in Scotland and can be sent to prison for seven years just for upsetting you 

Who cares! Chill. You're making this forum way too serious and unenjoyable.

There’s a nice wee ignore button you can use. 

[szkocjasid 3,061]

3 hours ago, iainb said:

Is that right? I've had a look through the rules... but it's a heavy read!

Couldn't see anything, that's not to say it's not there. The only thing I could see was that the excluded riders rides can be taken by a reserve or TS 08.2.2 z

I've not seen it in the rules, just read a team manager commenting on it. Unless I'm mistaken & confusing it with another rule change?

[Lioness 1,455]

31 minutes ago, StevePark said:

You are correct. I got a little confused.

BUT..... "Benzoylecgonine can be found in medical products as a topical muscle relaxer, anesthetic or to relieve muscle pain."

Taken from https://drugs.ncats.io/drug/5353I8I6YS

Topical medications just affect the area they are applied to though and don’t go beyond the skin layer (unless one of a very few used in extreme excess and even then it is very unlikely) That would take a transdermal product which would be on prescription.

It is a very complex area. In individual cases and medications even pharmacists would reach for the reference books That is why it is best to wait and see what the lab says and take it from there

[speedwaysliders 176]

The bottom line is,the tests at the start of the meeting are great and im sure everyone welcomes randam testing,there a few posters on here that get what im trying to say.PRE MATCH testing is quite new,and we are going to have the same problems again when the next rider fails a test.All im trying to explain and maybe not too well,is that this is a new practice,and sooner or later its going to happen again.100% punish the rider,BUT NOT THE FANS.I havnt got the answer but the people who are carrrying out the tests,must have thought this through and come up with a solution surely.

ie GREAT TESTING

     RIDER OR RIDERS FOUND GUILTY AND BANNED TO RIDE ON THE NIGHT

PLAN B PUT INTO OPERATION FOR THE TEAM WITH BANNED RIDER OR RIDERS SO THE MEETING CAN TAKE PLACE WITH 4 RIDER RACES.THAT PLAN B AT THE MOMENT IS ...........................?!!!!!!!

[Cast1rn 464]

Just did a wee bit of maths, to test the entire team every meeting it would cost £78.40, in the super grand scheme of things that isn't a lot.

To lab test a sample costs £120 (off Googley search £60 if done on mass) 

So simply charge every rider £5.60 a meeting to ensure a 100% clean sport.

If you get a "non negative" result the rider forks out the £120/£60 to prove their clean or not.

Don't ban the rider on the night but upon return of the lab test. Teams aren't affected, fans get a proper meeting.

 

[Technik 491]

I understand the frustration about the testing procedure but what if the rider be allowed to participate in the meeting after providing a non-negative result & then is involved in a track crash with the other rider receiving injuries that mean he must miss a few events. How then would the insurers look at our procedure if we knowingly allow a test failure to race in the event. how would the 13 other riders feel about taking to the track with a possible drug user. i understand that as a paying spectator you expect the perfect event each time but what of the others involved within the sport that work hard to produce the product you come to watch. The rules may not be perfect but if we are call bound by the same rules then it must work.

[secsy1 215]

4 hours ago, Cast1rn said:

Just did a wee bit of maths, to test the entire team every meeting it would cost £78.40, in the super grand scheme of things that isn't a lot.

To lab test a sample costs £120 (off Googley search £60 if done on mass) 

So simply charge every rider £5.60 a meeting to ensure a 100% clean sport.

If you get a "non negative" result the rider forks out the £120/£60 to prove their clean or not.

Don't ban the rider on the night but upon return of the lab test. Teams aren't affected, fans get a proper meeting.

 

 

1 hour ago, Technik said:

I understand the frustration about the testing procedure but what if the rider be allowed to participate in the meeting after providing a non-negative result & then is involved in a track crash with the other rider receiving injuries that mean he must miss a few events. How then would the insurers look at our procedure if we knowingly allow a test failure to race in the event. how would the 13 other riders feel about taking to the track with a possible drug user. i understand that as a paying spectator you expect the perfect event each time but what of the others involved within the sport that work hard to produce the product you come to watch. The rules may not be perfect but if we are call bound by the same rules then it must work.

A superb answer to silly question, it just shows how divided and how silly some people are.

Do not think anyone has answered a question on how to ensure 4 riders in each race after imposing a ban.

Well the offending team should be punished due to one of their riders failing the drug test.

They are employing each rider and are accountable for everyone of them and should randomly do drug testing of the team to ensure compliance.

Rider contracts should include details of random drug testing and a caveat that if they are banned then all testing and appeals are at the riders expense.

 

Plan B 

If any test from the randomly chosen riders is non negative then the offending team has to comply with the new regulations.

1. A heat leader can replace any drug test related banned rider once during the course of the meeting, going off 30 metre distance behind the tapes.

2. A second string rider can replace any drug test related banned rider once during the course of the meeting, going off 20 metre distance behind the tapes.

3. A reserve rider can replace any drug test related banned rider twice during the course of the meeting, going off 10 metre distance behind the tapes.

Maybe this is not the best answer but at least a start.

 

[mikebv 10,320]

1 hour ago, Technik said:

I understand the frustration about the testing procedure but what if the rider be allowed to participate in the meeting after providing a non-negative result & then is involved in a track crash with the other rider receiving injuries that mean he must miss a few events. How then would the insurers look at our procedure if we knowingly allow a test failure to race in the event. how would the 13 other riders feel about taking to the track with a possible drug user. i understand that as a paying spectator you expect the perfect event each time but what of the others involved within the sport that work hard to produce the product you come to watch. The rules may not be perfect but if we are call bound by the same rules then it must work.

100%...

Litigation would be enormous if anything happened which COULD be attributed to someone who has just not passed a drugs or alcohol test..

The ref and the clubs complicit in letting him ride, could face prosecution, as could the governing body...

Even the rider himself could sue if he got injured as "you let me ride"...

You don't pass, you don't ride...

Edited April 8 by mikebv

[foreverblue 6,098]

6 minutes ago, mikebv said:

100%...

Litigation would be enormous if anything happened which COULD be attributed to someone who has just not passed a drugs or alcohol test..

The ref and the clubs complicit in letting him ride, could face prosecution, as could the governing body...

Even the rider himself could sue if he got injured as "you let me ride"...

You don't pass, you don't ride...

Agree there completely, crazy to let a rider compete not having passed the test.  I know its not great for fans to go to a meeting expecting teams as advertised only to find out you are a rider down but I cant see any other acceptable way.

[Gazc 7,109]

18 pages and probably around 2 pages is actually about the meeting.

I know it is a huge debating point but surely it’s been done to death now , let’s see what happens now  and get the facts.

I notice Lees wife has posted on FB about what he had taken.

[Fromafar 10,390]

4 minutes ago, Gazc said:

18 pages and probably around 2 pages is actually about the meeting.

I know it is a huge debating point but surely it’s been done to death now , let’s see what happens now  and get the facts.

I notice Lees wife has posted on FB about what he had taken.

Have to agree,it happened ,the rules of the sport were applied.Glasgow just awaiting outcome.

ps

very enjoyable meeting.

Edited April 8 by Fromafar

[iainb 5,054]

2 hours ago, secsy1 said:

Do not think anyone has answered a question on how to ensure 4 riders in each race after imposing a ban.

I'm not sure if it does now, but didn't R/R allow 1 rider above the rider it's replacing to take a ride? For a reserve, It's not rocket science, you just allow the next highest rider to take a ride, if that is a reserve in heat 2 and obviously the other rider is already involved, use the next highest, maybe at the expense of being able to use a TS in the riders ride later in the meeting. It is entirely possible to write rules to cover such an eventuality. There seems to be a rather large hole in the rules as it currently stands.

As for Plan B, why are you continuing to punish the team with all the handicap starts?

Edited April 8 by iainb

[Cast1rn 464]

2 hours ago, secsy1 said:

 

A superb answer to silly question, it just shows how divided and how silly some people are.

 

It was written at 3 o'clock in the morning and intended to open up debate. 

The "Silly People" would be the ones that have the current procedure in force.

Why are we waiting until 1 HR before the potential dangerous rider is at the tapes to test them?

Why are we using a testing procedure that can only supply us a "non negative" which could be false instead of proving 100% wether the rider is safe or not.

Why are we only testing 28% of the riders at a meeting?

 

Edited April 8 by Cast1rn

[lisa-colette 6,039]

1 hour ago, Gazc said:

18 pages and probably around 2 pages is actually about the meeting.

I know it is a huge debating point but surely it’s been done to death now , let’s see what happens now  and get the facts.

I notice Lees wife has posted on FB about what he had taken.

I'm assuming that means it was some kind of medicine. 

[Gazc 7,109]

1 minute ago, lisa-colette said:

I'm assuming that means it was some kind of medicine. 

Medication for an abscess in his mouth apparently,