Lioness

Same one Gazc Actually Rye House outgated us most of the afternoon, Theo was probably the only one who made a gate that the referee let go - Tero's in the heat 14 re run was bizarrely called back. I love watching Rusty destroy the opposition just when they think they have made the gate - fair play to Kennett though he managed to counter it in heat 11 A fair summary. Gutted for Tero in heat 14, the initial running he was so far ahead, then he gets - wrongly - accused of a flier in the re run and the finally Garrity gets a wee flier and its allowed lol. In fairness though it perhaps balanced out heat 8 where I felt Compton was rather unlucky to be excluded DJEuan I wasnt at that meeting either! the numbers were close, there were good individual performances but lets be realistic was it a good speedway meeting with lots of passing and close racing? No way. I wont fault most of the riders for effort but I'd say as a close speedway spectacle that must be one of the least competitive meetings at Ashfield this season

Im in the same boat Shadders but it doesnt mean I cant have the opinion that the way the information was kept from the fans until it 'leaked' out from Edinburgh is unacceptable - as was a post made elsewhere by someone connected to the club attacking the fans for having that opinion (in my opinion)

The only problem is that its getting a bit crowded on here.....might need a naughty platform

that'll be you joining me on the naughty step for daring to have that opinion as well Paul!

I was under the impression that neither Theo or Rusty could take a ride for Wolbert cos of the new averages - whoops. Can't see it making much difference though. If only I wasnt so damn stiff and sore after 3 games in 2 days I'd be sorely tempted to go curling tomorrow again instead

Ironic that it should be fellow strugglers Rye House who can benefit. really they should have no problem as even when on form Theo and Rusty can only take a maximum of 5 rides, Kennett Boxall Garrity and even Greenwood (although he did not score well that day he was up against Thomsen and Lykke) have all looked comfortable round Ashfield. not Rye House's fault and I am sure they will be keen to take full advantage. I have said in the past I missed seeing CL (as it was then) racing north of the border but I didnt expect to see it this way

See you on the A9

courtesy of the hard work of the folks at http://speedwayupdates.proboards.com/ Newcastle Diamonds = 59 1. Danny King - 3 , 3 , 2 , 3 , 2' = 13+1 2. R/R for Lewis Rose - (SN - 1 , CM - 2' ,LK - 3,NR = 6) 3. Stuart Robson - 3 , 1 , 2' , 2 = 8+1 4. Lewis Kerr - 2' , 3 , 3 , 3 , 3 = 14+1 PAID MAXIMUM 5. Ludvig Lindgren - 3 , 3 , 2 , 2' , 3 = 13+1 6. Simon Nielsen - 1 , 1 , F/X = 2 (Withdrawn) 7. Chris Mills - 3 , 2' , 2' , 2' , 0 , 0 , 0 = 9+3 Glasgow Tigers = 33 1. Viktor Palovaara - 0 , 0 , 3 , 1 = 4 2. Theo Pijper - 2 , 2 , 0 , 2^ , 1 = 7 3. Kevin Wolbert - 1 , 4^ , 3 , 3 , 0 = 11 4. Theo Aarnio - 0 , 1' , 1 , 2 = 4+1 5. Rusty Harrison - 0 , 1 , 0 , 0 = 1 6. Kasper Lykke - 0 , 0 , 1 , 1 = 2 7. Derek Sneddon (Guest) - 2 , 1 , 1 , 1' = 5+1 Read more: http://speedwayupdates.proboards.com/thread/13802/newcastle-glasgow-pl-mon-30pm?page=1#ixzz3Bc1QV9on

Come on in, pull up a chair and help yourself to a beer....there are quite a few of us here already ;-)

Just had to quote that cos it was only a couple of weeks ago when I was waxing lyrical about Rusty this season and how awesome he has looked at home blasting round the boards that you were disagreeing with me What? A female remember and cast up something said weeks ago? never! I just dont think I've ever had the chance before to say 'told ya so' to you

In the UK absolutely nothing Jacques, it is fine. IN America it contains one of the banned ones but I couldnt tell you offhand what it is as I cant remember - maybe I need some myself lol. A lot of diruretics also include things in very small quantities that would be 'banned' but the quantity is not the issue, its the fact the substance is there. I know I am not putting myself across very well here, cant quite put into words what I mean - I am not saying he isnt guilty, just that they need to know where it came from before becoming judge jury and executioner

Sorry screm but you are wrong. Im not saying it is the case here but it IS possible he could have taken it innocently and they have to make sure that its not been a genuine mistake. Looking for a simpler example, do you suffer from hayfever? Hayfever sufferers often take some form of antihystamine that can be bought over the counter. What a lot of people probably dont realise is some brands include a compound that includes a 'banned' substance under FIM rules whilst other brands do not. If they have checked that its okay to take antihystamine in general and been told yes is it reasonable to know that there are a couple of brands out there that the 'yes' does not apply to? IF Dudek has knowingly taken a banned substance then yes, throw the book and anything else you want. But until they identify exactly what he took it in then its wrong to label him

the problem is that it IS possible to have products within things that are not readily identified and yes there can be 'innocent' ingenstion. As Alain Baxter found out - Vicks in America has different ingredients from Vicks in the UK and that was how he was caught out. They decided ignorance was not an excuse and he lost his Olympic medal (something I always felt was unfair tbh as I felt he had a legitimate case) Methylhexanamine as Ive already said is in a lot of dietary supplements. If it is listed as a banned substance it is easy to look at the ingredients and say 'yip, theres that nasty methylhexanamine, I wont take it. However what would you think if you saw geranium extract? Sounds innocent enough, I bet most would think that must be a natural product and ok. They'd be wrong as geranium extract and methylhexanamine are the same thing. I've had to learn a lot of these things and it is not as easy as you think to pick out things to avoid. A lot will depend on identifying what the methylhexanamine was in.

Firstly I am not 'the Moderator' I am an individual in my own right Secondly YOU brought me into your argument, not vice versa Thirdly you have just proved a lot of people's points by not only choosing to bring me into an argument that was nothing to do with me but also then have a go at me for pointing that out! Fourthly I belong to no 'cliques', come on you should know now that us females are well capable of having a mind of their own All my own work ps am I right in thinking this topic used to be about Darcy Ward? lol

perhaps its because I try not to be aggressive when people point out I am wrong or disagree with me? Or that I appreciate it when they tell me the correct information? Not quite sure why I suddenly am being dragged into your disagreement as an example nor do I particularly appreciate it but I'll stick to my own discussion thanks

I am indeed guys - thanks for putting me right on that one. Dopey here got muddled lol The risks of methylhexanamine have been well documented by sports bodies for a few years now so anyone caught found foul of it now really has no excuse so ignore my misinformed post!

The Dudek case is from before my time but that is a substance in those days it was probably very easy to take without knowing as it used to be in many nasal decongestants, I think even the popular ones like Vicks had it at one time but probably the 80's and 90's. Its partly diuretic (that'll make you 'go' quicker! lol) and in a lot of faddy dietry supplements although medical opinion suggests it could damage kidneys and liver and is a definite NO NO for people with irregular heartbeat (AF). Here endeth the preaching for the day

I'd rather f..k the sport that someone elses life any day of the week so if thats how you see it and those are the two options I will happily plead guilty to being a 'numpty'. Ward has crucified himself with the help of those who should be advising him with his behaviour and subsequent lack of remorse and understanding.

some people seem to think though that unless you are instantly Greg Hancock/Nicki Pedersen/Chris Holder you are a failure Blobby.

You beat me to that Tsunami. My recollection of recent Shawfield is that what would have been the track houses some pretty substantial foundings and supports for pylons and lighting stanchions

You are calling him pony but havent seen him..... So we ALL know that he is not a 7 point rider, we all knew that before he came over, we all knew he wasnt a no 1, most of us have the brain function to realise that he is a young lad starting out. Like many before him he has been brought over to get an average with a long term view, its not his fault incompetance in Glasgows team building management left him at no 1 on 7 points assessed. SO after a couple of meetings you decide to label him 'pony' yet you dont even know for example is he off the pace? does he have a good riding style? does he look as if he has raw talent? Want to tell me what Josh Grajczoneks first 3 scores were even riding further down the order? Or any of a few dozen other riders in the last few years who have come across on an assessed average. Come to that Aaron Fox for Edinburgh this season? You are unrealistic and for a comment to have any real bearing it has to be based on substantiated fact and frankly it seems to come off the back of a bandwagon.

My understanding is the 'customer' always has the final say and that the webmaster has to abide by what he is told to put on for an official site

All I am saying is that its normal that the official line is what a websmaster on an official site has to put on - perhaps you should be looking to who told him to put it on for the bias

in fairness doing an official website usually means you are only allowed to put on what you are officially told to. Basically almost a glorified typist with IT skills really. SO its not really fair to blame an official webmaster for whats on site - blame who tells him/her to put it there

and you have seen him how often?