SCB

Are you kidding? Two people having sex is not "vile and disgusting" it's 2014 now, not 1914, we've moved on, people have sex all the time without being in a relationship and having only met them hours earlier. Some people go out dogging and have sex with people they have literally just met. Two drunk people meting and having sex doesn't make 1 or the other vile or deplorable. Exactly. It seems it's ok to acuse someone or rape and risk having them thrown in prison for 3-10 years and then not allow them to ever work again. She DID accuse him of rape and he WAS found guilty but she has not said sorry. No, basically. If someone doesn't think they've been raped I don't see how it can be rape. What if you being female got to do with it? And why the use of man and woman? Surely person would suffice. Woman can commit sexual assault too and one men.

Thats not what is alleged to have happened at all. She never claimed to be out of it or anything like that. In fact alcohol tests the following day suggest that she didn't have enough alcohol in her system to have been that drunk at the time of the offence. She went to the police the day after to report that she has lost her handbag (later found in a takeaway she was in the night before) so the police interviewed the people she was with the night before, McDonald and Evans. At this point the police decided she had been raped based on what they themselves had said. If they'd said nothing then who knows?! Now if the girl in question didn't know she'd be raped and needed the police to tell her she hardly strikes me as someone who is going to be damaged for life by the experience. Now quite how the police come to that conclusion is not really know and we have to come to our own conclusions. What we seem to have here is a crusade against people going out on a Friday and Saturday night on the pull, not rape. Somehow, rape has now started to encompass doing just that, it's undermines what rape really is.

Pedant But you are correct! There you go then, Scunny announce him on a 3, the BSPA say no he should be a 7, they haggle and agree on a 5. Sorted. Still be a point too high, I see nothing from other results to suggest he'll get anything over 4.

Wheres my post from about 12pm last night gone?

You surely knew as soon as you saw I'd replied I'd not keep it simple But yeah, point is, as Judy Finnegan said and got slagged of for it, Ched Evans isn't the big nasty monster rapist you think of when you think, "rapist".

I'll answer. I always thought rape was grabbing someone and forcing them to have sex. I thought it meant physical violence. I think thats the stereotype, thats the person who I think we all agree should be locked away, once hes had his man parts removed with a rust knife. Rape can simply be having sex with someone who didn't give consent. It doesn't mean they wouldn't have given consent, just they didn't give it. Share a bed with a loved one and in the middle of the night you grab hold of a boob or a penis (hopefully not both!!) then thats sexual assault. Even if you have agreed before hand to do it, you were asleep and legally under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 75 (2) (d) you have broken the law. Where it gets a little difficult is it's only rape IF you reasonably believe they didn't consent. And this is where I think Ched Evans is being wronged. He says he didnt do anything wrong, now as the law states he has to believe he has done wrong, as soon as he says he doesn't think he did, he's not guilty. It's also impossible to EVER know what went on in that room unless you were one of the 3 people in there so how anyone can find someone guilty beyond reasonable doubt I don't know. Especially as the girl herself never complained to the police about being raped, the police told her she had been raped!

Thats the problem with know it alls on here. Makes things up. starman doesn't know the FIM jury personally, he doesn't knows what written all over their faces. If he did he wouldn't make such comments. Sour grapes. Totally out of touch fools.

That in itself sounds mad. But then they called it a "man on man heat". Brilliant. Luckily with so many KOC fixtures not taking place that season very few people got to see it happen and it can be quietly forgotten about.

There not many of the second type of people in blazeaways list on the BSF

Possibly. As for the KOC farce the season before last, I pretty much chose to pretend it never happened. In 10 years time nobody will believe we had a genuine tactical play called a "man on man heat" so it shouldn't be hard to pretend it never happened

If you're going to make moral stands, you have to accept people will question you. If people don't then it'll be assumed everyone agrees with her.

Troy not being re-signed in Poland is more down to him having had a crap season than any bad goings on in Poland. There are many far better examples to give. But still, if you think riding PL will make Craig a better rider than Troy Batchelor staying at the same club two years running, by all means think that. It's barmy logic that I doubt anyone else will agree with though.

Great. You're half way to your degree in online marketing and promotion. Or a degree in stating the bleeding obvious.

Go starman! You tell her! What about the "remorse" he showed when caught and he said, "next time I'll hydrate more in the morning". So not, "I'm never drinking the day before a meeting" but next time I'll try and cheat the system despite being drunk. The guy is a muppet. That said, making him wait until January and an as yet undecided date is really not fair. He should have a date by now and it should not be 4-5 months after the alleged offence.

TBH, McDonlads took her back to the hotel. So it could be assumed that by her going back to the hotel with him she give implied consent. While Evans turned up later, so there no proof of consent. But, the girl didnt got to the police about a rape, she went about a stolen/lost handbag. The police while speaking to Evans and McDonald about the handbag questioned if she had been raped and charged them with rape. Only then did the victim decide she had been raped. Regardless of his guilty/innocence, she should be allowed to play football. Unless a club has specific rules that says they don't employ these type if criminals and carry out CRB checks. I could go back to my job if I'd done it (or at least been found guilty of it), why shouldn't he?

I'm confused. It looks like someone has filmed a short documentary/interview and then someone has put music over it.

Ah yeah, beat plenty of heat leaders. But hadn't even met a heat leader at that point. More made up facts

Because the place is full of weirdos. Someone posted that Kasper Lykke had not had a single fall last season and had any other rider managed the same. So I asked, what kind of fall? No falls, no fell excluded or not knocked off by an opponent as I could answer for them if it was either of the first two. I then pointed out that Kasper Lykke had two "fell disqualified" this season then I listed the 10 or so riders who had not record a single 'F' or 'FD' this season and the place went mad, I was questioning someone, how dare I? It was an interesting stat and they thanked the OP for posting it and slammed me for pointing out it wasn't true. None of them cared about the real facts, they found the original incorrect one "interesting" and startiung demanding I be banned - so I quit after a massive bitch and flounced out.

You're kidding surely? £10 a point. So they were scoring 60 home and away so thats 120 points to be paid for from each home meeting. Thats £1,200. Each full paying adults makes the club £9 after VAT so thats only 133 adults. We're constantly told crowds everyone else would be envious of so 2,000 people, allow for some kids and concessins thats £12,000 a meeting. Where is the other £10,800 a meeting going? Rent, insurance.... Then what? Thats without taking into account any money earned from sponsorship and merchandise. Cradley is a license to print money the last few years.

The funny thing is, while I have always argued this, I prefer the old tac sub. Totally irrational but it seems fairer - it's not really but it seems it. It's also far more tactical, I could teach my 6 year old niece, "10 down so put the better of our two riders on a TR in the race" but would take a while to teach her the oddities of the tac sub, when to use 2, when to use 1. Which rider to put in, put a poorer second strings into heat 13 to get his ride out of the way but then put your top 2 in heat 14 in place of him and a reserve.... All sorts to think about.

im far from a fan of the Star but the number of pages for your money is actually pretty good. It's not for me as most of it is rehashs of clubs press releases I can read online but if I didnt have the time/inclination to look around for them the star wouldn't be bad value at all.

Don't see why not. Wouldn't be the first promoter to run two clubs. At one time Terry Russell had Swindon and Eastbourne in the EL for a start.

You can't stop being having an opinion! even if they ask a question, or post an incorrect statement as fact you CANNOT give you opinion or point out the statement is wrong - others may find the incorrect statement "interesting". Odd place.

Fair play. I'm amazed it's that high if I'm totally honest

I disagree. The new 3,2,1,0,1,2,3,4 point scoring system while not totally easy to understand has made 90% of heat 15s mean something and was a great change. Along with play-offs it's 1 of the best changes of the last 15 years.