Alan_Jones

For those that insist on comparing this to a drink/driving case or other domestic legal situation, here's a quote from the Preface to the FIM Anti-Doping Rules, nee WADA Code, with my emphasis; "Anti-Doping Rules, like Competition rules, are sport rules governing the conditions under which sport is played. Riders and other Persons accept these rules as a condition of participation and shall be bound by them. These sport-specific rules and procedures, aimed at enforcing anti-doping principles in a global and harmonized manner, are distinct in nature and, therefore, not intended to be subject to or limited by any national requirements and legal standards applicable to criminal proceedings or employment matters. When reviewing the facts and the law of a given case, all courts, arbitral tribunals and other adjudicating bodies should be aware of and respect the distinct nature of the anti-doping rules in the Code and the fact that these rules represent the consensus of a broad spectrum of stakeholders around the world with an interest in fair sport." For those that say he was only a little bit over the limit and thus should be treated more leniently, here's another quote from the same source that appears a couple of times with, again, my emphasis; "It is each Rider’s personal duty to ensure that no Prohibited Substance enters his or her body. Accordingly, it is not necessary that intent, fault, negligence or knowing Use on the Rider’s part be demonstrated in order to establish an anti-doping rule violation for Use of a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method."

14th September.

Cheap.

Meanwhile, back at the match, Mason Campton is the guest for Garrity. Still waiting for the swelling on Boxall's ankle to go down to allow an x-ray.

http://www.goldentyre.com/en/products/speedway/

Admirable sentiment, but consider the fact that we don't even have the same rules across the 3 domestic leagues...

Dudek in domestic competition dealt with by the GKSZ, Ward by the FIM.

...so far...

So the official word is, Hawkins is in for Bowen who has injured elbows from the Plymouth meeting, R/R for Mellgren, Steve Boxall with a suspected broken ankle from the Ipswich match & Garrity riding for Coventry. Hmm....

It's what the book's there for.

Yes, it's 7 riders against 12, 13, or 14.

Riders were saying it was patchy and unpredictable. Luke was very annoyed at his off.

Thanks for that info which doesn't appear anywhere on the FIM site either.

Funny you should say that, there's a bit of a gap next to Alfredo Garcia. On second thoughts, on a spike outside the Tower of London would revive an old tradition.

I'm annoyed that I can't make it. Should be a decent match....the second one that is...

Not sure. He didn't sound that enthusiastic and he was certainly as unhappy as the others with the track when they came round for the SRBF collection after heat 10.

How did you make that leap? Definitely no chips here, and no problem with other people's opinions as long as I'm allowed to give mine. I think it's probably the first time I've ever commented on a "BSI situation" because I'm not greatly bothered about the GP's. I am interested in rules & regulations and the strict adherence to them though. I think a dig at BSI was in order though in view of their mishandling of the cancellation & relocation this weekend. Sorry if you wanted an argument though, because I'm just joining in a discussion. It isn't a case going to court though, it's a motor sport rule infringement with procedures & remedies enshrined in the regulations. It is a fact that Ward was disqualified & fined for failing a random breath test and it's quite proper for him to be suspended pending the full CMI hearing if the FIM see fit. It was to clarify the latter situation that I went to the SGP site and was surprised that there wasn't even a reason given for the DQ. I guess I'm spoilt by the open way that this sort of thing is dealt with in other motor sports, especially F1, where there's a constant update of information on incidents being investigated by the stewards being relayed to viewers. I didn't hear any mention of the disqualification on the world feed either, just that Puodzuks was replacing Ward, although they may have mentioned it while EuroSport were back in the studio. FWIW, the FIM site doesn't have any more information either. We know the dirty linen has gone through the pre-wash but it would be nice to know what cycle we're using so that we can be ready to hang Ward out to dry at the appropriate time.

You've already got him at Coventry, that's the problem at Rye House.

Not saying anything about it makes it look as though they're doing random disqualifications as well as random breath tests. Just as long as people think everything is wonderful on Planet BSI.

Whereas, on the SGP website the only mention of the former was "17 Darcy Ward DQ" with no explanation anywhere.

I think you'll find it's just that the '24' hasn't been updated from last year to this year's 28. It'll be the top 2/6 at the cut off date.

The correct article 10.1 does give the same 2 year ban. The problem is that the FIM anti-doping regs are just a rehash of the WADA Code, as indicated by the information that alcohol is prohibited in Air Sports (FAI), Archery (WA), Automobile (FIA), Karate (WKF), Motorcycling (FIM) & Powerboating (UIM). They mainly deal with drugs, and alcohol only seems to be mentioned in the banned substance listing appendix and 10.4 does appear to be a get out of jail card in regard to alcohol.

The FIM have to deal with the matter "expeditiously" and have the right to impose a "provisional suspension" until then. Unfortunately, the Articles referenced as detailing the suspension procedure don't exist in the regs!

...does mean he broke the rules. Game set and match FIM!

It is, because one is giving made up points for doing nothing while the other gives a bit more freedom to use your own resources in an otherwise restricted format. The main thing wrong with the old rule, in view of the greater swing it could effect on a meeting, is that a 6 point margin was far too small and that was recognised later in its use. I'd be happy to see it used once or twice a meeting by both sides, irrespective of score, as an addition to the current use of 7 ride ringers at reserve, another rule that I like. What is wrong is the use of any 'tactical' rule by only one side when there is now a perfectly adequate way of awarding extra match points for good away performances.