|
HUNTING BAN
HUNTING BAN - NO WINNERS OR LOSERS
Well, the saga of my refereeing ban or deselection has at last come to an end, and we can now all look forward and talk about 2010 with more optimism. Why the ban was instigated in the first place with no consultation or hearing will probably always remain a mystery, as will the name of whoever made the decision regarding this action.
It is a coincidence that on Sunday we remembered all those who had sacrificed their lives so that we would remain a free country, with freedom of speech being one of the bonuses. We must, at all times, be allowed to voice our opinions, whether they agree or disagree with our governing bodies. A mature, fairly minded governing body would accept criticism of its representative qualities from it's very own members. It is a dictatorship that refuses to allow this to happen.
A fact that must be acknowledged in regards to this action taken by British Cycling is that there are no personal winners nor losers, just pure common sense has prevailed, and we, the Cycle Speedway membership have now had our rightful democracy restored. Whether I refereed again or not was not the criteria. It was the fact that we, the Cycle Speedway membership, had our rightful freedom of speech removed. Thankfully this has now been restored.
I would like to thank all those who supported me in my fight for the return of this freedom. It meant so much to me to realise that the majority of you felt the same as I did over the matter, and I shall be forever in your debt.
I would also like to thank our editor who so fairly aired the views of us all on his excellent spokesman-online. What would we all do without this outlet? I would also like to sincerely thank Mr Ian Drake for his intervention in the matter, for through his actions he has restored some of the faith that I had lost in British Cycling.
It will remain to be seen whether any resignations will now come from certain members of the British Cycling Cycle Speedway Commission, for they have certainly made a major mistake in thinking that we would take their bullish behaviour laying down.
Once again, many thanks for all your support.
Dave Hunting
HUNTING 'BAN' LIFTED - BUT MYSTERY DEEPENS - posted 7 November 2009
The 'ban' on Dave Hunting refereeing national events has been lifted.
In a letter to the veteran referee received earlier today, British Cycling's Chief Executive Ian Drake confirmed that national referee appointments were discussed at the Cycle Speedway Council meeting and, given the manner in which Hunting recently expressed his views about British Cycling, the Commission upheld their decision
"Your desire to be appointed to referee national events was communicated to the Commission and further discussions have taken place since the meeting on the subject. I can now confirm that you will be considered for refereeing appointments in 2010" wrote Drake.
Intriguingly the minutes of the meeting make no reference to the 'ban' - adding to speculation that cycling's top official has intervened to bring the matter to a close.
WORLD CLASS ENDORSEMENT - posted 13 October 2009
The referee that the Cycle Speedway Commission no longer want to referee its top events has been giving a ringing endorsement - by Australia's number one administrator. In an exclusive statement, Aussie cycle speedway legend Mick Harley told spokesman-online
"I beg to differ on your report that the refereeing career at the highest level for Dave Hunting is over as I will be recommending to the Australian Cycle Speedway Council to invite Dave to referee some of the 'Worlds' in 2013.
"I agree with my old mate Milton Anderson who passed away in 2006 that Dave has always been regarded as one of the world's best referees and we would have no problem using his talents here" added Harley.
CHIEF EXECUTIVE'S LETTER CLARIFIES HUNTING BAN
Ian Drake's letter to Dave Hunting explaining his ban from refereeing national events has put responsibility for the decision squarely in the lap of the Cycle Speedway Commission. British Cycling's Chief Executive clarified the position in a letter dated 29 September promising that "your letter and desire to be reappointed to referee national events is discussed at the next Cycle Speedway Commission meeting."
Whether this communication was conveyed to the Commission chairman Colin Docker or Administrator Brian Furness ahead of the meeting five days later remains unclear. What is clear is that with no immediate prospect of Hunting ever refereeing a national event again, it looks as if the career of arguably the sport's best ever referee is finally over.
British Cycling's Chief Executive Ian Drake
HUNTING BAN - WHAT OUR READERS SAY
"Those responsible for the decision to cut Dave loose from official engagements have clearly taken leave of their senses."
"It's everyone's right to express their thoughts openly and honestly and although I do not agree with Dave's opinions, I am concerned that this unhelpful action was been taken. It also concerns me that someone with such a flawed sense of fair play should in any way be in a position of authority."
"I was utterly disgusted with the treatment shown to Mr Hunting. While I do not agree with everything that Mr Hunting says, I am willing to listen to his voice of experience and form my own opinion. His suspension of referee duties, by certain members of the Commission, appears petty, vindictive and amatuerish."
"All this decision has served to do it demonstrate that, once again, they (the Cycle Speedway Commission) are out of touch with what constitutes good management."
"All they have done is cause embarrassment to British Cycling and also to Dave Hunting."
"It would appear that British Cycling have scored a monumental own goal with their treatment of Dave Hunting."
"Surely any sporting body must be able to accept criticism?"
"I agree with many of the others who point the finger of blame at the present Commission Members."
"Those of us involved in the sport seem to be under threat of censure unless we tow the party line."
"Let's hope those who make such rash decisions take time to reconsider."
"Stagnating Commission has lost its way."
"This case has gone on for too long now. This is clearly not in the best interests of the sport. So let's bring the case to a close, by reinstating Dave Hunting."
"To ignore Dave (which is what is actually happening rather than an outright ban) is not in the best interests of the sport."
"I'm appalled."
No contributions have been received supporting the Commission's decision to bar Hunting.
HUNTING BAN - FACT OR FICTION? - posted 7 October 2009
As the ban on Dave Hunting refereeing top matches moves into its third month, spokesman-online takes a tongue-in-cheek look at the decision-making process behind the controversial ban.
Bloody Hunting fellow! What's he playing at? Can't let him go round calling us despicable names like dictators and puppets. Bastard! Who does he think he is?
Just won't do. Not good form. Frightfully bad show. Needs his come uppance. Really gets up my nose.
So what to do chaps? Ban him. Yes, excellent idea.
Hold on. Doesn't he run a little club out East, Kesgrove something or other. Mmmmm - might affect our numbers if we do that, could cost us a few bob too.
Better not do that then - we may not get elected next time round. Oh that's right - forgot for a moment - we only elect oursleves. Frightfuly silly of me. Forgot we are an exclusive club. No worries on that score then. Do what we like. Answer to no-one. Bugger anyone else. Frightfully good show.
Tell you what chaps, lets stop him from refereeing. Never liked the way he let riders back in races when they twitched at the start. Warnings - be buggered. Stand and and take your medicine like a man, that's what I say. Not British you know. Exclude the bastards.
No - really can't having him calling us names. Good show. Well done chaps. Won't mention it again. Better not put it in the annual report. Bugger, forgot again. Memory not what is was you know. Don't do an annual report do we. No one will ever know then! Good show.
Time for another gin and tonic.
HUNTING BAN - MYSTERY GROWS - posted 5 October 2009
Barred referee Dave Hunting has been been told by British Cycling that he is not banned but at the moment it is not appropriate for him to referee national events because of his views on the Cycle Speedway Commission. In reply to a letter from Hunting, BC Chief Executive Ian Drake wrote:
"Having looked into this matter, I can confirm that that you have not been banned from refereeing. The Commission do however, at their discretion, appoint referees to national events and the Commission have communicated with you that the manner in which you have recently expressed your views about British Cycling and the Cycle Speedway Commission have resulted in a situation where currently it is inappropriate to invite you to referee national events."
However cycling's top official did promise that the matter would be discussed at Saturday's meeting of the Cycle Speedway Commission. He went on to say "I will ensure that your letter and desire to be reappointed to referee national events is discussed at the next Cycle Speedway Commission meeting" Drake added.
However it appears that the matter was only fleetingly mentioned at Saturday's meeting when Commission members were told that the matter was not up for discussion - as it now being conducted by BC headquarters!
The plot thickens!
HUNTING BAN ESCALATES - posted 24 September 2009
The Commission's decision to remove Dave Hunting from two major refereeing engagements and not offer him further appointments has escalated.
Following a meeting between Hunting and a British Cycling official at Leicester on Bank Holiday Monday, it appears that veteran campaigner Hunting pursuaded the sport's governing body to hold a special meeting involving representatives from all four regions to discuss the sport's future.
So far, nearly a month after concillary talks, no date has been set for the meeting. Clearly frustrated at the lack of progress and concerned that British Cycling may be reneging on the agreement to hold a 'crisis' meeting, Hunting has now made a formal complaint to BC's Chief Executive Ian Drake.
Clearly it would be inappropriate to publicise the nature of the complaint but the whole sorry affair shows no sign of abating.
TIME TO BRING HUNTING BAN TO A CLOSE - posted 21 September 2009
Regarding the Hunting Ban, British Cycling has an appeals process. Has this case been through this process? Is it for Dave Hunting to pursue this action? Will someone please explain the process? In the first instance it was a two match ban from refereeing BC events. That is how I understood it. However now this appears to have been changed. Someone please explain why?
This case has gone on for too long now. This is clearly not in the best interests of the sport. So let's bring the case to a close, by reinstating Dave Hunting - or give some good reason why the ban must continue?
So come on Mike Hack and Co - bring this matter to a close.
Brian Barnett
HUNTING DECISION NOT IN BEST INTERESTS OF SPORT - posted 20 September 2009
Just to correct a statement in the Hunting Ban page. Horspath didn't officially request for Dave Hunting to replace Terry Ashford who had withdrawn from referee at Norwich. Due to Horspath staging the sixth round of the South West Grand Prix the day before, with all the arrangements for that, plus programmes etc, I didn't actually pick up the email ref Terry until Saturday evening. It was in a conversation prior to the match that both clubs pointed out that surely Dave would have been better than ask the home club to arrange.
I do though think especially in East Anglia where there is a difficulty getting neutral referees, that to ignore Dave (which is what is actually happening rather than an outright ban) is not in the best interests of the sport. We all know how embarrassing the referee was that day, even though the match was good.
I think Dave must have misunderstood me when I relayed that to him at the British Final. There are not a lot of good competent referees around, so certainly the sport does need the likes of Dave officiating at our top events.
Geoff Gamage
HUNTING BAN CONTINUES - posted 17 September 2009
The Commission's decision to bar veteran referee Dave Hunting from refereeing major fixtures has been thrown into further confusion.
Although Hunting is allowed to officiate at regional and local level, it appears that he is prohibited from officiating at national events, including the Premier League.
Relationships between Hunting and the national referees manager are so strained that discussions on the subject are now being conducted direct with British Cycling's headquarters in Manchester.
Clearly angry at the treatment he has received from the Commission, Hunting told spokesman-online
"I was told, along with many other people at Leicester, that I was not banned as a referee, but that I had been removed from refereeing for just two matches. It has now transpired that after Terry Ashford notified Norwich that he was unable to referee the Norwich v Horspath match on August 23rd, that Horspath approached Mike Hack requesting that, as I only lived forty miles down the road, that it would make sense for myself to referee instead. They were told that I could not referee this match (match number three).
"A similar problem has now arisen for this coming weekend for the Norwich v Wednesfield match, and once again Mike Hack was approached by Norwich, this time to enquire whether I could referee instead of Terry Ashford. Norwich were told that I could not, and instead Mike Hack has told Norwich that Wayne Aris will referee instead (match number four).
"So why can't British Cycling be honest for once and admit that I am indeed banned from refereeing, with no charge made whatsoever, thus no trial with no defence applicable - just a ban!" said a disgruntled Hunting.
STAGNATING COMMISSION HAS LOST ITS WAY - posted 5 September
I read with increasing concern regarding the heavy handed and disrespectful way Dave Hunting has been treated by British Cycling or the Commission or some individual because as far as i can see no one has accepted responsibility for this.
It is everyone's right to express their thoughts openly and honestly and although I do not agree with Dave's opinions, I am concerned that this unhelpful action was been taken. It also concerns me that someone with such a flawed sense of fair play should in any way be in a position of authority.
This action is a clear breach of the 1998 "Human Rights Act" articles 9 and 10. I would like to see a separate disciplinary body set up to deliberate on such matters, perhaps a pool of seven people from which three can be drawn at any time to decide on appropriate actions.
This action was clearly unnecessary as Dave is but one of a small majority that believes that leaving British Cycling would be a panacea for all our sports problems. In my opinion Cycle Speedway's future lies with British Cycling but I do feel that the BC Commission has lost its way. No longer a governing body, it has struggled to find a new identity within the current environment and as such appears to be stagnating.
I am disappointed because on two occasions I have facilitated development groups to try to point the way to the future. I am sure you will remember "Project 2000" and "Project 2010". This needs to be the role of the Commission, developing the sport with a long term plan. At present most people's argument with British Cycling is either "where does all the money go" or "they do not give us enough money". For what? To buy more trophies or to reduce competition fees because that's how British Cycling must see us.
I understand there is to be yet another meeting in Birmingham in the near future to discuss what I cannot imagine, but lets not make it another whining session. Lets go there with some creative thoughts and ideas lets say to British Cycling here is our plan for the future and discuss how it can be funded. Only that way will our sport move forward.
Look at the Finals at Leicester. We have a wonderful product. Lets start to get the best out of it for everyone and once and for all put this endless argument about British Cycling membership to bed.
Paul Bodley
COMMUNICATION GAP - posted 2 September 2009
After catching up on all the previous posts it has been of great concern to me about the lack of communication between "our Commission", British Cycling and those of us who assist clubs or hold a license. This lack of communication is sadly leading to misunderstanding,supposition and suspicion. Crystal clear and open communication is essential for closer ties with all parts of the cycle speedway world.
I was utterly disgusted with the treatment shown to Mr Hunting. While I do not agree with everything that Mr Hunting says, I am willing to listen to his voice of experience and form my own opinion. His suspension of referee duties, by certain members of the Commission, appears petty,
vindictive and amatuerish.
Where is the legal framework for defending oneself? Does this mean that anyone who is willing to air their views will be penalised if these views do not agree with the Commission?
Surely the Commission should take into account ALL grass-level views and offer a reason why they could or could not work. Not listening or replying to any suggestion that may improve the sport is tantamount to negligence.
This splendid website has allowed many topics to be raised and many solutions to be offered. Personally, I think the Commission should take a more active interest in the Viewpoint pages and offer their reasons for and against any points raised. I am not talking about the basic, day to day, running of clubs but the way that major leagues and competitions are run and the assitance that can be offered to new or existing clubs so they don't fold. An open dialogue, on Spokesman, between the various levels of cycle speedway would remove the misunderstandings, help resolve concerns and improve all aspects of cycle speedway.
Finally, many thanks to all who sent cards, phoned, e-mailed and offered their "get wells" while I was in hospital. The personalised cards sent by the East Newport children were especially heart-warming. It was a great encouragement to know that everyone, friends and viewpoint-foes, wanted me fit and ready to rejoin the cycle-speedway family. I hope to see you all soon.
Tony Bennett
TIME BRITISH CYCLING AND COMMISSION GOT ITS ACT TOGETHER - posted 28 August 2009
This could be dangerous ground where I agree with what Joe McLauglin is saying!!!
The decision to go with British Cycling was not taken lightly but the only option available. Dave Hunting is wrong to suggest we could leave BC and go our own way. However I understand where Dave, Tim and Joe, amongst many, are coming from. It's utter frustration that cycle speedway members continue to pay monies into BC, but cannot see where is the benefit for being there.
It's really poor that given £25 millions (the amount now in the public domain) are not being used for all BC sports. We can find £24M for a BMX
track. Did we not win the Olympic gold (ooops I forgot we didn't) but Tim only wants £20K for some very worthwhile publicity. Surely a drop in the ocean of British Cycling's coffers.
Since Joe set the precedent at Coventry, the Finals have benefited from TV exposure. Poole did a great job last year and I'm equally sure that
Leicester will do this year. Given the tribulations suffered by Leicester this year and all the great work by Harry Glover, would this not have been great publicity for CS and BC. An opportunity lost.
Come on Commission and British Cycling - get your act together.
Finally I thank all the photographers for the great work they do. CS needs good publicity and some of the action shown has been brilliant. Keep up the good work all of you.
John Whiting
BC MUST REVERSE THIS TERRIBLE WRONG - posted 13 August 2009
Whilst on holiday in Poland with my girlfriend, I read with disgust and alarm the appalling treatment of Dave Hunting
Dave Hunting has given a lifetime's service to our sport. He has founded clubs, refereed at the top level, introduced countless hundreds of riders to Cycle Speedway and provided sponsorships to clubs (often asking for this generosity not to be publicised), amongst many other contributions.
British Cycling have again proven to be what they are - a bunch of power obsessed dictators. Their hands are all over this. Who exactly do they think they are?
And, as the country groans under the credit crunch, with thousands upon thousands of hard working people feeling the effects, and business and private enterprise suffering terribily, we see the appalling public waste of money in the form of obscene amounts of our (your) tax payers money now being used in ultimate `non` jobs - an army of publicly funded pen pushers working out of an address known as Stuart Street, Manchester.
They number 149 at the last count - all self serving to enchance their little power base, all largely non elected, all power crazy and allowing zero democracy. An organisation where Commission chairmanships are passed on a nod and a wink, where the Commissions and committees are dutifully packed with `yes` men - mostly track and road cycling types who treat us as a joke as we are not seen as `true cyclists. All this leads to decisions like the one involving Dave Hunting. Any dissent is not allowed and anyone not towing the party line is crushed.
I urge all those fair minded people in Cycle Speedway to rally to Dave Hunting`s cause to reverse this terrible wrong using the British sense of fair play.
Joe McLaughlin
Coventry
TIME FOR COMMISSION TO SHOW ITS TRUE COLOURS - posted 13 August 2009
This is my view on this issue of Dave Hunting's refereeing ban.
I feel that the sport deserves to know who ordered Dave Hunting being barred from refereeing. As the communication appears to come from Mike Hack, I feel Mike Hack should tell us the facts, as to who and why this action was required.
Dave Hunting was only expressing his opinion, which is not a crime in the UK. Or is British Cycling a law unto itself?
As I stated a few months ago, referring to 'jack boots of BC'. Have I been proved correct? Will BC now send in the secret police, to monitor and suppress any word or opinion that is not allowed in their world?
The events of the past week clearly suggests that B.C is not on this planet. BC have invented its own world. "You will not think for yourself. You will obey our every command, without question."
I think Dave Hunting was used to show the rest of us. ' Don't step out of BC line of our thinking'. Or this is how we deal with anyone that's thinks for themself. No doubt, action will now be taken against me, and others that has expressed their view.
The time is now, for the Commission to show its true colours, by holding BC to account and to provide the facts.
Dave Hunting has my support, as others have shown. He has a right to question and to express his views. Be it right or wrong, this helps the debate.
Brian Barnett
APPALLED - posted 12 August 2009
I'm appalled.
As a newcomer to the sport and someone who is fresh to its history and even the concept of cycle speedway, I thought my son had found a niche. Something he could be passionate about, the company of young mates that show 'spirit' on the green (cheek in abundance) and do what kids do.
I have no idea where my son's interests will flare next but cycle speedway has certainly captivated something within him that I have never seen before and as such I'm doing what I can to put back and support our local club.
Of course, I doubt I would have continued it much further had it not been for the welcome we received when we tentatively approached the track. I doubt I would have felt any commitment to the club had I stumbled across a field of apathy.
Moving on, I would be happily walking away from political wrangling, of which I really don't need to get involved in but...Who was the first person I met and so warmly welcomed us? Who have I watched produce one of the most amazing clubs, not only in results but in the impeccable standard of the track and appearance of the grounds?
I can't speak of Dave Hunting's previous credentials other than what I hear, nor his reputation for saying what is 'needed' to be said but I have to agree with the opinion of others.
What the hell happens when there is no one who is prepared to open their mouth and suggest things are not right? Have we not fought wars to ensure our right to question, perhaps that is an extreme and inappropriate reference but...?
When Dave retires it will be a sad loss to the sport. Who else out there is prepared to stand up and voice an opinion, or is my son lost to a sport that will deflagrate in its anominity and lack of importance/revenue in the eyes of British Cycling?
If Silence or 'yes' is the way this works then I can't believe that any of the UK clubs are prepared to stand by and allow BC to continue without a serious response to this situation. Worst of all there seems to be no attempt by BC to even explain or contradict the comments!
Have I missed something? Please correct me if I have, or perhaps I should expect a ban for my nine-year-old son from racing for his father's outgoing expression of opinion.
Paul Wiggins
COMMISSION OUT OF TOUCH - posted 11 August 2009
It is not often I feel compelled to put my words in print, but having read the recent Dave Hunting affair I feel the need to just voice my opinion.
Whether or not one agrees with Dave's point of view, those who know me well know my views on BC, Dave has every right to voice his opinion through whatever medium he deems suitable for his forum. BC have the
right to reply to Dave's challenges, the Cycle Speedway Commission also have the same right to reply.
It begs the question, what are both BC and the Cycle Speedway Commission afraid of? Surely if they have confidence in their governance and management of the sport of Cycle Speedway they would welcome debate, respond accordingly and deal with issues openly and honestly to reassure their members from the Cycle Speedway community that they have the sport's best interest at heart.
Banning or banishing, either word is appropriate, a distinguished official such as Dave is totally contrary to what they should be demonstrating. All this decision has served to do it demonstrate that, once again, they
are out of touch with what constitutes good management.
I do not wish in any way to re-ignite the Coventry - Bury incident, but at the time I wrote to the very person who put pen to paper and told Dave, in somewhat undignified terms for one who had served so diligently over many years, that his services were no longer required. I never received a reply to my letter, nor did I receive answers to my valid questions. To be honest it was exactly what I expected, but ever the optimist I
lived in hope that my expectations may have been exceeded!
I shall end by reminding all those who attended the same BC coaching course I was on, where we were reminded by a high ranking BC representative that "All coaches are encouraged to act in a manner befitting BC, that is to undertake their role in a diplomatic and democratic manner, Autocracy is not condoned by BC"
Apparently Hypocrisy doesn't fall under the same category.
All the best Dave!
Jez Hughes
PASSION, LEADERSHIP AND ABOVE ALL HONESTY - posted 10 August 2009
Having read and digested the responses to my call to kick British Cycling into touch, I am man enough to realise that I was being over zealous in my wording due to my passion for the sport, a passion that has not waned over the past fifty six years.
I look back at the halcyon days when our sport was run by The Cycle Speedway Council with such precision and finesse, with the likes of Bill Gill, Harry Glover, Rod Witham, Graham Sutton, Mel Perkins and Dave Blinston, to name just a few. What characters, what leadership and above everything else, what passion these names had for our sport. And their other outstanding attribution was honesty, for their word was their bond, something very rare nowadays.
Compare these names with our present representatives, namely the Cycle Speedway Commission, and they shouldn't be mentioned in the same room, let alone the same breath.
Yes, I agree with many of the others who point the finger of blame at the present Commission Members, for they are certainly lacking in their representation of the membership at their committee meetings with British Cycling.
But the one thing to remember is who installed the present Cycle Speedway Commission Members into their positions, none other than British Cycling, who must hold up their hands and accept part of the blame for our current crisis.
It was British Cycling who wanted the 'YES' men on board, people that they could control, people who wouldn't rock the boat, and above all, people who would obey. It was British Cycling who took away our right to vote the Cycle Speedway Commission Members into place by taking away our hallowed AGM, where we could all have an input into the future of our sport. By taking away the voting procedure, the Members of the Commission have become an elite organisation, beholding to no one but themselves, with no threat of losing their seat providing they do as British Cycling tell them.
Again looking back at the Cycle Speedway Council, I remember the day well when many of us attended the meeting in Manchester where we first met the British Cycling leadership, who were to explain how our amalgamation with British Cycling would work. Many voices of concern were to be heard, mine included, and the big asking point was 'how will our joining forces with British Cycling affect our own control of our sport'.
The answer was this, and please all take note, 'You, as members of British Cycling, will continue to control your own sport through your very own committee, not unlike your present procedure. This committee, as in previous years, will be voted into place at your annual AGM, again not unlike the present situation. The only difference being that you will all be under the umbrella and professional guidance of the British Cycling Federation, who in turn will finance your running costs, plus bring in valuable financial help through sponsorship deals that we, British Cycling, will bring on board via our promotional section'.
Am I misreading something here, for two and two don't make four, and as stated previously, the word 'Honesty' seems to have been kicked out of the window.
So come on, and insist that our right to vote the Commission into place is not only returned, but upheld as originally stated by British Cycling.
Dave Hunting
BC NEED TO BE OPEN AND HONEST - posted 10 August 2009
All talk at the moment is Dave Hunting versus British Cycling affair. I don't believe that we should detach ourselves from British Cycling as stated in the past by myself but Dave has a right to express himself, or anyone else for that matter. Clearly Dave has touched a raw nerve or pressed the right button.
Why didn't British Cycling leave Dave to fulfil his appointments and deal with the matter in the closed season? All they have done is caused embarrassment to British Cycling and also to Dave Hunting. Whatever happened to freedom of speech! At least we all now know that the British Cycling censorship department works well! Will we see a response via Spokesman from British Cycling on the matter?
Whatever the outcome British Cycling need to be open and honest with the cycle speedway community. They owe us that!
Also I would like to thank all at Wednesfield club and Bob Prince for delaying the start time for the under-19's on Saturday, due to traffic delays and the accident on the M5. It was well worth the wait, many thanks.
Dave Mould
RECONSIDER RASH DECISION - posted 10 August 2009
It would appear that British Cycling have scored a monumental own goal with their treatment of Dave Hunting. Whether people agree or disagree with Dave's views doesn't really matter now this action has been taken.
What does matter is that those of us involved in the sport seem to be under threat of censure unless we tow the party line.
All BC have managed to do is give credence to Dave's views regarding a perceived dictatorship. Let's hope those who make such rash decisions take time to reconsider.
Tim Jarvis
COMMISSION HAS TAKEN LEAVE OF ITS SENSES - posted 9 August 2009
British Cycling has nothing to fear from its vibrant cycle speedway membership as regards the well aired personal views of Dave Hunting who has never made a secret of his preference to turn the administrative clock back to the previous century.
However, they have everything to fear from the likely response to their astonishing over-reaction in this latest spat. This may be the political silly season where an epidemic of "on leave" signs is not unusual, but those responsible for the decision to cut Dave loose from official engagements have clearly taken leave of their senses.
It tells the sport something about the Commision mindset that it will find deeply disturbing and will give an element of credence to Dave's call for a sporting divorce that is otherwise completely unjustified.
Graham Sutton
HUNTING BAN SETS A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT - posted 9 August 2009
Having read about how BC have declared Dave Hunting persona non grata because he dares to disagree with them, the words of Voltaire spring to mind -
"Not only is it extremely cruel to persecute in this brief life those who do not think the way we do, but I do not know if it might be too presumptuous to declare their eternal damnation."
Often summed up as - "I disagree with what you say but defend to the death your right to say it."
Surely any sporting body must be able to accept criticism? I have been involved in a number of sports over the years, on both the club and committee sides of the fence and I've been at a number of highly vocal meetings with views strongly expressed.
Never have I heard it advocated those who disagree with the ruling body be barred and believe this is a dangerous precedent to set as it could see any sport run by only the yes men with any new ideas dismissed as against the ruling body.
Barry Watson
BRITISH CYCLING'S ACTION PROVE ME RIGHT - posted 9 August 2009
Having criticised the way that British Cycling dictates to its members within the Cycle Speedway fraternity, both whilst as the Commission Chairman and more recently as just one of its members, after being misled in regards to the British Under-13 individual perpetual trophy, to which I have received no apology whatsoever, I have now been informed by Mike Hack that In view of your publicly stated attitude towards British Cycling and the Cycle Speedway Commission members, the Cycle Speedway Commission does not wish to burden you any longer with the status of being a Cycle Speedway Referee, appointed by British Cycling for major events, therefore, the official refereeing appointments for the 15th August and 18th October previously offered to you, have now been withdrawn.
Personally, at the age of 68, who really wants the added stress of refereeing a national round of the Senior Club Championships, especially bearing in mind the attitudes and behaviour of some of the senior riders nowadays. A referee's job is not an easy one, as all will agree who have ever taken up the whistle, and having refereed more national finals than I can remember, and having been voted, by the clubs themselves, to be the number one referee on five consecutive seasons, then I consider that I have served my years as both a referee and the referee's manager with dignity, and that younger faces should now be given the chance to officiate at a senior level.
By the actions of Mike Hack, ably backed by the Cycle Speedway Commission, and no doubt instructed by British Cycling, they have proved two of my main criticisms to be correct, these being that the Cycle Speedway Commission (who incidentally are not democratically elected anymore, but are personally put into place by British Cycling) are nothing short of puppets in the hands of British Cycling, who in turn are nothing short of dictators towards the Cycle Speedway membership.
We have lost the opportunity of addressing both the Cycle Speedway Commission and British Cycling themselves when they so cleverly withdrew the annual AGM, and it was quite obvious then, as it is proving even more obvious now, that they are not prepared to receive any criticism of their dictatorial methods, even though they realise that their regime has proved to be flawed on many occasions in the past.
I personally think that my past involvement in cycle speedway deserves a lot more respect from British Cycling, and in particular the Cycle Speedway Commission, who somehow consider themselves to be head and shoulders above us mere members.
My involvement dates back to 1954, when I first joined the Kesgrave Panthers. Through the years I have served my time as a rider, manager and sponsor, together with serving on numerous committees. It was myself, together with Ivan Pike, who reinstated the Ipswich Cycle Speedway Club in 2002, and who are now the number one Youth & Junior Club in the UK, and it was myself, together with a superb committee, who have raised the profile of the Kesgrave Cycle Speedway Club, who in turn are now rated as the number two Youth & Junior Club in the UK.
Way back in 1973, together with many helpers, I built a new track at Grundisburgh, and within the second season of racing the junior team reached the finals of the British Junior Team Championships at Leicester, which was considered by many to be an outstanding achievement. Maybe all these successes have been a fluke, but I personally don't think so. I think it is about time that British Cycling and its Cycle Speedway Commission puppets listened to the many members who have raised the profiles of their clubs through sheer hard work, by introducing the many new and exciting young riders that have emerged through their very own youth and junior development policies.
What financial help have we all received from British Cycling, even though millions of pounds have been put into British Cycling's coffers by many household names to help with the development of youth and junior riders. I certainly haven't seen any of this sponsorship money since being at either Ipswich or Kesgrave, so once again I ask the question, 'Where has it all gone'.
A very concerned Dave Hunting.
SHORT-SIGHTED VIEW - posted 9 August 2009
I like to check into Spokesman to read the results from other club's league meetings and it caught my eye being on the front page about Dave Hunting's short-sighted view of British Cycling organisation. How can he say British Cycling does nothing for our sport?
I thought it's British Cycling who for our small membership fee, which is a lot less than my golf club membership fee, that we get an up to date handbook and rules every year, medals for competitors and racing jersey for winners, insurance cover, exposure on the wesbite, a well presented photographer who spends a lot of his own time helping promote the sport of cycle speedway. What is the point in making our sport go backwards and breaking away from other cycling disciplines?
Of course there's always room for improvement, but moaning about costs when their membership is cheaper than any I know of isn't the way to go about things. We all know racing was good in the 'old days' but that is in the past now. It's pretty obvious that Dave Hunting is very short sighted when it comes to British Cycling and what goes on in their headquarters.
S Knights (Midlands)
COMMISSION CLEARLY DOESN'T WORK - posted 8 August 2009
Having read both views from Dave Hunting, Dave Mould and others, I don't think cycle speedway can do with out British Cycling. The big problem as far as i can see is the stepping stone from cycle speedway to British Cycling. The stepping stone I refer to is the Commission. The Commission clearly does not work!
This is the problem clubs all over the country face - no development what so ever, no funding, need I go
on? So is it time to vote in a new Commission? Will clubs have the chance to vote on this sometime in the near future? Like to hear more views on this.
John Avery
COMMISSION IS THE BIGGEST PROBLEM - posted 8 August 2009
This is my view on those that are suggesting that cycle speedway 'goes it alone' without British Cycling.
Whilst I can see the reasons for, and on one hand I support the idea of a breakaway, I have also considered what the pitfalls could be.
1 With British Cycling being an established organisation, would local councils, accept cycle speedway that is not part of British Cycling?
2 Now with liability claims on the increase with 'no win on fee', which years ago, if one wished to pursue a claim, it required a long legal battle, and had to be paid for before a settlement was made. Could clubs be able to get liability insurance?
3 Who is going to run such an organisation now? What about in twenty years time?
4 It is ok to state that cycle speedway ran its own show for years before BC, however the world has changed. Its not so easy dealing with local authorities, as it was in the past. Many councils now require something similar to a business plan.
5 Could cycle speedway be able to get the grants and funding, without BC?
Those that are suggesting a breakaway from BC please give the figures for things such as insurance cover, a detailed plan as to how cycle speedway would be run without BC, giving how it would be better without BC.
Making statements on how good it was in the past. Times have changed, what happened and worked in the past. These may not, now be allowed to work due to the current laws. With child protection laws, this area has to be addressed.
If cycle speedway was to part from BC would this happen overnight or would there be a period of time set? Let's see the facts and figures.
I see cycle speedway's biggest problem is not BC but our Commission not fighting hard enough. The time has come to remove the Commission and elect a new Commission. One that will fight for cycle speedway best interests. One that is not quivering at the sight of BC officials.
Brian Barnett
NO SUPPORT FOR BREAKAWAY - posted 3 August 2009
As a current rider racing regional leagues and in the Premier Combination I would like to add a different view on this subject.
Whilst it's a shame that there was not a trophy for the U13s, I believe if you ask most average riders if they have a problem with British Cycling the answer will be no! I pay very little for my BC membership and for that get to race in all events (some of which have medals and jerseys up for grabs) and I get insurance both on the track and off it - something I could not provide for myself at the same cost. This would be the first problem as many riders who also work would not be able to risk riding and injuring themselves if they did not have this insurance to cover it!
As pointed out in a previous post, we would also lose the services of photographers such as Andy Whitehouse etc or have to pay his fee ourselves. and before it's pointed out to me I am aware the Brian Barnett doesn't charge and does his photos for free but he can only be in one place at a time where as BC can send four photographers to four locations at no extra cost to us!
It seems obvious to someone with an open mind about this (and from what people outside the sport have said) that we would stand to lose more from a split from BC than they would. Yes we pay a lot of money but it's just a drop in the ocean to that other disciplines give them! They make millions from road racing, BMX and track cycling so fairly they get more resources! We would lose insurance for all riders and officials, free photographers. expenses paid for referees, a huge amount of coverage plus alot more - something we ourselves couldn't provide at amount we pay at the moment!
Around tracks and on spokesman I always hear people talk of the benefits BC give (just sometimes without mentioning where they came from) but I only seem to hear the same four or five people saying they do nothing for us and we should leave.
It seems that if you don't like it you can leave but I wouldn't expect a mass following!
Dan Johnson
|
