Shakey suing MSV / BSB
Discussion
https://www.kentonline.co.uk/sittingbourne/news/su...
He must've had some legal advice telling him his chances are good, as surely this will be the end of his work with Eurosport at BSB
He must've had some legal advice telling him his chances are good, as surely this will be the end of his work with Eurosport at BSB
graeme4130 said:
https://www.kentonline.co.uk/sittingbourne/news/su...
He must've had some legal advice telling him his chances are good, as surely this will be the end of his work with Eurosport at BSB
If he wins it’s not a massive leap to see this as the end of track days and a serious blow to racing, at least.He must've had some legal advice telling him his chances are good, as surely this will be the end of his work with Eurosport at BSB
However, as you say I can’t see a lot of people being happy for him to continue being associated with the sport via a tv contract. My understanding is that Eurosport pays really well so it’s a strange thing to risk throwing away for ‘just’ a one off £1m.
There is a lot of weirdness to this for sure.
If the people responsible for his safety were negligent, so be it- he deserves recompense. If they weren't, he doesn't.
Approaching it with a carte blanche "Motorsport is dangerous" attitude is dangerous in itself, because it'd allow unscrupulous operators to cut corners on safety knowing they're free from liability.
The courts are typically sensible so it's worth waiting for the outcome before deciding it's right or wrong to have brought the claim.
Approaching it with a carte blanche "Motorsport is dangerous" attitude is dangerous in itself, because it'd allow unscrupulous operators to cut corners on safety knowing they're free from liability.
The courts are typically sensible so it's worth waiting for the outcome before deciding it's right or wrong to have brought the claim.
I’ve raced Karts and Cars for years and also done probably well over 100 trackdays on bikes. I’ve always worked on the basis that the black bits were the track and the green bits weren’t the track. I discovered that if you aren’t on the black bits, things can go wrong very quickly and on several occasions I discovered that there are hard things to hit and that they hurt. I discovered that on the occasions when I ran out of talent, but even though I’m an amateur, I worked it out for myself, so surely a professional like Shakey would know it as well. I’ve always liked him, but I hope he fails miserably in this ridiculous quest and gets handed his arse by the judge on the way out, because if he wins, motorsport will never be the same again.
vw_99 said:
My brother died racing at knockhill in the 1st "reverse" races in years. This following life changing injuries to another rider on a track day 2 days before.
The thought to sue never crossed mine or his wifes mind even after the track was modified and saftey mesures put in a few weeks later.
Sorry for your loss. I'm amazed that Knockhill gets to run in reverse, going down to what becomes turn 1 has little run off. I'm planning a track day there myself later this year but not on the reverse track. The thought to sue never crossed mine or his wifes mind even after the track was modified and saftey mesures put in a few weeks later.
Forester1965 said:
If the people responsible for his safety were negligent, so be it- he deserves recompense. If they weren't, he doesn't.
Approaching it with a carte blanche "Motorsport is dangerous" attitude is dangerous in itself, because it'd allow unscrupulous operators to cut corners on safety knowing they're free from liability.
The courts are typically sensible so it's worth waiting for the outcome before deciding it's right or wrong to have brought the claim.
This. Probably the most level headed reply to this. Approaching it with a carte blanche "Motorsport is dangerous" attitude is dangerous in itself, because it'd allow unscrupulous operators to cut corners on safety knowing they're free from liability.
The courts are typically sensible so it's worth waiting for the outcome before deciding it's right or wrong to have brought the claim.
trickywoo said:
graeme4130 said:
https://www.kentonline.co.uk/sittingbourne/news/su...
He must've had some legal advice telling him his chances are good, as surely this will be the end of his work with Eurosport at BSB
If he wins it’s not a massive leap to see this as the end of track days and a serious blow to racing, at least.He must've had some legal advice telling him his chances are good, as surely this will be the end of his work with Eurosport at BSB
However, as you say I can’t see a lot of people being happy for him to continue being associated with the sport via a tv contract. My understanding is that Eurosport pays really well so it’s a strange thing to risk throwing away for ‘just’ a one off £1m.
There is a lot of weirdness to this for sure.
Knowing a little about small audience TV salaries, I'd guess that he probably earns £3-4k a weekend at most for BSB stuff, and it's only 11 rounds a year at BSB
graeme4130 said:
I don't think it pays so well that you'd not be prepared to risk it for a single £1m payout
Knowing a little about small audience TV salaries, I'd guess that he probably earns £3-4k a weekend at most for BSB stuff, and it's only 11 rounds a year at BSB
James Haydon is on record saying it pays him better than racing ever did and he was around when money was good in bikes and he was a star, more so than on the tv.Knowing a little about small audience TV salaries, I'd guess that he probably earns £3-4k a weekend at most for BSB stuff, and it's only 11 rounds a year at BSB
Equally and, without being too PH hopefully, £1m doesn’t actually go that far.
Forester1965 said:
If the people responsible for his safety were negligent, so be it- he deserves recompense. If they weren't, he doesn't.
Approaching it with a carte blanche "Motorsport is dangerous" attitude is dangerous in itself, because it'd allow unscrupulous operators to cut corners on safety knowing they're free from liability.
The courts are typically sensible so it's worth waiting for the outcome before deciding it's right or wrong to have brought the claim.
sorry ive never read such rubbish, this sets a dangerous president who ever wins, who the hell would open a race track to people for racing if they feared being suedApproaching it with a carte blanche "Motorsport is dangerous" attitude is dangerous in itself, because it'd allow unscrupulous operators to cut corners on safety knowing they're free from liability.
The courts are typically sensible so it's worth waiting for the outcome before deciding it's right or wrong to have brought the claim.
all it will do is put costs up for everyone
The only dangerous president I know is Donald Trump.
Otherwise, circuits and organisers have a duty of care to competitors. Motorsport is dangerous and people participate with their eyes open, but that doesn't mean anything goes. Circuits oughtn't be negligently dangerous.
Whatever happens in this case, the idea that a circuit or promotor should be immune from responsibility if they're negligent is a dangerous idea.
Otherwise, circuits and organisers have a duty of care to competitors. Motorsport is dangerous and people participate with their eyes open, but that doesn't mean anything goes. Circuits oughtn't be negligently dangerous.
Whatever happens in this case, the idea that a circuit or promotor should be immune from responsibility if they're negligent is a dangerous idea.
Forester1965 said:
The only dangerous president I know is Donald Trump.
Otherwise, circuits and organisers have a duty of care to competitors. Motorsport is dangerous and people participate with their eyes open, but that doesn't mean anything goes. Circuits oughtn't be negligently dangerous.
Whatever happens in this case, the idea that a circuit or promotor should be immune from responsibility if they're negligent is a dangerous idea.
Agreed...but in this instance, the basis of his claim is that they would/should have positioned Airfencing against that Tyre wall during a BSB race, so why did they not have it at an' Official BSB test' run under what amounts to comparable regulations as a race weekendOtherwise, circuits and organisers have a duty of care to competitors. Motorsport is dangerous and people participate with their eyes open, but that doesn't mean anything goes. Circuits oughtn't be negligently dangerous.
Whatever happens in this case, the idea that a circuit or promotor should be immune from responsibility if they're negligent is a dangerous idea.
Accordion to the press, the defence are countering with the argument that Airfencing would not have resulted in him walking away dusting himself off, but would still have ended with significant injury given the circumstances, and that Mr Byrne was in some way at fault given he crashed the bike regardless od the knowledge of the implications
If that's true, then it's reasonable to assume that they got beyond the stage of trying to identify the reason of Air fencing or no Airfencing on that day, and are now beating out details to apportion responsibility
Motorsport, is of course, dangerous, but this sets a dangerous precedent for things to come, as if the requirement for Air fencing suddenly becomes the go to safety level, that'll price out many Club race companies and TDO's
Unsurprisingly, there's only one decent supply of approved Rectocell (sp?) Airfencing in the UK, and that's Mr Palmer and the MSV empire as they have the logistics infrastructure in place to store, transport and erect it at race meets
Gave him the benefit of youth and exuberance after the podium girl/champagne incident but it turns out he’s a complete bellend after all.
Many riders have paid the ultimate price playing this game knowing the risks and he’s still here and clearly doing alright.
You only have to see the YouTube videos with his pushbikes that cost more than my car to see that.
f
k him. fking idiot.
Many riders have paid the ultimate price playing this game knowing the risks and he’s still here and clearly doing alright.
You only have to see the YouTube videos with his pushbikes that cost more than my car to see that.
f
k him. fking idiot. Racing brought Shane so much success and a lifestyle he probably wouldn’t have enjoyed if he hadn’t pursued his racing ambitions. With the injuries he suffered from what I understand he is lucky to be walking.
Like many others have posted if he wins the implications could be far reaching for the sport.
Like many others have posted if he wins the implications could be far reaching for the sport.
Edited by Rob 131 Sport on Wednesday 15th May 00:07
Rob 131 Sport said:
Racing brought Shane so much success and a lifestyle he probably wouldn’t have enjoyed if he hadn’t pursued his racing ambitions. With the injuries he suffered from what I understand he is lucky to be walking.
Like many others have posted if he wins the implications could be far reaching for the sport and current and future competitors.
Exactly that Rob. A really, really dangerous precedent to set. Like many others have posted if he wins the implications could be far reaching for the sport and current and future competitors.
Lost all respect for the bloke.
Forester1965 said:
The only dangerous president I know is Donald Trump.
Otherwise, circuits and organisers have a duty of care to competitors. Motorsport is dangerous and people participate with their eyes open, but that doesn't mean anything goes. Circuits oughtn't be negligently dangerous.
Whatever happens in this case, the idea that a circuit or promotor should be immune from responsibility if they're negligent is a dangerous idea.
so a grammer nazi to add to your skills, well done, was only trying to say, racing will never be or should be safe, thats why people do it, take it you have never raced.Otherwise, circuits and organisers have a duty of care to competitors. Motorsport is dangerous and people participate with their eyes open, but that doesn't mean anything goes. Circuits oughtn't be negligently dangerous.
Whatever happens in this case, the idea that a circuit or promotor should be immune from responsibility if they're negligent is a dangerous idea.
Forester1965 said:
The only dangerous president I know is Donald Trump.
Otherwise, circuits and organisers have a duty of care to competitors. Motorsport is dangerous and people participate with their eyes open, but that doesn't mean anything goes. Circuits oughtn't be negligently dangerous.
Whatever happens in this case, the idea that a circuit or promotor should be immune from responsibility if they're negligent is a dangerous idea.
Hi Shane Otherwise, circuits and organisers have a duty of care to competitors. Motorsport is dangerous and people participate with their eyes open, but that doesn't mean anything goes. Circuits oughtn't be negligently dangerous.
Whatever happens in this case, the idea that a circuit or promotor should be immune from responsibility if they're negligent is a dangerous idea.
DarthtaterM16 said:
Forester1965 said:
The only dangerous president I know is Donald Trump.
Otherwise, circuits and organisers have a duty of care to competitors. Motorsport is dangerous and people participate with their eyes open, but that doesn't mean anything goes. Circuits oughtn't be negligently dangerous.
Whatever happens in this case, the idea that a circuit or promotor should be immune from responsibility if they're negligent is a dangerous idea.
Hi Shane Otherwise, circuits and organisers have a duty of care to competitors. Motorsport is dangerous and people participate with their eyes open, but that doesn't mean anything goes. Circuits oughtn't be negligently dangerous.
Whatever happens in this case, the idea that a circuit or promotor should be immune from responsibility if they're negligent is a dangerous idea.
Gassing Station | Biker Banter | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff