"Now it's up to the lawyers."

#991
Posts
1685
Joined
8/7/2013
Location
Melbourne AU
1/27/2015 5:02pm Edited Date/Time 4/6/2015 2:03pm
VET74 wrote:
Weren't they racing for position? If so, not even close to the same.
Triton wrote:
It was carry over for the week before as I understood it. Even it wasn't, this is almost identical, outside of the race line, not racing...
It was carry over for the week before as I understood it. Even it wasn't, this is almost identical, outside of the race line, not racing forward with the intent to make the other racer stop or go off the track. Otherwise you could argue that Chad was racing for position as well.
...
VET74
Posts
360
Joined
6/14/2010
Location
TX, TN, AZ US
1/27/2015 5:04pm
Triton wrote:
It was carry over for the week before as I understood it. Even it wasn't, this is almost identical, outside of the race line, not racing...
It was carry over for the week before as I understood it. Even it wasn't, this is almost identical, outside of the race line, not racing forward with the intent to make the other racer stop or go off the track. Otherwise you could argue that Chad was racing for position as well.
The other side of this is that Reed does have a history with JG, and there is a high likelihood that factored in. Reed has not always been innocent in every case either. But in my opinion JG had every right and obligation to black flag him in this instance. This isn't just about Reed, JG has obligations to every rider in the field and if Reed was left in the race and took out Canard again and he was injured, people would have been calling for his head in that scenario also. We can all argue this thing to death, but the only person who gets to make the decisions is JG...and I can live with that.
#991
Posts
1685
Joined
8/7/2013
Location
Melbourne AU
1/27/2015 5:08pm Edited Date/Time 4/6/2015 2:04pm
Triton wrote:
It was carry over for the week before as I understood it. Even it wasn't, this is almost identical, outside of the race line, not racing...
It was carry over for the week before as I understood it. Even it wasn't, this is almost identical, outside of the race line, not racing forward with the intent to make the other racer stop or go off the track. Otherwise you could argue that Chad was racing for position as well.
VET74 wrote:
The other side of this is that Reed does have a history with JG, and there is a high likelihood that factored in. Reed has not...
The other side of this is that Reed does have a history with JG, and there is a high likelihood that factored in. Reed has not always been innocent in every case either. But in my opinion JG had every right and obligation to black flag him in this instance. This isn't just about Reed, JG has obligations to every rider in the field and if Reed was left in the race and took out Canard again and he was injured, people would have been calling for his head in that scenario also. We can all argue this thing to death, but the only person who gets to make the decisions is JG...and I can live with that.
...
Triton
Posts
618
Joined
10/1/2006
Location
Redmond, WA US
1/27/2015 5:11pm
Can't say that I disagree. Again I believe this based on what I've seen and my opinion of what a top level official should operate like (based on my own experience in a few different professional sports). This is an area for improvement for the sport. I don't care if the flag gets overturned. If this is a black flag incident than so be it. I'm fine with that just make sure it is for everyone. Consistency is needed.

The Shop

VET74
Posts
360
Joined
6/14/2010
Location
TX, TN, AZ US
1/27/2015 5:39pm
Digging what hole? I didn't say he made a biased decision. The facts are Reed took out Canard in a non racing scenario and JG black flagged him. The decision as I see it was based on what everyone watching TV and in the stadium saw. Do I think that JG would give him the benefit of doubt that it wasn't a takeout move based on his history with Reed...doubtful. But call it whatever you want, Reed is the offender here.
#991
Posts
1685
Joined
8/7/2013
Location
Melbourne AU
1/27/2015 6:02pm Edited Date/Time 4/6/2015 2:05pm
VET74 wrote:
Digging what hole? I didn't say he made a biased decision. The facts are Reed took out Canard in a non racing scenario and JG black...
Digging what hole? I didn't say he made a biased decision. The facts are Reed took out Canard in a non racing scenario and JG black flagged him. The decision as I see it was based on what everyone watching TV and in the stadium saw. Do I think that JG would give him the benefit of doubt that it wasn't a takeout move based on his history with Reed...doubtful. But call it whatever you want, Reed is the offender here.
...

Bultaco
Posts
1728
Joined
1/20/2014
Location
Planet, VT US
1/27/2015 6:14pm
Is there anything left to say about this?
What if Reed were a pirate and the black flag had a skull and cross bones on it? Would he still be disqualified? Wink
VET74
Posts
360
Joined
6/14/2010
Location
TX, TN, AZ US
1/27/2015 6:19pm
#991 wrote:
...

Maybe in your world JG's are what's in question. Can't have one without the other. Either way, Reed showed very poor judgement and JG doesn't have a crystal ball. Reed proved he's willing to take someone out, and the race official has the obligation to the other riders to make sure he doesn't have the continued opportunity to do so.
VET74
Posts
360
Joined
6/14/2010
Location
TX, TN, AZ US
1/27/2015 6:22pm
Is there anything left to say about this?
I was honestly done about 2 hours ago LaughingSidewaysSidewaysSideways now it's just to argue something that can't be won by either side.
#991
Posts
1685
Joined
8/7/2013
Location
Melbourne AU
1/27/2015 6:23pm Edited Date/Time 4/6/2015 2:05pm
#991 wrote:
...

VET74 wrote:
Maybe in your world JG's are what's in question. Can't have one without the other. Either way, Reed showed very poor judgement and JG doesn't have...
Maybe in your world JG's are what's in question. Can't have one without the other. Either way, Reed showed very poor judgement and JG doesn't have a crystal ball. Reed proved he's willing to take someone out, and the race official has the obligation to the other riders to make sure he doesn't have the continued opportunity to do so.
...
#991
Posts
1685
Joined
8/7/2013
Location
Melbourne AU
1/27/2015 6:29pm Edited Date/Time 4/6/2015 2:05pm
Is there anything left to say about this?
...
#991
Posts
1685
Joined
8/7/2013
Location
Melbourne AU
1/27/2015 6:31pm Edited Date/Time 4/6/2015 2:06pm
Is there anything left to say about this?
VET74 wrote:
I was honestly done about 2 hours ago LaughingSidewaysSidewaysSideways now it's just to argue something that can't be won by either side.
...
VET74
Posts
360
Joined
6/14/2010
Location
TX, TN, AZ US
1/27/2015 6:45pm
#991 wrote:
...
Maybe that's true there, but not here. Wink and that is an assinign statement. You really think that a habitual DUI offender (anywhere in the world) isn't going to get the book thrown at them the more times they show up for the same offense...and that a judge wouldn't take their prior record in to account? If you call that unfair and bias, please google the word "bias" to refresh your memory what that word means.
1/27/2015 6:55pm
VET74 wrote:
Digging what hole? I didn't say he made a biased decision. The facts are Reed took out Canard in a non racing scenario and JG black...
Digging what hole? I didn't say he made a biased decision. The facts are Reed took out Canard in a non racing scenario and JG black flagged him. The decision as I see it was based on what everyone watching TV and in the stadium saw. Do I think that JG would give him the benefit of doubt that it wasn't a takeout move based on his history with Reed...doubtful. But call it whatever you want, Reed is the offender here.
#991 wrote:
...

"Reeds actions aren't what's in question. JG' s are." BULLSHIT

Reed's actions are the total reason he got the black flag and thus has stirred up this mess.

Reed got the black flag for blatantly retaliating against Canard causing him to crash in a non racing move immediately after the two came together while racing for position and right in front of the officials. It's as simple as that. It will get you a black flag or worse every time.

Reed said it was a bonehead move on his part but has also said he would do it again. Sounds smart doesn't it.

If Canard hadn't have went down there probably wouldn't have been a black flag but there would most assuredly been some consequence for Reed's actions. What Reed did and the manner in which he did it were too blatant and stupid to ignore and let slide in any form or fashion.

It would of happened to anyone, not just Reed, but Reed has apparently felt discriminated against on several occasions. Of course he is also the guy that has burned more bridges than any other rider of his caliber and is now putting quit a bit of his own money into that money pit of a team instead of having multiple options to be paid well based on his past performance and future performance potential..

Remember the red plate fiasco? Reed didn't want to play by the rule book then and looked like a chump with his protest. He didn't feel it was right, even though it was right there in the rules how that would work.

Reed pulled the victim card with the county and/or surrounding neighbors over the track addition deal at home which was against the rules. Once again he didn't like the rules that were in place and just decided to do it his own way.

There are other instances as well. What it all boils down to is if Reed doesn't like the rules or gets himself into hot water over not abiding by them he pitches a big ass fit under the claim that he is "just telling it like it is."

His MX/SX accomplishments are stellar, in fact some of the best ever and he is probably the most savvy rider on the track. Unfortunately he is his own worst enemy and has proven that on several occasions by his actions and words.

It's sad to see a person who has done so well coming from where he started to always be in the messes that he gets himself into.

I wish he would just put his head down and race, letting his results speak for themselves.

He keeps alluding to how things would be done in F1, maybe that will be an option for him in the future.

#991
Posts
1685
Joined
8/7/2013
Location
Melbourne AU
1/27/2015 6:55pm Edited Date/Time 4/6/2015 2:06pm
#991 wrote:
...
VET74 wrote:
Maybe that's true there, but not here. ;) and that is an assinign statement. You really think that a habitual DUI offender (anywhere in the world)...
Maybe that's true there, but not here. Wink and that is an assinign statement. You really think that a habitual DUI offender (anywhere in the world) isn't going to get the book thrown at them the more times they show up for the same offense...and that a judge wouldn't take their prior record in to account? If you call that unfair and bias, please google the word "bias" to refresh your memory what that word means.
...
#991
Posts
1685
Joined
8/7/2013
Location
Melbourne AU
1/27/2015 7:04pm Edited Date/Time 4/6/2015 2:07pm
VET74 wrote:
Digging what hole? I didn't say he made a biased decision. The facts are Reed took out Canard in a non racing scenario and JG black...
Digging what hole? I didn't say he made a biased decision. The facts are Reed took out Canard in a non racing scenario and JG black flagged him. The decision as I see it was based on what everyone watching TV and in the stadium saw. Do I think that JG would give him the benefit of doubt that it wasn't a takeout move based on his history with Reed...doubtful. But call it whatever you want, Reed is the offender here.
#991 wrote:
...

"Reeds actions aren't what's in question. JG' s are." BULLSHIT Reed's actions are the total reason he got the black flag and thus has stirred up...
"Reeds actions aren't what's in question. JG' s are." BULLSHIT

Reed's actions are the total reason he got the black flag and thus has stirred up this mess.

Reed got the black flag for blatantly retaliating against Canard causing him to crash in a non racing move immediately after the two came together while racing for position and right in front of the officials. It's as simple as that. It will get you a black flag or worse every time.

Reed said it was a bonehead move on his part but has also said he would do it again. Sounds smart doesn't it.

If Canard hadn't have went down there probably wouldn't have been a black flag but there would most assuredly been some consequence for Reed's actions. What Reed did and the manner in which he did it were too blatant and stupid to ignore and let slide in any form or fashion.

It would of happened to anyone, not just Reed, but Reed has apparently felt discriminated against on several occasions. Of course he is also the guy that has burned more bridges than any other rider of his caliber and is now putting quit a bit of his own money into that money pit of a team instead of having multiple options to be paid well based on his past performance and future performance potential..

Remember the red plate fiasco? Reed didn't want to play by the rule book then and looked like a chump with his protest. He didn't feel it was right, even though it was right there in the rules how that would work.

Reed pulled the victim card with the county and/or surrounding neighbors over the track addition deal at home which was against the rules. Once again he didn't like the rules that were in place and just decided to do it his own way.

There are other instances as well. What it all boils down to is if Reed doesn't like the rules or gets himself into hot water over not abiding by them he pitches a big ass fit under the claim that he is "just telling it like it is."

His MX/SX accomplishments are stellar, in fact some of the best ever and he is probably the most savvy rider on the track. Unfortunately he is his own worst enemy and has proven that on several occasions by his actions and words.

It's sad to see a person who has done so well coming from where he started to always be in the messes that he gets himself into.

I wish he would just put his head down and race, letting his results speak for themselves.

He keeps alluding to how things would be done in F1, maybe that will be an option for him in the future.

...
Clutchy
Posts
2833
Joined
3/24/2009
Location
redding, CA US
1/27/2015 7:22pm Edited Date/Time 1/27/2015 7:24pm
By the way, and I know this is a mystery, pretty much a secret, but apart from the lawyers who help people be greedy and stupid...
By the way, and I know this is a mystery, pretty much a secret, but apart from the lawyers who help people be greedy and stupid, there are some lawyers who help people do things better and more fairly. My experience over 25 years is that clients get the lawyers they want.
So you're opinion is that, if there's cooperation from the existing parties and they're reasonable, things will be right as rain. And if everything was fair, the attorney demand would see a small decrease. Pinch . I was more curious if the promoter or race organization has any legal obligation to the teams and owners or is it more if you don't like it you can go race another series. Sounds like teams have very little protection.
motosmith
Posts
2039
Joined
11/8/2010
Location
Washougal, WA US
1/27/2015 7:40pm
I agree with you Keyboard, Reed is guilty. There's nothing he can argue. He's throwing a temper tantrum that's only going to make him look worse than he already looks.
VET74
Posts
360
Joined
6/14/2010
Location
TX, TN, AZ US
1/27/2015 8:26pm
#991 wrote:
...
No you are wrong...sorry. Im not going to go in to a long dissertation about the legal system in the US, but priors can be brought up before a jury's verdict. Maybe you should've quit while you thought you were ahead.

Don't you have a job or something you need to be paying attention to?
FreshTopEnd
Posts
12476
Joined
8/16/2006
Location
Sacramento, CA US
Fantasy
4231st
1/27/2015 8:28pm
Clutchy wrote:
So you're opinion is that, if there's cooperation from the existing parties and they're reasonable, things will be right as rain. And if everything was fair...
So you're opinion is that, if there's cooperation from the existing parties and they're reasonable, things will be right as rain. And if everything was fair, the attorney demand would see a small decrease. Pinch . I was more curious if the promoter or race organization has any legal obligation to the teams and owners or is it more if you don't like it you can go race another series. Sounds like teams have very little protection.
Does the sanctioning body have a legal obligation to the promoter, teams, or riders? For what? I guess the question you're asking is do they have duties to them under the law in addition to the rights the parties have defined and agreed to in their contracts. Generally the answer is that the parties get to define their relationship unless their contract requires acts that violate law or policy. There may be regulation about how they go about making those agreements binding, but generally those tend toward consumer protections or matters that involve public interest and protection. Practically, I don't see that being the case between parties with the level of sophistication in play here (usually judged less by education and more by the amounts of money at issue and whether the activity is essential to life ~ something a court pretty surely would conclude does not characterize SX). Court's generally let these bodies set up their rules and the parties live with the consequences, again, barring something arising to the level of fraud or criminal activity ~ matters where the court may involve itself to protect public interests along side the private interests at issue..

There are some situations where a court will intervene to assure someone losing vocational privileges receives due process where the activity is regulated by a quasi-public board (example, discipline of doctors or other licensed professionals), but the FIM and motorcycle racing are a bit of a square peg for that hole.

So, yeah, I do think in the end for it to work it takes people getting serious about responding constructively to situations that reveal flaws in the current system. It doesn't mean the original decision was wrong; the flaw might be that the way the result was arrived at eroded rather than bolstered confidence that the decision was arrived at fairly regardless whether the rider disagrees with the finding of fault (Chad doesn't) or the penalty (which I think Chad does, although it seems like he's tried more to kick the legs out from under Gallagher). It means that all the stakeholders recognize that the best way to do something like this is the way that encourages confidence in the fairness of the process. That doesn't mean it's not messy, especially when the trigger was controversial and of great consequence. Shoot, most of the time it is a mess that provokes change, but that's an opportunity if people keep their heads.

I'd be surprised if something constructive doesn't happen soon. But I don't think you will see any franchising body not have a race director with authority to black flag and/or immediately disqualify a rider for a clear violation implicating safety reasons. Even at the risk of the official getting it wrong, because the safety issues are primary no matter what the fallout is afterwards. And SX doesn't make it easier, because there is very little time to resolve something if it may go bad quickly; you have to imagine everyone involved is queasy about their riders' health from January to May, and it's going to be interesting to see how the wrestle with what's been a pretty electric season so far in terms of banging.
#991
Posts
1685
Joined
8/7/2013
Location
Melbourne AU
1/27/2015 8:36pm Edited Date/Time 4/6/2015 2:07pm
#991 wrote:
...
VET74 wrote:
No you are wrong...sorry. Im not going to go in to a long dissertation about the legal system in the US, but priors can be brought...
No you are wrong...sorry. Im not going to go in to a long dissertation about the legal system in the US, but priors can be brought up before a jury's verdict. Maybe you should've quit while you thought you were ahead.

Don't you have a job or something you need to be paying attention to?
...
Triton
Posts
618
Joined
10/1/2006
Location
Redmond, WA US
1/27/2015 8:41pm Edited Date/Time 1/27/2015 8:44pm
Does the sanctioning body have a legal obligation to the promoter, teams, or riders? For what? I guess the question you're asking is do they have...
Does the sanctioning body have a legal obligation to the promoter, teams, or riders? For what? I guess the question you're asking is do they have duties to them under the law in addition to the rights the parties have defined and agreed to in their contracts. Generally the answer is that the parties get to define their relationship unless their contract requires acts that violate law or policy. There may be regulation about how they go about making those agreements binding, but generally those tend toward consumer protections or matters that involve public interest and protection. Practically, I don't see that being the case between parties with the level of sophistication in play here (usually judged less by education and more by the amounts of money at issue and whether the activity is essential to life ~ something a court pretty surely would conclude does not characterize SX). Court's generally let these bodies set up their rules and the parties live with the consequences, again, barring something arising to the level of fraud or criminal activity ~ matters where the court may involve itself to protect public interests along side the private interests at issue..

There are some situations where a court will intervene to assure someone losing vocational privileges receives due process where the activity is regulated by a quasi-public board (example, discipline of doctors or other licensed professionals), but the FIM and motorcycle racing are a bit of a square peg for that hole.

So, yeah, I do think in the end for it to work it takes people getting serious about responding constructively to situations that reveal flaws in the current system. It doesn't mean the original decision was wrong; the flaw might be that the way the result was arrived at eroded rather than bolstered confidence that the decision was arrived at fairly regardless whether the rider disagrees with the finding of fault (Chad doesn't) or the penalty (which I think Chad does, although it seems like he's tried more to kick the legs out from under Gallagher). It means that all the stakeholders recognize that the best way to do something like this is the way that encourages confidence in the fairness of the process. That doesn't mean it's not messy, especially when the trigger was controversial and of great consequence. Shoot, most of the time it is a mess that provokes change, but that's an opportunity if people keep their heads.

I'd be surprised if something constructive doesn't happen soon. But I don't think you will see any franchising body not have a race director with authority to black flag and/or immediately disqualify a rider for a clear violation implicating safety reasons. Even at the risk of the official getting it wrong, because the safety issues are primary no matter what the fallout is afterwards. And SX doesn't make it easier, because there is very little time to resolve something if it may go bad quickly; you have to imagine everyone involved is queasy about their riders' health from January to May, and it's going to be interesting to see how the wrestle with what's been a pretty electric season so far in terms of banging.
Thanks for the insight FTE. Great as always. In regards to your near to last statement, as I pointed out a few posts ago, JG has rules available to him to handle this situation. It states that if a rider is black flagged then he can't return to the track unless cleared by the official. That could be interpreted as JG could have flagged Reed, talked to him, then decided if he was fit to return to the track without the intent to further retaliate. In this case the flag was called and no explanation was given to Reed. Even if he still determined Reed to be DQ'd, it would have deflated this much more than inflate it. Again a top official should rule professionally and effectively. In this case he didn't. While they may want to retain the power of the official, clarity on the process to handle these types of situations would be a good outcome.

Reed very well could have then finished the race under a warning advisement, then reviewed after the race and fined/probation as per rules or previous judgements.
FreshTopEnd
Posts
12476
Joined
8/16/2006
Location
Sacramento, CA US
Fantasy
4231st
1/27/2015 8:59pm
Triton wrote:
Thanks for the insight FTE. Great as always. In regards to your near to last statement, as I pointed out a few posts ago, JG has...
Thanks for the insight FTE. Great as always. In regards to your near to last statement, as I pointed out a few posts ago, JG has rules available to him to handle this situation. It states that if a rider is black flagged then he can't return to the track unless cleared by the official. That could be interpreted as JG could have flagged Reed, talked to him, then decided if he was fit to return to the track without the intent to further retaliate. In this case the flag was called and no explanation was given to Reed. Even if he still determined Reed to be DQ'd, it would have deflated this much more than inflate it. Again a top official should rule professionally and effectively. In this case he didn't. While they may want to retain the power of the official, clarity on the process to handle these types of situations would be a good outcome.

Reed very well could have then finished the race under a warning advisement, then reviewed after the race and fined/probation as per rules or previous judgements.
Yup, he could have handled it differently, in different ways some better than others. Reasonable people can disagree about the penalty even if the means of its determination was judged fair by everyone. I am sure very few people, including JG, disagree that it couldn't have been done better and should be done better in the future. If he doesn't and in denial about whether the process can be improved to get more buy in by everyone concerned, he'll eventually go the way of Whitlock. I doubt he want to do anything other than to improve confidence in the system, but anyone who disagrees with that probably isn't going to be convinced by anyone's words.

I think folks have said all they can say at this point without repeating themselves, even about the alternative that would work better, at least until someone in a position to do something puts a tangible change or proposal that might go into play up for discussion.
Clutchy
Posts
2833
Joined
3/24/2009
Location
redding, CA US
1/27/2015 9:08pm
Yup, he could have handled it differently, in different ways some better than others. Reasonable people can disagree about the penalty even if the means of...
Yup, he could have handled it differently, in different ways some better than others. Reasonable people can disagree about the penalty even if the means of its determination was judged fair by everyone. I am sure very few people, including JG, disagree that it couldn't have been done better and should be done better in the future. If he doesn't and in denial about whether the process can be improved to get more buy in by everyone concerned, he'll eventually go the way of Whitlock. I doubt he want to do anything other than to improve confidence in the system, but anyone who disagrees with that probably isn't going to be convinced by anyone's words.

I think folks have said all they can say at this point without repeating themselves, even about the alternative that would work better, at least until someone in a position to do something puts a tangible change or proposal that might go into play up for discussion.
Thank you for All of the above... That's exactly what I wanted to hear your thought on. Spot on sir.. thanks again.
1/27/2015 9:19pm
Crush wrote:
On the other hand Piston, if you have whatever bank he has in the bank, let's call it, well, fuckloads, what do you have to lose...
On the other hand Piston, if you have whatever bank he has in the bank, let's call it, well, fuckloads, what do you have to lose?

To gain? 15 points? A new set of rules? Who knows... but it could be big when you believe in yourself as much as him...

I wonder tho, I wonder that tweet he put out, where he hashtagged the #Goat, wonder, and this is total wild conspiracy by internet hoodlums, I wonder if he asked Ricky how he went about fuelgate...
Chrusha, He could throw away shit tons of money over nothing. . .thats what there is to lose. LOL, it's not my money, but I hate...
Chrusha,

He could throw away shit tons of money over nothing. . .thats what there is to lose.

LOL, it's not my money, but I hate seeing lawyers getting shit.

And the AMA don't change rules, they make em up as they go mate!

PS :-)
Defamation - By Gallagher's call it makes Reed out to be a danger to the sport and everyone in it. This can potentially lose money for Reed. In future or current endeavour's. Not to mention by his choice he effectively takes him out of the championship with a call made in 30secs with no other influence. I believe Reed has a case.

If won, Reed will not get points. He will dethrone Gallagher and maybe end up with some coin. Or just one or the other.
kongols
Posts
23996
Joined
9/22/2009
Location
Riga LV
1/27/2015 9:23pm
Defamation - By Gallagher's call it makes Reed out to be a danger to the sport and everyone in it. This can potentially lose money for...
Defamation - By Gallagher's call it makes Reed out to be a danger to the sport and everyone in it. This can potentially lose money for Reed. In future or current endeavour's. Not to mention by his choice he effectively takes him out of the championship with a call made in 30secs with no other influence. I believe Reed has a case.

If won, Reed will not get points. He will dethrone Gallagher and maybe end up with some coin. Or just one or the other.
Or he will just be a guy who suckerpunched another racer from behind.
1/27/2015 9:42pm
Defamation - By Gallagher's call it makes Reed out to be a danger to the sport and everyone in it. This can potentially lose money for...
Defamation - By Gallagher's call it makes Reed out to be a danger to the sport and everyone in it. This can potentially lose money for Reed. In future or current endeavour's. Not to mention by his choice he effectively takes him out of the championship with a call made in 30secs with no other influence. I believe Reed has a case.

If won, Reed will not get points. He will dethrone Gallagher and maybe end up with some coin. Or just one or the other.
kongols wrote:
Or he will just be a guy who suckerpunched another racer from behind.
As I said "If won,..."
FreshTopEnd
Posts
12476
Joined
8/16/2006
Location
Sacramento, CA US
Fantasy
4231st
1/27/2015 9:55pm
Defamation - By Gallagher's call it makes Reed out to be a danger to the sport and everyone in it. This can potentially lose money for...
Defamation - By Gallagher's call it makes Reed out to be a danger to the sport and everyone in it. This can potentially lose money for Reed. In future or current endeavour's. Not to mention by his choice he effectively takes him out of the championship with a call made in 30secs with no other influence. I believe Reed has a case.

If won, Reed will not get points. He will dethrone Gallagher and maybe end up with some coin. Or just one or the other.
Half the people in moto and I bet virtually any lay person who might be on any jury for such a case would cut Chad off and ask ~ rhetorically ~ "what the heck were you thinking?"

Post a reply to: "Now it's up to the lawyers."

The Latest