I cannot believe what happened..

Robert could hardly walk after the race and we thought he was a brave man....

NOT a man who would defy authority..

We think the case should be reconsidered,,,
Robert is a fine ambassador for the sport...

He does not deserve this treatment !

What did he do wrong?

Thanks. Sounds like rules for rules' sake. Could he have left the bike for examination and gone back for a kip himself?

I have the greatest respect for Robert Dunlop and the greatest disrespect for authority. However if he was so unfit should the ACU officials have allowed him to ride at all? The same goes for Richard Quayle.
Would it be more to the point that they want these crowd pulling, big name riders to start at any cost, but after the event is over they feel the special treatment can be turned off?
I would suggest that Robert was reinstated to keep the fans happy and off the ACU's back and the fine was to show everyone they were still the boss.

Very well said Don.

Very well put Tom.I can go back just a few!! years to when a certain Mick Grant rode in the TT with injuries bad enough to warrant walking with the aid of crutches,and there was no way that he could dismount from his bike unaided.He was a superstar(puke) and so he was permitted to ride!!!!

So did he take his bike away, or leave it in the parc ferme and go to the van himself?

It's not easy for the ACU to judge peoples fitness to race, when the rider will put on a show and say anything to get a start. It's easier to know after a race that the rider wasn't fit.

There is supposed to be a medical officer to ensure that riders who have known injuries are fit enough to ride.

It is not for a rider to decide if he is medically fit, it is for an expert in his field to consider all of the facts I.E. period of healing time since the previous accident and existing medical reports from the practitioner or surgeon who has dealt with the injured rider.

In F1 a driver is subjected rigorous medical checks by the organisers own medical experts. Bernie Ecclestone is to smart to let such neglect jeopardise F1.

If a rider is capable of deciding if he is medically fit there is no purpose in the A.C.U requiring a medical certificate before issuing a licence, do we scrap the need for a medical certificate?

Road Racing and in particular the T.T. has no friends in the national press as it is.

It only needs one really big fatality and one or two spectators to be killed by a rider who was medically unfit to ride to escalate the demands for the T.T. be banned particularly if the organisers have been proved to be failing in their duty of care.

The T.T. and real road racing has enough knockers without handing them bullets to fire on a plate.

I make no apologies to anyone, safety of all is paramount.

Well said, Tom. We all do stupid things sometimes, and need holding back...never more so than when we want to win.

I think Tom is raising the real bogey for the TT and that is indemnity insurance.
No one wants to think of the repercussions if unprotected spectators were taken out even by fully fit riders.
It is only happenstance but the RD name comes up again in the rear wheel incident, which sent serious shock waves through whole TT fraternity.

We have reached the farcical situation in Australia where the free annual Greek Festival in Brisbane now has to be fenced and an entry charge made just so they can pay the public liability insurance!
Motorcycle racing is far more dangerous than Greek dancing or drinking too much Ouzo!

Robert had just completed a one hundred and fifty mile race on arguably the toughest circuit in the world.We all know the injuries he's carrying,isn't he entitled to be sore by the end?The ACU guys dont belong on the island...

Tom, when you have even the half of the talent, grit and sheer bottle that Robert Dunlop possesses, then I suggest you let your riding do the talking. Robert and indeed Joey have done more for motorcycling in Britain than any other rider you care to name. Don't hear you complain about him riding the big Norton. You are not making an issue of the late, great DJ's crash or indeed that of Peter Jarmann. It seems to me that you are singling Robert for special attention. Until you develop the test tickles that Robert has I suggest you back off.

Just a quick comment from an "injured" rider.
Last November I had a "nasty" crash during practice for motocross (my fault, the throttle stuck wide open in third gear). Both ankles broken, small bones in both feet broken and left tibia broken just below the knee. Lots of titanium screws, a few pins and a steel plate and all has joined up nicely. Back on the MX bike, find that I have become a potential liability. Although I can manage all the controls, shift my weight around, stand, etc., my left leg is weaker than the right and I have nasty wobblies on landing from jumps. The situation has since become self regulating as both ankles swell up. If I can get my boots on, I cannot get them off again! The urge to keep riding (racing) is strong but I will have to be sensible and wait a few more months. The problem is I will be 61 next month and I don't want to loose the enthusiasm.

My understanding of this thread is that it discusses the question of infringement of regulations, the heavy handed tactics of the ACU on a competitor and the question of the ACU allowing injured or unfit riders to compete.

Firstly Elwyn Roberts addresses the disqualification of a rider alleged to have not parked his machine in Parc Ferme at the end of a race. Firstly I agree with Elwyn that it was a Draconian penalty given the circumstances, then on appeal the rider is re-instated and fined 500, again an extreme penalty, particularly as no other competitor lodged an objection and there was no bad tricks motive.

In his second posting Elwyn indicates that the machine may not even have been taken back to the van but left with security? if that is correct there should have been no penalty at all.

However even if the regulations were broken, as I stated previously a verbal warning should have been more than sufficient given the circumstances of the rider. Perhaps my choice of words that Robert should have had is bottom smacked were imprudent and badly chosen and taken out of context.

It is completely irrelevant if the rider was Robert Dunlop or anyone else and I take personal offence that I am alleged to be singling out Robert Dunlop for critcism, as I stated in my first posting.

"NEVERTHELESS A BRILLIANT RIDE BY ROBERT DUNLOP GIVEN HIS HANDICAP OF PREVIOUS INJURY". I believe Robert was as badly and unfairly treat as anyone else by the extremity of the penalties imposed others have done far worse and got away with it

Don Simons continues by addressing the safety issues and questionable negligent actions of the ACU by allowing injured riders to compete. This is far more serious issue than a minor infringement of paddock rules.

No one with half a brain would question Robert Dunlops undisputed exceptional talent and ability or past performances of a Manx newcomers win, 5 1st 3 2nd and 6 3rd places in the T.T. plus his numerous lap records.

There must be thousands of us out there who have had to settle for a few silver and bronze reps and the odd place in the 1st six and the fact that a T.T win was never within our grasp. I think we all look up to people such as Robert Dunlop and his like in awe and wonder and our admiration for their exceptional talent is without question.

However I repeat that my understanding of the the thread started by Elwyn is in respect of the harsh actions of the ACU and its failure to address issues logically and fairly.

I believe the further issues raised by Don Simons in respect of inured riders and safety are far more important than the infringement of Parc Ferme rules and the ACU need to address this issue pronto.

I am at a loss to understand the relevance of the tragic fatalities of David Jeffries and Peter Jarman or how their accidents have any connection with this thread, it has not even yet been officially established what the cause of their accidents were and there certainly does not appear to be any infringement or negligence of any kind by either these riders or the organisors or officials?

Finally ACU give the man his 500 back.

I merely meant.....

The doctor makes a judgement, partly based on the patient's answers to questions. Those answers may tend to be optimistic when a guy is keen to race. Good luck to such a rider. It's a sign of his enthusiasm.