Anyone wishing to complain about the ACU should be pretty sure about the grounds for their complaint, if they wish to be taken seriously by the DTI. Individuals should also be a bit wary that submitting complaints could leave themselves open to action if their complaints are seen to be nothing more than harassment.

I'm as brassed off at the ACU as anyone but as I've said before if we are to take action it has got to be legal, sustainable and stand a chance of success. The scatter-gun approach is useless.

There really are only 3 avenues of approach.

1. For the Shareholders to vote out the Directors. This would have to be done within the articles of association of the company and I suspect JP and his clique have got that sewn up.

2. For events to run outside of ACU control. An alternative governing body would be needed for insurance and liability purposes, and this has been done in MX and Supermoto in the past. Arguably it could be done in road racing as well though somebody would have to make it happen - and even then if the ACU own some form of rights to the TT and MGP the MMCC may be obliged to stay with them or lose the right to use the names etc.

3. For the Directors of the ACU to be found to be acting in breach of their fiduciary duties, for example in anti competitive behaviour - restricting members rights to compete under other governing bodies, or if Directors were to restrict or give less favourable terms to non ACU events on tracks where they were also Directors.

To be honest guys I don't see any of those being strong possibilities in the near future. The best prospect in the medium term is a breakaway from the ACU in my view, because they are intent on strengthening their own position within the parts of the sport that they control and challenging their current position will prove fruitless.