- This topic has 81 replies, 29 voices, and was last updated 18 years, 7 months ago by
.
- Posts
i find the motivations behind such a stroke difficult to comprehend but at the same time, if the rider (and maybe connections) had anticipated a strong backlash from the media and real scrutiny from the authorities, then maybe it wouldnt have happened..
As someone who is usually the first to point out non-triers (often to stipendiary stewards, and usually involving AP McCoy riding for J P McManus – ask Simon Cowley) I have to say that having viewed the race in question I think you lads are wrong on this occassion. Heffernan appears certain he has Fallon beaten without coming off the bridle, and clearly puts Magna Cum Laude’s nose in front 75 yds from the line – at which point the horse puts his head up in the air and dogs it, leaving Heffernan no time at all to pull his whip out, never mind use it. Perhaps a poor ride, but perhaps the horse would have stopped even sooner if he’d ridden him to lead 2f out and got beaten much further. I am 100% certain he was trying to win though.
But I do agree with some of the earlier sentiments, that, by and large, Irish racing is a poorly stewarded, institutionally corrupt, licence to print money for those connected up to the leading yards.As someone who is usually the first to point out non-triers (often to stipendiary stewards, and usually involving AP McCoy riding for J P McManus – ask Simon Cowley) I have to say that having viewed the race in question I think you lads are wrong on this occassion. Heffernan appears certain he has Fallon beaten without coming off the bridle, and clearly puts Magna Cum Laude’s nose in front 75 yds from the line – at which point the horse puts his head up in the air and dogs it, leaving Heffernan no time at all to pull his whip out, never mind use it. Perhaps a poor ride, but perhaps the horse would have stopped even sooner if he’d ridden him to lead 2f out and got beaten much further. I am 100% certain he was trying to win though.
But I do agree with some of the earlier sentiments, that, by and large, Irish racing is a poorly stewarded, institutionally corrupt, licence to print money for those connected up to the leading yards."Spare me please" as they say there is always one !
Let me first say that the following has nothing to do with the title or subject matter of the particular race addressed by this thread, or any individual involved in it, or otherwise living or dead.
I post in this thread only because that is where the general statement has been made on which I wish to comment.
……by and large, Irish racing is a poorly stewarded, institutionally corrupt, licence to print money for those connected
If that was indeed the case, it would raise serious integrity issues for Great Britain.
It would mean for example that jockeys brought up and infused by the Irish system would routinely be subject – under English law – to lower standards of honesty when crossing the Irish Sea than would apply to those infused by the ethos of the newly-purged British system.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Take for example a man who comes from a country where public transport is free. On his first day here he travels on a bus. He gets off without paying. He never had any intention of paying.His mind is clearly honest; but his conduct, judged objectively by what he has done, is dishonest.
It seems to us that…….cannot have intended to catch dishonest conduct in that sense, that is to say conduct to which no moral obloquy could possibly attach. …..
If we are right that dishonesty is something in the mind of the accused, then if the mind of the accused is honest, it cannot be deemed dishonest merely because members of the jury would have regarded it as dishonest to embark on that course of conduct.
There remains the objection that to adopt a subjective test is to abandon all standards but that of the accused himself, and to bring about a state of affairs in which ‘Robin Hood would be no robber’ (see R v Greenstein).
This objection misunderstands the nature of the subjective test.
It is no defence for a man to say, ‘I knew that what I was doing is generally regarded as dishonest; but I do not regard it as dishonest myself. Therefore I am not guilty.’
What he is, however, entitled to say is, ‘I did not know that anybody would regard what I was doing as dishonest.’
He may not be believed……. But if he is believed, or raises a real doubt about the matter, the jury cannot be sure that he was dishonest.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<R v Ghosh 1982 Court of Appeal Criminal Division
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/1982/2.html
Is it a condition of licensing jockeys visiting to ride in GB that they be educated in, and sign a declaration that they understand, the new-ish British approach?
best regards
wit
The rules of GB racing are clearly spelt out (not sure about the Irish ones).
Whether everyone adheres to them over here, or believes they even need to do so, is open to deliberation.I’m not sure about this one. It looked really bad, but what struck me is the distance both horses put between themselves and the third. Achill Island stayed on very strongly. The other fella may be a bit of a Harchibald, have a look at his previous race. He may not be the sturdiest and it doesn’t surprise me to hear he broke blood vessels.
They are a gambling stable, but usually in different scenarios to this.
Watch it again in slow motion. From just before the 2f pole Shameys upper arms and elbows are going back at least twice as far as they are going forward. Just before the 1f pole he actually sits up a bit and leans back. The horses head is coming up and its mouth is open its being so reigned back. He had a hell of a lot of horse under him, connections had their money on the other horse.
Horses break blood vessels all the time, its doesnt necessarily effect performance.
Regarding wit’s post a bit earlier, presumably wilfully neglecting to appraise yourself of the basic rules of the land to which you have travelled – or the rules of racing in the jurisdiction in which you are now riding – makes you liable to prosecution in much the same way that dishonesty does.
I await your verdict, m’lud.
You can have many rules, in fact thousands of them, but they’re not worth tuppence unless enforced.
hi Prufrock
Regarding wit’s post a bit earlier, presumably wilfully neglecting to appraise yourself of the basic rules of the land to which you have travelled – or the rules of racing in the jurisdiction in which you are now riding – makes you liable to prosecution in much the same way that dishonesty does.
that’s the problem.
in terms of law of the land, there is no such duty on the traveller to appraise himself.
if a policeman stood at the ferry / plane exit and quizzed those disembarking about their knowledge of English criminal law, those not knowing much could not be done for it.
they run the risk of inadvertently breaking it and suffering the sanction and in that sense have a duty to themselves to appraise themselves, but there’s nothing contrary to law in their running the risk.
and if there is no duty, then there is no neglect in failing to discharge the duty, since a pre-existing duty is integral to the concept of neglect.
a typical crime requires a guilty act (eg travelling on the bus without paying) and an intention to perform that act (eg i intend to travel on the bus without paying).
with dishonesty crimes there is additionally what is referred to in the Ghosh case as " what Professor Glanville Williams calls "a special mental state" ", viz "knowing that what I was doing is generally regarded as dishonest".
if a defendant can present himself as a poor country boy who only speaks to the birds and the trees and the horses, or who otherwise because of his own background has no knowledge that a particular act would be generally regarded as dishonest – and can do so sufficiently convincingly to raise a reasonable doubt in a jury’s mind that such might be the case – then he cannot be convicted of dishonesty.
that’s not ignorance of the law being a defence – its ignorance of the moral standards in a particular respect of the society visited, being a defence.
eg "Although in England, I really lived among my own countrymen in a kind of ghetto, m’lud, not interacting with the locals enough to understand their general moral standards and thoughts. those locals that i did interact with seemed to have the same notions i did".
in terms of JC rules, being within them is wholly a matter of contract. there is no duty there on a visiting jockey other than one contracted for –
hence my query about signed declarations of agreement in some form to spelled-out obligations, since its very difficult to deny something you’ve signed.best regards
wit
Alan Sweetman wrote a very critical piece on the Magna Cum Laude race and stewarding in the RP Tuesday Irish edition (not sure if it was published in the UK one)
Enter Magna Cum Laude in the cuttings search facility to read it.
Bit of a wishy washy article if you ask me. This non stayer has entry’s in The Royal Lodge, The Dewhurst, The Beresford, The Champagne Stakes, The National Stakes, The Racing Post etc…
I thought it was a good article as well, zilzal.
Although AS pulled his punches a bit at the end, he had already made the crucial point that the inactivity of the stewards was nearly as bad as the inactivity of Heffernan.
He could also have added that incidents like this do Irish racing no favours in the eyes of people further afield, people who might otherwise be persuaded to bet on it.
Even Matt Chapman, who never gets a thing wrong
said it was the most ‘disgraceful’ thing he has ever seen. He said that live on his Get On show earlier today.In fact I am yet to here one pundit, broadcaster, journalist, etc come out and say anything other than it did not look good – and that was putting it nicely.
Nothing will change my opinion about the race – the fav was backed as if defeat was out of the question. If only I knew before the race that this was the case
.Mike
said it was the most ‘disgraceful’ thing he has ever seen. He said that live on his Get On show earlier today.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.