- This topic has 659 replies, 109 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 4 months ago by
.
- Posts
"Since BHA evolved, collectively we debated then generally found a way forward on the many and varied issues faced.
What issues were those and what has been Jim McGraths contribution to them?
On the same theme, a piece by Chris McGrath in the Independent published on Saturday:
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/raci … 20398.html
For those that don’t want to read it all, the last two paras are strong stuff:
This BHA regime has handed over the keys to some of the Turf’s most precious heirlooms to innovators protected from their ignorance only by a self-importance acquired in other walks of life. They have squandered resources they complain to be scarce on projects likely only to serve their vanity. They have nourished a credulous (and very expensive) culture of suspicion in the field of integrity.
They have, in short, turned the Turf into a pretty apocalyptic landscape, even before Roy decided that he could still play St George while quietly scavenging in the dragon’s cave. Some knight in shining armour he turned out to be…
AP
Another nail in the coffin of RFCs credibility…
In what respect is it a nail in the coffin of RFC’s credibility, rather than one in JMcG’s?
- Total Posts 17716
It just gets better and better doesn’t it guys?, I’d rather a 100% committed team trying their best to take us out of this depression we’re in and I credit Jim for stepping down inspite of I presume a well paid salary he could of sat on.
Good bloke imo.
I agree , and its not exactly the sinking ship scenario, but a principled decision
One good man down , several others glues to salaries
RFC is essentially dead anyway , the whole shambolic mess is just s symptom of the maniacs running the show
Get them out
Ricky
- Total Posts 17716
Better late than never, and now the bandwagon has gathered enough momentum (given yesterday’s breakdown in Levy negotiations) Mr Wood of course is happy to jump on it.
The article itself makes the mistake of concentrating on the personalities rather than the facts (no mention for instance of the Deloitte report) but his final paragraph on Roy is measured and just.
I give this one a B+ for style and content.
I’m a bit puzzled by McGrath’s admiration of Paul & Nic, think they have shown extremely poor leadership of the sport myself.
…the sport has united to campaign for a fair Levy.
No, it hasn’t.
You and some chums united for a Levy on terms that many within racing do not support.
The only true unity I have seen of late is the poll on here in which 95% of respondents said Paul Roy should resign.
Stick that in your pipes.
Surely it’s time to start up a website with a url along the lines of http://www.racingreallyunited.co.uk where there’s a petition to get Roy and chums to go and haunt someone else.
You’ll notice Greg Wood had nothing published in The Guardian all last week, Pinza.
Even celebrated racing journalists of the year have a week off every now and then.
- Total Posts 17716
Even celebrated racing journalists of the year have a week off every now and then.
That’s fine for
celebrated
ones, but
hacks
like Greg Wood should keep their noses to the grindstone.
As he’s a father with reasonably small children, I hope he was spending last week (which was half term) attending to their racing education.
I’m sure a family day out to the Zetland Stakes at Newmarket would have been right up his alley!
I am astounded that Prufrock seems to have sided with RFC on this one. Has he applied for Jim’s job at the BHa or something? whatever 1 thinks of McGrath he knows the game and RFC are consultants enriching themselves.
Pig Man, I think you’ll find I asked a question – one that no-one has bothered to answer – not made a statement. I am astounded that you are astounded.
Pig Man, I think you’ll find I asked a question – one that no-one has bothered to answer – not made a statement. I am astounded that you are astounded.
I am astounded that you are astounded that PigMan is astounded at your question. What a disingenuous post. You write for a living and yet are astounded that someone has noticed that you added a phrase after the comma in you original question. If you meant the question to be one question then the question would have finished with a question mark at the place where you have placed the comma. That question would have been a simple and complete question requiring more information from Carvillshill about his view on the credibility of RFC. You chose not to stop there. You added something new to the debate that no-one else had mentioned. You asked about Jim McGrath’s credibilty. Not the BHA’s credibility, not Paul Roy’s, not the Racing Committee of the BHA. It
would
be a question of Jim McGrath’s credibilty if the RFC people had said that they could no longer work with the BHA as long as Jim McGrath was playing an active role. But that isn’t the case, it is the opposite.
We live in a world where lots of people, converse, read, write and exchange views. People are very clued up about writing, debating and journalism. I suggest you might want to take a copy of the relevant posts on this thread and show them to a random selection of people who knew nothing about racing or the people involved and ask them what they would infer from your two part question. I know that educational standards are supposed to have slipped in recent years, but if those texts and that question were put in front of an English GCSE class, and the exam paper asked what should be inferred from your question, I would be disappointed if the class didn’t say: “The questioner is defending the RFC organisation and attacking the motives or ability of JMcG”.
- Total Posts 17716
Had Prufrock not used the comma, Marginal Value, it would have indeed indicated that someone had already called in to question Jim McGrath’s credibility. As it is Prufrock has merely introduced a comparable, albeit without unarguable context. If a GCSE student reads in to the question as you have suggested, there’s no unequivocal justification for them being considered to be correct. The wording doesn’t allow for definitive interpretation, thus making Prufrock’s astonishment equally and perfectly plausible.
Edited
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.