- This topic has 290 replies, 76 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 2 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
- Total Posts 17716
PS. I relly must get a new keyboard
Not about racing but very interesting never the less
And Lennon in the seller tomorrow at Musselburgh – can’t wait to see the betting patterns on that…..
Seems like everything is being put away until after the National. No need to interfere with the training of expensive horses belonging to rich owners until the season is over. After all if no offence took place it would be a shame to upset the wealthy.Pity the same courtesy is not extended to jockeys,or minor owners and trainers.
- Total Posts 17716
Seems like everything is being put away until after the National. No need to interfere with the training of expensive horses belonging to rich owners until the season is over. After all if no offence took place it would be a shame to upset the wealthy.Pity the same courtesy is not extended to jockeys,or minor owners and trainers.
Do you have parallel examples to support your contention?
I can’t think of a similarly serious case where the BHA
didn’t
take plenty of time to marshal their evidence, to make sure that their judgement (potentially) stood up in court. This seems to me entirely sensible. It also gives Mr Johnson time to marshal his evidence. Which is fair.
The whole thing’s called
"fair process"
.
Jockey Fallon might just possibly fit the case. He was instantly banned until the evidence which did not I regret to say"stand up in court" was thrown out by the judge with no compensation for loss of income from rides lost to Ballydoyle .I believe Fallon had to wait a year sitting out the process.The BHA "marshalled the facts", a nice way of putting it, after they had judged Fallon to be guilty in their own mind.Otherwise why bring the case?
I don’t think there’s one single shred of evidence Andy to support what you’re inferring (that ‘rich’ owners with large strings are treated differently, which I take to be your proposition.)
I realise that Fallon is not a rich owner and that there were many who felt that Henderson got off lightly since he admitted to druging the Queens horse(check back the record),however Johnson has already admitted to medicating the horse; so what is the long delay all about? At least he should be treated like anyone else under a cloud and be forces to take an administrative leave until after the enquiry.I bet he will be punished by being forced to stop training until the end of summer,maybe even to October.
- Total Posts 17716
So you can’t find a
parallel
case where proceedings were rushed through? Not surprising. Banning a trainer has infinitely more consequences than banning a jockey
pro tem
. And there’s a fistful of horses involved in the Johnson case, all of which need scrutiny.
If Mr Johnson is proved to have knowingly raced his horse after denerving, then your cynical notion of a meaningless, short summer ban is going to be very wide of the mark indeed.
There’s several worlds of difference between running a horse on something to stop it bleeding, and risking the life of horse and jockey by denerving.
They also can’t stop the trainer the way they can stop a jockey because of the knock on effect onto stable staff, the yard, other owners etc, whereas banning the jockey is only affecting the individual concerned.
FWIW, I dodn’t think jockeys should be banned until found guilty either.Pinza, Your arguement can be used the exact opposite way. Leaving a yard full of horses at risk with such a possibly dangerous trainer. Putting the ride out lads and the race jockeys at risk. The head lad could be temporarily in charge.However justice demands that everyone is treated the same regardless of their station in life and the consequences of justice should not change the course of it.I will leave it at that .
- Total Posts 17716
Jings Crivens
has pointed out precisely why immediate trainer bans can do immense harm, both to horses and personnel, and I can’t add to that. "Station in life" (a curiously 19th century phrase!) has absolutely nothing to do with the different treatment accorded to sole-practitioner jockeys. And if you can’t see the difference, I can’t help you.
Seems like an irish trainer was banned for 3years for a horse not running up to his potential. Mr.Eamon Tyrrell was summarily suspended without all the highfaluting excuses about "employees" that one reads here.Is not running "on it’s merits" more serious than running under medication to dumb down the horses nerves? We shall see what we shall see.Three years for one offense; running on medication how many times you say? My God. We could be looking at twenty years.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.