- This topic has 2 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 5 years, 5 months ago by
.
- Posts
The Jockey Club washing its dirty linen in public:
There are clearly two sides to this story and nobody emerges with much credit. Has anyone on the forum got any perspective on this?
Racing would be better off replacing all board members with working class people drawn from the wide spectrum of the industry.
An own goal and racing made to look a laughing stock by the upper class twits again.
With just a short piece to go on, appears at least to be a clash of personalities here and may have been borne by recruiting someone ‘not from the fold’ if you like and from quite a different background.
I also do wonder if someone coming in wanting to shake up an organisation so slow to change and heaped in tradition caused conflicts along the way.
While a different angle was sort, in this case perhaps the appointment only caused ruffles and raised hairs with too much pace and friction.
I believe in a number of organisations, the more different mix of people you can have the better with their own creativity and development to bring to the table to push the business forward. Without knowing exactly who works here, I suspect there are many more ‘chiefs than indians’, and while that may create more stability, that also would create less need for change.
This is hilarious and will get them more column inches than they could muster themselves.
Lawyers licking their collective lips.
At a time when authorities should be working together to help the sport.
If you commission someone to investigate internal issues and pay them, can they be objective and independent?
How would a tribunal see this?
If high ranking staff think for themselves or do not toe the line they are soon kicked off the gravy train.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.