- This topic has 27 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 5 months ago by
.
- Posts
The Wise Men Say moment, with Knott riding his own horse to victory in his own unique style at Wincanton was great too.
It’s hard to have any sympathy for him now.
Mr Knott has made some very dumb choices over the past few years but I wouldn’t be leaving the comfort of my chair to join the baying mob, flaming pitchfork in hand.
More than anything, he strikes me as a very naive individual whose being thrust suddenly into the relative limelight was rather a lot for him and caused him to be sensitive to suggestion. The moment of madness when he agreed to do that ghastly Paddy Power stunt was the action that pis
Indeed, whenever a coup is landed – many of which are well publicized and positively lauded – ethically speaking there is literally no difference between what is done by Barney Curley and what was done by Anthony Knott. Well actually, the main difference is a couple of zeros on the end of the figure.The BHA want to make an example out of somebody for PR purposes rather than making a genuine effort to clean up the sport. To this end, they’ve chosen a man without the means to adequately defend himself. I think if they went after every trainer and owner that did this kind of thing, backing or laying, the sport would literally collapse.
Good post overall BH, but I do think there is a massive difference between Curley’s modus operandi and the crime committed by Knott.
Curley has never been found guilty of laying a horse to lose or scamming people in that way via the exchanges, nor even accused of those acts as far as I know.
Inside information when it comes to horse racing would be making use of information not available to the wider general public for financial gain. Whether backing or laying, the end result is exactly the same. People privy to the information make a gain whilst those not privy make a loss. There is literally no difference.
Had Mr Curley declared beforehand that his horses would be running much better than recent results suggested then that information would no longer be classified as "inside". This wouldn’t be feasible though because eventually there would end up being a system where trainers would have to give a percentage chance assessment of every declared runner.
For what it’s worth, I’m only choosing Mr Curley as he’s the most famous and his methods are insultingly blatant. There are many many others who’ve very obviously landed a "cheeky" punt or two in their time. I’m not going to waste energy crusading against this as it doesn’t affect my enjoyment of the sport quite enough although it is something the sport would ideally be better off without.
More than anything, I am perturbed as to how inside information is deemed perfectly acceptable in some cases but unforgivably abhorrent in others.
A convenient scapegoat so they look like they are being vigilant. There is no consistency. If you had a straw poll of what was wrong with racing, a farmer telling his mate his horse was working poorly would hardly be top of the list.
Was the PP incident such a big deal? Traditional race names are dropped on a whim when bookies flash their knickers, but I’m meant to be in up in arms when an owner gives his horse a bit if a shave?
Funny you should mention Mr. Stewart he seems to do what he wants and say what he wants without hint of sanction. Not such an easy target isn’t Mr. Stewart. There is no consistency, at least not to my eye.
Was the PP incident such a big deal? Traditional race names are dropped on a whim when bookies flash their knickers, but I’m meant to be in up in arms when an owner gives his horse a bit if a shave?
I actually think that was the worst thing he did.
It became clear to me then that Mr Knott regarded Hunt Ball not as a living, breathing, talented animal worthy of his respect, but just a tool to be used to make some cash.
Despicable in my view.
Mike
Mr Knott regarded Hunt Ball not as a living, breathing, talented animal worthy of his respect, but just a tool to be used to make some cash.
I’m not sure the two are mutually exclusive, however in this case I agree. Backed up by the Wincanton incident, which was worse imo.
I’m sure Hunt Ball was devastated at such an act of malice.
I’m sure Mr. Pipe, Mr. Nicholls, and associates, we’re all thinking of their "living, breathing, talented animals" whilst they were chucking everything at everything during the last knockings of their title battle a few years ago.
Perspective needed.
I’m sure Hunt Ball was devastated at such an act of malice.
It wasn’t an act of malice, it was mucking about with a horse at a bookmaker’s request. Not terminal, but tawdry and I found it pretty offensive.
Mike
I’m sure Hunt Ball was devastated at such an act of malice.
It wasn’t an act of malice, it was mucking about with a horse at a bookmaker’s request. Not terminal, but tawdry and I found it pretty offensive.
Mike
It was a tacky stunt but no harm was done to the horse and the only person who looked like as ar*e was Knott himself.
Sport these days is littered with competitors emblazoned with advertising from head to toe and I would find it pretty hypocritical if anyone at Channel 4 took offence at Paddy Power being advertised on a horse’s hind quarters before going to the break and seeing the first advert being for the self same bookmaker.
I think there are a lot more things to be concerned about regarding horse welfare than the incident in question here and I find it hard to get worked up about it. The man Knott is probably best described as a "tit" and had there been a "Tit Of The Year" section in this year’s forum awards he’d have won, with Hunt Ball on his back to boot.
Thanks for the good crack. Time for me to move on. Be lucky.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.