- This topic has 70 replies, 24 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 9 months ago by
.
- Posts
Cattermole adds of McCririck: "If John can make a few quid for charity, then good luck to him."
Rididculous comment from Cattermole.
Collecting for charity is not the raison d’etre of the legal system.
Mike
I didn’t mind seeing the old snot eater occasionally telling off some of the annoying punters who’d linger around the camera pulling faces, making stupid hand gestures, etc.
That said, Mr McCririck was way past his sell-by date and was probably in danger of growing fungi. If he does win his case, then it won’t be much
I’ll miss Alastair Down though.
I cannot seem to avoid the conclusion that the principle of age discrimination means that the only way an employer can avoid liability is to allow older employees to keep working until they die. How on earth does an employer get rid of old employees without the implication of age discrimination?
I liked this from Terence Blacker from the "i"
and the The Independent:-I haven’t got a clue about whether he would win this case or not but if he does (and sadly there are examples of people getting compensation who imo shouldn’t have … and others who should have but don’t) I hope he donates it ALL to racing charities … dream on I suppose! It is just TOO stupid for words … he should just retire from public life completely – but maybe the Booby doesn’t want him at home all the time (and who could blame her??)???!!!
If talent were manifest as elastic, big Mac would not possess enough to create a mosquito’s jockstrap. He reminds me of David Dickinson from the antiques world, who seems equally out of his depth in reality, when compared to the projected persona. Pick any episode of Dickinson’s Real Deal and you will here the stock evaluation assessment by ‘The Master’
‘Well, the auctioneer and the independent valuers are saying 200 to 300 and I agree with them’
In reality he hasn’t got a Scooby and McCririck is the same. Empty vessels do indeed make the most noise, a dinosaur in the 21st Century.
Thanks for the good crack. Time for me to move on. Be lucky.
– but maybe the Booby doesn’t want him at home all the time (and who could blame her??)???!!!
Don’t you believe it – she is his manager and the "brains" behind the outfit – she says "jump", he says "how high"
he hasn’t got a Scooby and McCririck is the same.
The thing is, McCririck DOES know his stuff and his betting information and statistics are second to none.
His detailed figures for winning favourites, longest priced winners of a race etc, often going back many decades, are unparalleled by any other betting presenter or expert.
They represent hours of detailed and impressive research and should not be under-estimated. It’s unfair to say, as many have done elsewhere, that he doesn’t know what he is talking about.
He clearly does and, in his heyday until very recently, was a formidable figure for his knowledge. He rightly won a reputation as a fearless, campaigning journalist not afraid to take on vested interests.
That has become tarnished in recent years and, despite his wealth of knowledge, it is undoubtedly time for him to stand down gracefully at the age of 72.
That obviously isn’t going to happen and he is determined to make the whole thing as unpleasant as possible but he seems to be picking up plenty of extra TV work with his bellyaching now.
The thing is, McCririck DOES know his stuff and his betting information and statistics are second to none.
So, you are saying that Big Mac hand compiles and remembers all the stats off the top of his head?
I had someone claim years ago that Jeff Stelling had a savant like ability to take a latest score and work out the league positions that would change, all in the the bat of an eyelid. Nothing at all to do with a backroom team, several computers and someone talking into your ear constantly!! Similarly, it was revealed by Stephen Fry that some viewers believe that he knows all about all the facts on the show QI, which he presents.
In any case, the information is pretty much all there on the net these days and the value of Mac’s stats, however they are culled, is pretty spurious. 14 favs in 31 runnings, blah blah, has about as much relevance to an upcoming race as a cow has to asking for a half-holiday. Betfair and the betting ring are in a tandem now and it is pretty much a one person job in my opinion. It hardly warrants two presenters for that aspect of the show. Jesus, even Carol Vorderman had to learn to multi-task and handle both letters AND numbers on Countdown after it was decided that one for each task might be hard on value for money front.
Mac is a failed bookie and a rotten tipster, the skills he has wowed you with are basic arithmetic grunt work for anyone who wishes to look for the pot of gold at the end of that Nostredamian rainbow. Charm and wit are two skills that missed Mac when God fired the talent blunderbus at him during birth. I will miss him like Beethoven missed the sound of urine drying!
Thanks for the good crack. Time for me to move on. Be lucky.
RE The Booby and Don’t you believe it – she is his manager and the "brains" behind the outfit – she says "jump", he says "how high"
I’d agree with that – why on earth would she put up with him otherwise …??? !!!!I will not miss Big Mac’s "someone somewhere knew something" whenever a horse is heavily backed and wins or weak in the market and runs a stinker…
No No Bingo halved in price at Plumpton today, yet pulled up; doesn’t quite fit in to that way of thinking. But I just bet he’d have said it about the winner Simply Wings, 11/2 in to 7/2.
"Someone somewhere knew something" makes it sound (to the mug punter) as if a horse has deliberately been stopped prior to improving to win; or deliberately made unfit to lose. Where as in reality it’s just punters recognising a particularly good price (backed in) or poor price (friendless). Again, in today’s 3:15 Plumpton Lord Singer doubled in price from last night’s price, yet ran a stormer in 2nd.
Big Mac only saw what he wanted to see, when he wanted to see it. Making it look as if he was the "punters pal", the only person to point these (usually meaningless) things out.
Value Is Everythinghe hasn’t got a Scooby and McCririck is the same.
The thing is, McCririck DOES know his stuff and his betting information and statistics are
second to none
.
His detailed figures for
winning favourites, longest priced winners
of a race etc, often going back many decades, are unparalleled by any other betting presenter or expert.
They represent hours of detailed and
impressive research
and
should not be under-estimated
. It’s unfair to say, as many have done elsewhere, that he doesn’t know what he is talking about.
He clearly does and, in his heyday until very recently, was a formidable figure for his knowledge. He rightly won a reputation as a fearless, campaigning journalist not afraid to take on vested interests.
That has become tarnished in recent years and, despite his wealth of knowledge, it is undoubtedly time for him to stand down gracefully at the age of 72.
That obviously isn’t going to happen and he is determined to make the whole thing as unpleasant as possible but he seems to be picking up plenty of extra TV work with his bellyaching now.
Most of the stuff John came out with was useless for gambling purposes. A race with "a poor record for favourites" invariably an open handicap, often 3 year old handicap at the start of the season. Der! Of course some 3 year olds will improve a lot over the winter, so form is often misleading… And is he really saying if the favourite misbehaves in the paddock, "flip-flops" – then the original favourite has a better chance of winning just because it is no longer fav?!
In my opinion his statistics were never "impressive" and (with few exceptions) were difficult to "under-estimate".
Value Is EverythingThen again Ginge, it would also be somewhat naive to believe that such practices do not occur, as they quite often did in the past.
I have always maintained that wherever professional sport is practiced – and where money is undoubtedly king – you can bet your last pound coin that there will always be someone, somewhere (
) who is all too ready and willing to try and gain some sort of advantage over the rest.Gambling Only Pays When You're Winning
Totally agree H, but just because a horse is well backed and wins, or friendless and runs badly… Does not mean there is neccessarily anything sinister in it. Which Big Mac’s words seemed to imply.
Value Is EverythingTotally agree H, but just because a horse is well backed and wins, or friendless and runs badly… Does not mean there is neccessarily anything sinister in it. Which Big Mac’s words seemed to imply.
Does he imply that it is sinister though, that’s the question. I always took it for what it was – a Big Mac throwaway line, laced with an element of contrived "intrigue" and more often than not, embellished for effect.
There was an interesting Matt Chapman interview with the Baldings, Toby, Ian and Andrew, originally on ATR. A Dynasty of Baldings ( six parts, featuring AP, Mill Reef, Morley Street et al ) is currently available on YouTube and well worth a look. Old Toby was not averse to laying out a horse ( or two ) in order to win a big prize – and at big odds.
Hear his thoughts on the subject. Gambling Only Pays When You're Winning
Totally agree H, but just because a horse is well backed and wins, or friendless and runs badly… Does not mean there is neccessarily anything sinister in it. Which Big Mac’s words seemed to imply.
Does he imply that it is sinister though, that’s the question. I always took it for what it was – a Big Mac throwaway line, laced with an element of contrived "intrigue" and more often than not, embellished for effect.
There was an interesting Matt Chapman interview with the Baldings, Toby, Ian and Andrew, originally on ATR. A Dynasty of Baldings ( six parts, featuring AP, Mill Reef, Morley Street et al ) is currently available on YouTube and well worth a look. Old Toby was not averse to laying out a horse ( or two ) in order to win a big prize – and at big odds.
Hear his thoughts on the subject. I was searching for the word/s. Your "element of contrived intrigue" and "embelished for effect" is a much better way of saying it than my "sinister".
I saw the Dynasty Of Baldings interview at the time. Somewhat surprised Toby admitted to certain things. But he is also "Old school", old-fashioned opinions. It’s usually the older/retired trainers who are behind in the Morals Stakes as far as racing is concerned.
Come to think of it:
It is interesting that jockeys to learn their trade at Kimpton have seen their fair share of controversey over the years. Including Richard Guest, Graham Bradley, John Williams and Sean Fox. Toby spoke up for the latter (was he National Trainers Federation President or something like that at the time?) in the Ice Saint (Fontwell) affair. Where Sean got "unbalanced" and fell off. John Williams was said in John Francome’s book "Born Lucky" to have pulled up in the fog, only to join in again on the final circuit to win a race. Richard Guest has been in trouble with stewards more than most… And less said about Graham Bradley the better.It’s good to see Toby recovering well from stroke, a great story-teller but he went down in my estimation after that interview.
Value Is EverythingCan I just add this from Saturday’s Racing Post, which I buy to help with the PRICEWISE competition.
Lang explained "The way it works in board terms is that he would need to show that the decision not to renew his contract was because of his age, and then with age discrimination there is the ability for an employer to seek to justify it.So even if there is less favourable treatment because of age, an employer can say there was a legitimate aim and that this was a proportionate means of achieving it."
The tribunal will look at the amounts you would otherwise have earned, and he is 72 and a factor in that is going to be how much longer would he have continued anyway."CAN BE MADE FOR WHAT IS CALLED
Hear his thoughts on the subject. 
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.