- This topic has 105 replies, 34 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 6 months ago by
.
- Posts
If I’d have backed this horse I’d be absolutely fuming.
How is that an example of riding a horse to its best possible position? This coupled with a drift from 4/1 to 14/1 exacerbates the potential infuriation for a punter who backed this.
Jockey – Dean McKeown
- Total Posts 17716
Kick the ******* cheating **** out the sport ASAP, sanction him under the the animal cruelty act
They’re on his case already
McKeown referred to BHA
over non-trier ruleracingpost.co.uk
CONTROVERSIAL jockey Dean McKeown has found himself back in hot water after he was found in breach of the non-trier’s rule (rule 157) at Southwell on Tuesday.
McKeown was found guilty after his ride on Rascal In The Mix in the 1.30 maiden auction stakes finished unplaced having attracted significant market support before drifting.
The Southwell stewards have referred the case to the BHA at Shaftsbury Avenue.
If they have been up to no good here, then surely it’s one for those "Dumbest Criminals" shows.
If you want to stop a horse and invest on Betfair accordingly, then your horse is going to be watched hawkishly by the stewards. The stewads even get a camera trained on the horse throughout the race..
When you also use a jockey with a bit of a history in these affairs, then you simply cannot get away with it. So giving trainer and jockey the benefit of the doubt, they would be fools to be so blatant.
The BHA have suspended his licence with immediate effect pending the hearing.
At least that presvents any more trainers being stupid (or arrogant) enough to employ him.
Predictably the trainer in this case, Richard Whitaker, has leapt to his defence, claiming the decision is appalling. It begs the question of why anyone would want a horse in training with a man that has such limited race reading skills.
Credit to Sean Boyce on ATR, who was damning in the aftermath of the race. He reported an email that claimed McKeown might have been riding to orders – Boyce replied ‘only if his orders were to make no effort at any stage’!
I liked the Boycemeister’s response to this Struthers character claiming the licence had been taken away.
"That’s fantastic news…erm, I mean it’s fantastic that you have been able to bring us this news".
You were right the first time Boycemeister.
ATR’s, and in particular Boyce’s coverage of the incident has been spot on. Full credit for that.
Thank goodness it wasn’t tango man in the booth.
Once again Sean Boyce has shown consummate professionalism, pointing out the issues without any "look at me " histrionics.
Regarding McKeown’s licence being revoked – full credit to the BHA for taking swift action.
I can’t wait to see connections try and defend this one.
- Total Posts 17716
Anyone for a prison sentence? he’ll be riding more then horses
It once again begs the question – what happens to the money that has been won unfairly here? Does it just stay in the pockets of those who clearly knew the horse wouldn’t be running on its merits?
While the only deterrents are slaps on the wrist and warnings off, Horse Racing will probably remain the easiest way to defraud people of large sums of money without any serious threat of a custodial sentence.
without the betfair revolution the hundreds of cases of illegal laying would never have been exposed
without the betfair revolution the hundreds of cases of illegal laying would never have been exposed
Over all I am in favour of exchanges, use them myself. The positives being more than it’s negitives. And what you say is true, it is a lot easier now for authorities to check up on illegal stuff.
However, with everyone now able to lay horses, it makes illegal practices more likely. When it was only those extremely honourable bookmakers who could lay horses, there was not (thought to be) much of a problem. Though in those days there was no "paper trail" back to the culprits.
How much illegal laying / deliberate losing was there before exchanges Barry?
Mark
Value Is EverythingIf they can prevent him riding now, why did they not prevent him riding after he was found guilty of corruption?
How many times did he have to do this sort of thing before it was deemed reasonable to suspend him from riding?
Sincere questions: perhaps someone from authority can answer them.
gingertipster, 40 years on-course bookmaker perhaps 5 or 6 times approached by jockey go-betweens to lay their horses, refused every time but still overlayed them and they all lost.
lets look at todays incident, without betting exchanges, what realistically could be taken out of a horse at southwell, I’d guess about a monkey,
How would illegal layers go about it, approach a BIG bookie and ask him to take £10K out of a horse in readies, how could it be done, not on racecourses most days, put a sign in shop window we are offering 14/1 this 3/1 chance, laughable, where would the readies to pay come from.
I’m not that naive to pretend it never happened before exchanges, but NOT on the scale of recent years,
leave the sweet shop open all night unattended and honest people become shoplifters.
Prufrock,
See below – it seems that the warning off hadn’t started because the reasons for the penalty hadn’t been published. It isn’t made clear, but I assume that is something different from the published evidence on which they were found guilty.
This is taken from the Britishhorseracing website :
DEAN MCKEOWN – WITHDRAWAL OF LICENCE
Dean McKeown – Withdrawal of Licence
Following the decision of the Southwell Stewards on 4th October 2008 that Dean McKeown was in breach of Rule 157 for his ride on RASCAL IN THE MIX (USA) in the Book Your Christmas Party Here Maiden Auction Stakes, and in light of the recent decision of the Authority’s Disciplinary Panel to declare him a disqualified person for four years, the Authority has taken immediate action to protect the integrity of Racing.
Under Rule 1A 2(iv)(a)2, the Authority has withdrawn McKeown’s licence to ride with immediate effect.
The betting patterns on the Southwell race are now the subject of an investigation by our Integrity Services department.
For further information, please contact Paul Struthers, 07966 590105
Notes for Editors:
A. The action has been taken under the following rule
Rule 2 (iv) (a) reads as follows:
2. (iv) The BHA additionally have power to withdraw or suspend a licence or permit if in their opinion: 1. such action is considered necessary in the interests of racing pending the outcome of an ongoing investigation or process (whether or not undertaken by the BHA); or 2. any other good cause is shown.B. Penalties / Appeals
Under Rule 2 (viii) a decision to withdraw or suspend a licence or permit for a period of 3 months or more or to declare a person a Disqualified Person shall take effect on the day after the announcement of the decision unless and subject to such conditions as the BHA or the Appeal Board shall otherwise direct.
In the recent case of McKeown and Paul Blockley, the Panel directed that ‘the penalties to take effect after the Panel have given full reasons and the period for appealing has lapsed’. It is for this reason that McKeown has been riding and Blockley has been running horses. These written reasons for penalty are still awaited.
No BC, but there is a difference between laying a horse in the normal course of business and actively setting out to lay a known non trier at any price.
I completely sympathise with backers of this horse though, whoever they have backed it with. I certainly think the betting exchanges should be taking a good look at any accounts who have laid this horse to lose significant amounts of money.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.