- This topic has 56 replies, 24 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 5 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
The Honours system is bizarre, antiquated, debased and means nothing to me whatever, but given we’re stuck with it and that knighthoods are handed out like confetti to those who’ve served time in the ‘entertainment’ indusrty, no one can deny surely that Cecil – should that be a deferent Sir Henry from now on
– is a thoroughly worthy recipient of such a gongJust consider for a while the horses that’ve been through his hands over the decades, and consider too the for-the-most-part exemplary and patient way they’ve been handled
A man with demons, failings and frailties; but one damn good with horses and I for one have thoroughly enjoyed the entertainment they and he have provided
Sir ‘Enry died last month, long live Sir Henry
First time out as in his first honour under what passes for a system Coggy……
Anyway ,I celebrate Cecil as a many times champion trainer and several times classic winning trainer……..much more meaningful than titles and anything that suggests superiority as a being or forelock tugging.- Total Posts 17716
Do people still have forelocks to tug? Dreadlocks possibly, but most people seem bald either by nature or inclination, with No.1 all-overs the order of the day.
Actually it seems some folk do still have something to tug:
Wordtothewise
‘s forelock scrape to Martin Pipe rather demonstrates the point. Your oleaginous kowtow to that admirable, rich bookie-turned-trainer has been the only class-tuggery I’ve seen on this thread, which shows how warmly (nearly) everyone feels about Sir Henry Cecil not as a class icon, but as an individual – and quite right too!
Actually if you care to read it again, my post attacked what you posted and not you
In addition, the points raised by Cav merit discussion, particularly in the context of this thread.
How is calling a post ‘fawning crap’ not insulting the poster?
I don’t think it’s Lester’s criminal record that’s stopping him getting a knighthood, I think it’s the length of time he’s been retired. Can’t really give the man a knighthood for ‘services to racing’ when he’s not provided many services to racing for such a long period of time.
I thought he was Sir Henry Cecil already. Which indicates to me that he’s probably earned it!
Do people still have forelocks to tug? Dreadlocks possibly, but most people seem bald either by nature or inclination, with No.1 all-overs the order of the day.
Actually it seems some folk do still have something to tug:
Wordtothewise
‘s forelock scrape to Martin Pipe rather demonstrates the point. Your oleaginous kowtow to that admirable, rich bookie-turned-trainer has been the only class-tuggery I’ve seen on this thread, which shows how warmly (nearly) everyone feels about Sir Henry Cecil not as a class icon, but as an individual – and quite right too!
Er…….I’ll think you’ll find that you don’t actually know Henry Cecil even if you think you do…….Knighthoods are all about forelock tugging.Cecil’s record speaks for itself and doesn’t need discredited embellishments steeped in snobbery and elitism.
I abhor the honours system as much as any man but this isn’t the thread (or forum) for that. The fact of the matter is you are either pleased for H Cecil or you aren’t.
And, despite my loathing of said system, if Sir Henry is happy with this honour then I’m happy for him.
He’s achieved a great deal and I’m glad its been acknowledged.
I don’t see anything sacred or inappropriate about discussing the honours system and anything taboo about discussing it in relation to Henry Cecil either:
Not being a ‘dewy eyed good old Henry’ person is not the equivalent of trying to shoot Bambi IMO.
There seem to be lots of people who agree that the honours system is a nonsense but at the same time delighted that Cecil has been recognised by it.
I recognise Henry Cecil as one of the most successful trainers of all time………nothing more and nothing less.
- Total Posts 17716
Er…….I’ll think you’ll find that you don’t actually know Henry Cecil even if you think you do……. Knighthoods are all about forelock tugging.Cecil’s record speaks for itself and doesn’t need discredited embellishments steeped in snobbery and elitism.
Far be it from me to dissuade you from these class prejudices about knighthoods,
wordfromthewise
, though they clearly don’t bring you much comfort! You’re as entitled to repeat your bigotry as anyone else.
However, many people on this Forum have a perfect right to feel that they
"know Henry Cecil"
: either personally, or by watching him work. You cannot argue with people’s feelings, any more than I can argue with yours.
Finding common ground … as you say, his record speaks for itself; and he has won many hearts in doing his job so beautifully over four decades. In that sense, he is Public Property, and today’s gong is a recognition of his status as a National Treasure.
I don’t do personal abuse on here ( unlike some) but to describe anything I have said on here (ever) as ‘bigotry’ is a serious error of judgement and an unsustainable position.
Finding common ground … as you say, his record speaks for itself; and he has won many hearts in doing his job so beautifully over four decades. In that sense, he is Public Property, and today’s gong is a recognition of his status as a National Treasure.
Perfect summation.
I’ve opened a thread called ‘Honours’ in the Lounge. Can I ask those wishing to discuss the merits or otherwise of the honours system to continue the debate there please.
………..disappointing that on honours list coverage on the tv news no mention of the ‘national treasure’ whatsoever………a poor show that Cecil’s name(in this way at least) has not transcended the sport after 40 years.
……..sorry for daring to mention this , not sure it’s allowed on a thread that clearly is meant to consist of non stop ‘well done Sir Henry’posts one after the other.
- Total Posts 17716
The better news was that there was *plenty* of coverage for Sir Henry on BBC Radio 4 – as a R4 addict I can tell you that he was 2nd up to Sir Forsyth from 07:00 onwards on
Today
(6.6M average listeners per day), through
The World At One
, though by the
Six o’clock News
tonight he was only mentioned third to Forsyth and Dame Jenni Murray (another National Treasure). Doubtless
Radio 5 Live
led with his name too.
You shouldn’t assume that the Great Majority watch TV news (whichever sample brand of it you might have meant). Quite the reverse! So your disappointment need not be too great,
WTTW
.
I think that is a very wise and pragmatic view david. I have had the occaisional disagreement with pinza, but i feel that he is totally correct here . This one voice, albeit a fairly reasoned voice, is becoming a distraction from the original thread. Emotives such as "dewy" and "bambi" are irksome to say the least. Allow the dissenting voice his place in the wilderness , and let us all celebrate SHC recognition
I think that is a very wise and pragmatic view david. I have had the occaisional disagreement with pinza, but i feel that he is totally correct here . This one voice, albeit a fairly reasoned voice, is becoming a distraction from the original thread. Emotives such as "dewy" and "bambi" are irksome to say the least. Allow the dissenting voice his place in the wilderness , and let us all celebrate SHC recognition
Wordfromthewise’s initial post on this thread was mostly about the honours system and its links to perceive social class, with which I disagree, but to which I never felt the need to respond. His post concluded with:
“Why has there been no knighthood for Martin Pipe whose contribution to racing has been the equal of arguably any in the sports history…..only a CBE for him……clearly not posh enough it seems”
Pinza’s response included:“Actually it seems some folk do still have something to tug: Wordtothewise’s
forelock scrape
to Martin Pipe rather demonstrates the point.
Your oleaginous kowtow
to that admirable, rich bookie-turned-trainer has been the only class-tuggery I’ve seen on this thread”
In a thread on TRF fairly recently, I included both Martin Pipe and Henry Cecil in my list of four trainers who had been the most innovative in the last 100 years. I was surprised that Pinza chose to use such emotive, innaccurate, derogatory, abusive and insulting phrases as “ forelock scrape” and “ oleaginous kowtow” in his response. Emotive is only one of the adjectives which could be used to describe Pinza’s later accusation of bigotry about Wordfromthewise’s comments on the links between the honours system and the class system. I am surprised that you highlighted “dewy” and “bambi” as demonstrating emotive language when there were much better examples in this thread.
I think there would have been very little distraction if Pinza had confined himself to thoughts of Sir Henry Cecil. There are several posters on this thread with whom I disagree, and I did indeed respond to one of them. However, it lessens a dissenter’s argument when he descends into personal attacks on other posters. It is as if he is saying “I cannot express a cogent argument against your view, so I will call you names”.
I think it would not be in Sir Henry Cecil’s nature to couch any disagreement he may have with any poster here in such terms as we have seen on this thread.
Just to rub in the ‘elitism’ that several seem so bothered about and uncomfortable with, it’s occurred to me that this knighthood bestowed on Henry Cecil could be viewed as the continuation of a circuitous hereditary Baronetcy, though one which would give believers in primogeniture many a nightmare
Sir Cecil Boyd-Rochfort was Henry Cecil’s stepfather. Henry Cecil married Julie, daughter of Sir Noel Murless, ergo…
Quite right too, three cheers for the Nobs and Toffs
- Total Posts 17716
… it’s occurred to me that this knighthood bestowed on Henry Cecil could be viewed as the continuation of a circuitous hereditary Baronetcy, though one which would give believers in primogeniture many a nightmare.
Sir Cecil Boyd-Rochfort was Henry Cecil’s stepfather. Henry Cecil married Julie, daughter of Sir Noel Murless, ergo…
Yes indeed, Drone. Cecil was an Old Etonian too, which would doubtless put some backs up even more firmly against your "circuitous Baronetcy"!
There’s a pleasant article here by Paul Hayward:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2011/ju … ul-hayward
… in which one of the snippets revealed is Sir Henry’s failure to even
get into
Eton (man of the people, you see!) Here’s the quote, together with something much more interesting about that sense of intuition I mentioned on the Mark Johnston thread:
"I was the first person from my Eton prep school ever to fail common entrance to Eton so I’m pretty stupid. But I have been doing this for so long, if I see three horses work together and finish in a triple dead-heat I know which one is working the best. Some people might think they’re working as well as each other – but they’re not.
"I always go with the horse, I never make a horse go with me, you know? I always watch it and go with it. I never say: ‘I want to make Royal Ascot with you.’ I watch the horse and feel my way and he’ll tell me what I’m meant to be doing. You’ve got to know the horse, have that feeling. I do everything through instinct."
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.