- This topic has 68 replies, 25 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 6 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Whilst it would be absolutely wonderful if every trainer and jockey were media friendly and open
Well if that’s what you believe why all the negativity and excuses.
If you look carefully I went on to say it is something that will never ever happen. Quoting part of a comment out of context to try and make a point isn’t really helpful
The comment I made is akin to saying it would be absolutely wonderful if there was no more disease and poverty in the world. A great ideal but something that is not achievable. So we have to work within the realities not the ideals.
If certain trainers can make the effort – and that’s what it comes down to – then they all can.
It is not as simple as that – why should anyone be forced to do something they don’t want to just to please the whims of others. Others to whom they have no accountability.
As far as I am aware there is nothing in the job description of a trainer that says they need to be media friendly, or disclose the welfare of all their runners to all and sundry – until such time as it does, why should they be forced to, if they don’t want to?
I have no idea what you do for a living – but if you were told to do something you did not want to do, that was not a necessity for your job, would you not complain or resist?
Also, as I have already suggested, if a trainer is required to make public pronouncements against their will, you will not get anything meaningful out of them. So why bother?
You make it sound as if Stoute and the like are going to thrown into a pool of piranhas. Personally, I don’t see any budding Paxmans out there. In fact the racing media are probably the most sycophantic group of any sports journalists.
Now that one has put me on the spot – how do I answer that one tactfully? I could go all political and ignore it, but as you raised the issue.
I would suggest it is perhaps unwise to generalise.
That allegation you make could be levelled at some members of the racing media – although it could equally be levelled against some members of the media in other sports as well.
However I can also assure you there are a large number of free thinkers, who can also be rottweilers, out there, who when they get in full flow make Paxman look like a pussy cat.
I saw one example last year where I am really surprised the trainer concerned did not deck the questioner (I would have done so) – they certainly deserved it.
You also need to remember most of the journalists are subject to editorial control and in some cases that really does restrict what they can and cannot write.
Wayne "emmm" Ronney is a professional footballer, not a professional broadcaster, he found it necessary to get coaching for his media "duties" as he would see them.
Oh yes Mr Rooney who struggles to string a cogent insightful sentence together.
In return may I offer Mr Paul Scholes or Mr Ryan Giggs – neither of whom are considered media friendly yet are acknowledged as excellent footballers.
Oh yes Mr Rooney who struggles to string a cogent insightful sentence together.
True Paul, but a least he tries, probably more as an obligation to the fans than something he enjoys doing which says loads in the context of this discussion I think.
In return may I offer Mr Paul Scholes or Mr Ryan Giggs – neither of whom are considered media friendly yet are acknowledged as excellent footballers.
I’ve seen more of those two in the media in their 17 years at ManU than I have of 30 years watching Stoute and probably the next 30 years of watching O’Brien.
- Total Posts 17716
As Racing is a sport not unlike Poker, where keeping your cards close to your chest and bluffing are amongst the major skills to separate the best from the merely good,
Absolute tosh!
If I’d ever played poker with marked cards, I’d have been tarred and feathered – and deserved it.Could you give the links to Aidan O Briens, Sir Michael Stoutes and Jim Bolgers detailed thoughts and analysis on their runners in the concerned races please, would be delighted to read them.
I read Aidan O’Brien/Johnny Murtagh’s and Jim Bolger’s views in the paper on Sunday morning and this morning after the respective Guineas. Bolger was interviewed at Newmarket on the Sunday on Channel 4 and spoke about Gan Amhras’s run and the plans. Sure I read Stoute’s too along with the Cheveley Park guy (name escapes me).
I take your general points though.
Thanks Aidan. I take your point there might have been more in the paper edition of the RP which I didnt see. I did however search the RP website and archive, looked at the Irish Indo, Uk Indo, Times, Daily Telegraph and Guardian sites, did a Google and searched Google news and all I came up with was 2 lines from the MD of Chevely Park and a small bit from Jim Bolger.
- Total Posts 17716
What more would you have? A public "I’m sorry" and full explanations on Newsnight from all the trainers of the beaten horses for "putting us away"? Three years warning off for Brian Meehan, who so bullishly misled the general public into thinking his horse would win,
pour encourager les autres
?
What relevance that has to do with this discussion is beyond me, but 10 out of 10 for the use of French (granted the "general public" probably would be lost with that one, I know am)
Apologies. Indeed I have no intention of seeking work from the BHB, an organisation much exercised in chasing its own tail, to be sure… As for the French quote, try Googling here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pour_encourager_les_autres
The story as to how this well-tried phrase (from Voltaire’s
Candide
) entered into British history is chillingly instructive. The sections you might like to read are "Court-martial, trial and execution" and "Legacy" – the chilling Byng Story concerns what happens, for bad
and
good, when
vox pop
is allowed to impinge on aristocratic privilege.
As a proficient Googler I’m surprised you missed the RTE report, with full post-race comments from Chris Richardson on Evasive. It’s here:
http://www.rte.ie/sport/racing/2009/050 … stars.htmlThough it occurs to me that a Google on "Sir Michael Stoute Evasive" might produce ironic results, at least so far as this thread is concerned!
Im with Paul….the trainer works for and reports to the owner….not the betting public / media.
The only information a trainer should be giving to the public is that the horse is fit and well and ready to give his best.
I’ll read about John Byng and try to relate his story to media coverage of Group 1 horseracing when I get time Pinza. Thanks for the link to RTE, read with interest although still no comment from the great man himself.
Julian Muscat wrote a good article in The Times today. His comment…..
"We must hope the marketing men deliver concepts more substantial than old chestnuts like the undesirability of racing jargon. If jargon alone alienates audiences, cricket would be watched by one man and his dog."
…..is particulalry relevant to this discussion imo.
Full article here…..http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/ … 221707.ece
I can see both sides here but I feel that there’s a difference between someone training a horse to win a small race and someone with a fancied horse in a Classic. In the former case I’d agree with Paul that I’d expect my trainer to keep schtum if I were planning a bet- after all I pay the bills. In the latter case the huge prizemoney, prestige and increase in the horse’s value should it win surely means owner confidentiality is less important than keeping the betting public fully informed.
but surely all the runners in a classic are expected to run to form….a trainer is not going to run a horse in a classic if he doesn;t think its fit enough to win? If we all backed horses on trainers comments we’d probably all be skint….I’m sure O’Grady says his horse is a cert nearly every time it runs!
- Total Posts 17716
I’ll read about John Byng and try to relate his story to media coverage of Group 1 horseracing when I get time Pinza.
The Byng story is a fascinating and chilling chunk of history, showing (amongst other things) how difficult it is to gauge a response to mob feeling, and how easily that response can get out of hand. As for its application to this thread, Voltaire’s famous phrase encapsulates (ironically) the complex effect that making an example of one transgressor, in order to satisfy the redtop press, will have on his colleagues.
In other words, they are damned if they do, and damned if they don’t.
Thank you for the link to Julian Muscat’s article, which is full of sense (apart from the daft idea of an end-of-season "championship" meeting, which doesn’t work in the USA any better than it would here for something as complex as the Flat, which has early and mid-season climaxes at each distance as well as the late – and no more reliable – Group 1 races.)
"We must hope the marketing men deliver concepts more substantial than old chestnuts like the undesirability of racing jargon. If jargon alone alienates audiences, cricket would be watched by one man and his dog."
Of course. My
own
irony in pretending to take Gosden to task for jargon clearly lacked Voltairean clarity!
Aside from his acute attack on the headless chickens responsible for what passes for Flat marketing (roll on the next Famous Race, be it the
Call Betsquare on 0800 Gold Cup Heritage Handicap
or whatever accessible rebranding they’ve opened their legs to) … I found his last line the most interesting:
"The danger here is that racing comes to expect too many conversions to its cause. It has always been, and will always remain, a minority sport."
All sports are, in that sense, minority pursuits. Most people simply don’t give a damn about football either. Fact. Racing may never recapture its 19th century pre-eminence in the popular imagination, though; and it ought not to be wasting resources applying scatter-gun marketing in hope that it can somehow manage to square the circle.
And that is the point. No amount of candid, dumbed-down TV interviewing of dear Sir Michael Stoute will lead to Racing leap-frogging football in redtop popular esteem. And
Thank Goodness for that!!
Whilst it would be absolutely wonderful if every trainer and jockey were media friendly and open
Well if that’s what you believe why all the negativity and excuses.
If you look carefully I went on to say it is something that will never ever happen. Quoting part of a comment out of context to try and make a point isn’t really helpful
The comment I made is akin to saying it would be absolutely wonderful if there was no more disease and poverty in the world. A great ideal but something that is not achievable. So we have to work within the realities not the ideals.
I used that quote because in the context of everything else you have written on this thread it made no sense whatsoever. The ideal may be unattainable but if you really believe what you have written surely you would want to move towards it.
If certain trainers can make the effort – and that’s what it comes down to – then they all can.
It is not as simple as that – why should anyone be forced to do something they don’t want to just to please the whims of others. Others to whom they have no accountability.
As far as I am aware there is nothing in the job description of a trainer that says they need to be media friendly, or disclose the welfare of all their runners to all and sundry – until such time as it does, why should they be forced to, if they don’t want to?
I have no idea what you do for a living – but if you were told to do something you did not want to do, that was not a necessity for your job, would you not complain or resist?
Also, as I have already suggested, if a trainer is required to make public pronouncements against their will, you will not get anything meaningful out of them. So why bother?
Actually I think it is as simple as that and yes it would be better if they did it on a voluntary basis. I am sure in other sports fines are imposed if competitors do not turn up at press conferences.
Not comparing like with like but I have worked beyond my job description and if someone was interested enough to ask me about my job I wouldn’t be inclined to give them short shrift.
You make it sound as if Stoute and the like are going to thrown into a pool of piranhas. Personally, I don’t see any budding Paxmans out there. In fact the racing media are probably the most sycophantic group of any sports journalists.
Now that one has put me on the spot – how do I answer that one tactfully? I could go all political and ignore it, but as you raised the issue.
I would suggest it is perhaps unwise to generalise.
That allegation you make could be levelled at some members of the racing media – although it could equally be levelled against some members of the media in other sports as well.
However I can also assure you there are a large number of free thinkers, who can also be rottweilers, out there, who when they get in full flow make Paxman look like a pussy cat.
I saw one example last year where I am really surprised the trainer concerned did not deck the questioner (I would have done so) – they certainly deserved it.
You also need to remember most of the journalists are subject to editorial control and in some cases that really does restrict what they can and cannot write.
Unless you can put a bit more flesh on the bones that isn’t what I read or see – the editorial shackles are hardly likely to come off just because a few of the die hards make themselves more accessible?
I used that quote because in the context of everything else you have written on this thread it made no sense whatsoever.
Obviously I would disagree but I don’t really get into a discussion on nuances and semantics
The ideal may be unattainable but if you really believe what you have written surely you would want to move towards it.
Why – I have no problem with the status quo
Actually I think it is as simple as that and yes it would be better if they did it on a voluntary basis. I am sure in other sports fines are imposed if competitors do not turn up at press conferences.
You still have not addressed the point I made that if the trainers are press ganged into attending press conferences and they just go through the motions and make vacuous general comments then what will be achieved. Punters will have learned nothing and everyones time would be wasted.
You can "force" a traier to attend a press conference but you can’t control what he says. I certainly would not waste my time attending a press conference where the subject was just going through the motions.
Not comparing like with like but I have worked beyond my job description and if someone was interested enough to ask me about my job I wouldn’t be inclined to give them short shrift.
That is, again, ignoring the point I am making. Would you reveal confidential work related information to the general public?
Unless you can put a bit more flesh on the bones that isn’t what I read or see
Not knowing what you read and see I obviously cannot comment. All I can comment on is what I see.
And no I am not goint to betray confidences and put "flesh on the bones"
I think there is quite a difference between making yourself accessible and giving out confidential information.
As this in danger of turning into a tennis match just to try and move things along how do we compare with other countries in terms of media access?
I had Equidia for quite a time and reporters spoke to trainers in the stands with seemingly no problems. Anyone confirm what happens in the US, Australia……
From my limited understanding Australian trainers are obliged to submit to the stewards racing tactics ( instructions to their jockeys) on how the horse is going to be ridden. Any deviation is questioned after the race and penalties levied if answers are unsatisfactory.
Is this information publicized?The philosophy that it’s ok for owners/trainers/jockeys to withold vital facts from the betting public, in order to land a punt or ‘lay’ the horse, is surely unsavoury putting it politely. The betting public funds these activities.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.