Sorry AD I should have made it clear I was referring to your post on the Cheltenham thread.
I did wonder ! No worries. I have my reasons but will keep them to myself ! If I had a horse or a share in one I would rather it be with someone else tbh. That’s not a detraction on Killer Kish (a good mate who invited me to join the Zee Man syndicate!) or anyone else who has horses with him.
It’ll be interesting to see whether some of Elliot’s horses do end up with trainers over here and given their connection, it could well be Murphy who benefits.
Not good enough IHRB. Predictable - he was already toast for Cheltenham and probably Aintree, so this just covers the summer and then it’ll likely be biz as usual next jumps season. Whether owners vote with their feet we’ll see. Hopefully so. I hope that the BHA will act independently and make the ban here longer, more meaningful and send a proper message that such disrepect of the animals that make the sport will not be tolerated. Ireland may currently have the best horses but we have the races all the owners want to win.
This is what happens with Self-regulation. What is needed is Independent regulation.
Wouldn't have agreed with that statement before today, as those lobbying for "independent" regulation - like yourself - have varied interests, and of course in some cases a total cessation of horse racing is one of those interests.
Now though, I don't think I am as opposed as I was to the idea. This punishment - and indeed, Charles Byrnes' punishment - isn't really nearly enough. I would welcome changes to governance and indeed independent panel reviews, much as we have in the FA. I cannot find out much about the IHRB referrals committee, but not much about them being independent/impartial is advertised.
I would also say that "in life a commodity; in death a thing to be ridiculed" is as far from the prevailing attitude as you'll get, and it is unfair to leave that sentence hanging, implying as if everyone who's taken any interest in racing would think that. But it looks as if a few people feel that way. And they need black-balling.
This is what happens with Self-regulation. What is needed is Independent regulation.
Let’s wait and see what the BHA do. But I also don’t disagree with your point but with the absolute proviso it does not include people with the aim of shutting down the sport. Sorry @Anna_Kissed Don’t give up the day job.
The IHRB appear to have been lenient on the basis that this was a calculated attempt to discredit Elliott and that he had suffered financially as a result:
The verdict also noted a “sinister aspect” to the case, accepting “the release of this photograph is part of a concerted attack upon Mr Elliott, the full circumstances of which are unknown”
While it considered its penalty appropriate to Elliott’s offence, the panel acknowledged it is “but one of a plethora of punishments which he is already suffering and will likely continue to suffer. These include serious damage to his reputation and, anecdotally, substantial economic loss through loss of business contracts and departure of horses from his yard to be trained elsewhere”.
The £15,000 fine is neither here nor there. Elliott will, presumably, be allowed to hand over the reigns to someone else within the yard? If that's the case then he will return relatively unscathed given that the real sufferers will be the stable staff that have had to be let go as a result of the loss of some of the horses. But the stench of his actions will hang over the sport for far longer.
Mr Elliott won't be appealing the sanction. No wonder. The luck of the Irish, perhaps? Someone will come in and keep his operation going during his short hiatus. Be that as it may. Horseracing will be propped up by Matt Hancock and his chums and public opposition to this exploitative 'sport' will grow. Tick, tock
Lifetime ban and nothing else! He just carries on as though nothing happened with just a change of name for six months,most of his owners seem to have the same morals too.
Mr Elliott won't be appealing the sanction. No wonder. The luck of the Irish, perhaps? Someone will come in and keep his operation going during his short hiatus. Be that as it may. Horseracing will be propped up by Matt Hancock and his chums and public opposition to this exploitative 'sport' will grow. Tick, tock
A bit xenophobic, and you're indulging in some liberal conflation there. 3/10 must try harder
Sorry, Sir. I shall try harder, Sir. Thank you, Sir.
Given a situation where conservatives officiate in the sordid 'sport' of horseracing and the Conservative Party gives support to the conservatives, a resilient and tenacious opposition is required. The number and frequency of horse fatalities on UK courses appalls. One wonders how many horses die on training courses. Will the industry inform the public about that?
I read Greg Wood's articles and he comes across as a decent chap.
Sorry, Sir. I shall try harder, Sir. Thank you, Sir.
Given a situation where conservatives officiate in the sordid 'sport' of horseracing and the Conservative Party gives support to the conservatives, a resilient and tenacious opposition is required. The number and frequency of horse fatalities on UK courses appalls. One wonders how many horses die on training courses. Will the industry inform the public about that?
I read Greg Wood's articles and he comes across as a decent chap.
Glad to hear it. Don't be casually xenophobic; it's not a good look.
You do, of course, have a point, and fair play we all disagree with you and I am glad you don't back down tbh. But to use an incident in a different country, governed by a separate country's horse racing authority, to then prop open the door for unrelated arguments related to British horse racing is clearly bad-faith discourse. You know and I know that the conversation won't go anywhere here and it's just going to leave all of us pissed off.
(1) Boylan wasn't sitting on the horse when the photo was taken (2) Not only was Elliott happy train a horse for Boylan and his criminal associates but he kept a share in the horse too (3) One assumes that Elliott didn't give to charity his share of the proceeds from the remarkable rejuvenation of Labaik at Cheltenham.
If you play with fire then you are likely to get burned. Elliott is extremely fortunate that he received such a short ban though I suspect, as well as the loss of some horses, there is still a chance that he might receive an unwelcome visit or two!
I reject the accusation of xenophobia. My 'luck' comment was used sarcastically, there being no luck involved whatsoever. Those deciding an outcome were not going to hand Elliott a big sentence.
As to 'bad-faith discourse' and 'unrelated arguments': Racing here, racing there; the process and outcomes are similar. People claiming to 'care' speculate on an animal's chances in a competition in which the participant - the horse - has no choice but to appear. The risk of injury and / or death is there every time. I call it exploitation. You call it sport.
Assuming the truth has been told, the photo of GE was taken following the death of a horse in training. How many horses die in, or as a result of training? If the owner / trainer was compelled by rules to disclose the matter each and every time a death occurred, numbers could be collated and put into the public domain. A request to do this has been put to the people in governance. Do you think that they will agree to the request? If not, why not? (Some sort of 'client confidentiality' excuse, e.g. 'On private property', perhaps).
People claiming to 'care' speculate on an animal's chances in a competition in which the participant - the horse - has no choice but to appear. The risk of injury and / or death is there every time. I call it exploitation. You call it sport.
......
As arguments go, it's got a certain understated stupidity.
@Anna_Kissed a quick question if I may. Do you believe that a horses life is equal to that of a human life? If the answer is yes would you extend that to all animals lives are equal to that of a human life.
It is different to human life, but of no less value.
I do not wish to harm others, be they people or animals. I think it reasonable to believe that a horse does not wish to be harmed - or to be put into a position, by humans, whereby it could be harmed.
My thoughts about life and respect for other creatures led me to adopting a plant-based diet. That was nearly 25 years ago.
It is different to human life, but of no less value.
I do not wish to harm others, be they people or animals. I think it reasonable to believe that a horse does not wish to be harmed - or to be put into a position, by humans, whereby it could be harmed.
My thoughts about life and respect for other creatures led me to adopting a plant-based diet. That was nearly 25 years ago.
Nobody who loves horse racing wishes harm on horse or jockey. Yes, horses are killed, so are jockeys - I would mourn the death of a jockey more than I would the death of a horse - neither death would be intentional.
If the entire global population of mice, as an example, were wiped out in the process of finding effective cancer treatments that save human lives then I would consider that to be valid and worthwhile.
If you believe that the life of a horse, a dog, a mouse, an ant (or do you draw the line on certain living things) or any other creature is of equal value to a human being then your thoughts about life are, in my opinion, obscene.
It is different to human life, but of no less value.
I do not wish to harm others, be they people or animals. I think it reasonable to believe that a horse does not wish to be harmed - or to be put into a position, by humans, whereby it could be harmed.
My thoughts about life and respect for other creatures led me to adopting a plant-based diet. That was nearly 25 years ago.
I don't think anyone is going to alter Anna_Kissed views but as a racehorse owner, here is my view. I've been lucky enough now to own racehorses for 24 years. Over that period I have owned around 30 different racehorses ( in different %'s 100% to 25%). Fortunately in that time I have only had one horse euthanased which was because of a congentinal problem which meant he was in pain all the time. He never raced. Apart from that I had one horse that broke down on the gallops and we sent him to Greatwood Centre for Retraining Racehorses where he retrained for dressage and led a happy life for another 14 years or so. All of my other horses have been retired as hacks, or retrained for Polo or Dressage. In all the years of visiting the various stables to see my horses I have never seen anything but care and respect for the beautiful animals. Anyway, and I have made this point before, if those who wish to stop racing were successful or even part successful by banning Jump Racing, all that would happen is that people would stop breeding racehorses - around 14,000 foals come in every year so they would just cease to exist. Its obviously a very difficult value judgement to deny a type of sentient being an existence because some people don't like the sport and a minority of those thoroughbreds just might have a miserable existence. I'm tempted to suggest that if you put this question to a panel of thoroughbred horses they wouldn't vote for breed extinction. Interestingly on Countryfile the other week they were bemoaning the virtual extinction of the Shire Horse breed in the UK because we no longer have a productive role for them.
I have made the very same point about the fact that the horse would cease to exist if people like Anna_Kissed got their way and don't, for a second, think that it would stop at jump racing. Flat racing would be next and then they would move on to any other activity where a horse is "exploited". I don't believe that I have ever received a response from Anna_Kissed over this point and I don't expect you to either.
Anna kissed is great at not responding to certain questions and facts they posted that were wrong just to make himself feel better or his cause. And that's why it's pointless trying to get an answer or even interacting with anything from him.
Comments
Hollie wouldn't get these rides if she wasn't good, And she is very good.
https://www.thoroughbreddailynews.com/protestors-shut-down-racing-at-golden-gate-fields/
A suspension of training licence for twelve months, six of them suspended.
In life, a commodity. In death, a thing to be ridiculed.
Wealth, royalty, political connections, greed; these things will keep this exploitative 'sport' alive.
Horseracing's self-dug hole just got a lot bigger.
Still, horse racing will continue as normal and the thousands that love horses within the industry will keep doing their jobs properly.
In all seriousness, 6 months is a joke and I hope owners vote with their feet.
I hope that the BHA will act independently and make the ban here longer, more meaningful and send a proper message that such disrepect of the animals that make the sport will not be tolerated.
Ireland may currently have the best horses but we have the races all the owners want to win.
Now though, I don't think I am as opposed as I was to the idea. This punishment - and indeed, Charles Byrnes' punishment - isn't really nearly enough. I would welcome changes to governance and indeed independent panel reviews, much as we have in the FA. I cannot find out much about the IHRB referrals committee, but not much about them being independent/impartial is advertised.
I would also say that "in life a commodity; in death a thing to be ridiculed" is as far from the prevailing attitude as you'll get, and it is unfair to leave that sentence hanging, implying as if everyone who's taken any interest in racing would think that. But it looks as if a few people feel that way. And they need black-balling.
But I also don’t disagree with your point but with the absolute proviso it does not include people with the aim of shutting down the sport.
Sorry @Anna_Kissed
Don’t give up the day job.
The verdict also noted a “sinister aspect” to the case, accepting “the release of this photograph is part of a concerted attack upon Mr Elliott, the full circumstances of which are unknown”
While it considered its penalty appropriate to Elliott’s offence, the panel acknowledged it is “but one of a plethora of punishments which he is already suffering and will likely continue to suffer. These include serious damage to his reputation and, anecdotally, substantial economic loss through loss of business contracts and departure of horses from his yard to be trained elsewhere”.
The £15,000 fine is neither here nor there. Elliott will, presumably, be allowed to hand over the reigns to someone else within the yard? If that's the case then he will return relatively unscathed given that the real sufferers will be the stable staff that have had to be let go as a result of the loss of some of the horses. But the stench of his actions will hang over the sport for far longer.
Horseracing will be propped up by Matt Hancock and his chums and public opposition to this exploitative 'sport' will grow.
Tick, tock
Given a situation where conservatives officiate in the sordid 'sport' of horseracing and the Conservative Party gives support to the conservatives, a resilient and tenacious opposition is required. The number and frequency of horse fatalities on UK courses appalls. One wonders how many horses die on training courses. Will the industry inform the public about that?
I read Greg Wood's articles and he comes across as a decent chap.
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/mar/06/damage-of-gordon-elliotts-moment-of-madness-will-take-years-to-erase
You do, of course, have a point, and fair play we all disagree with you and I am glad you don't back down tbh. But to use an incident in a different country, governed by a separate country's horse racing authority, to then prop open the door for unrelated arguments related to British horse racing is clearly bad-faith discourse. You know and I know that the conversation won't go anywhere here and it's just going to leave all of us pissed off.
(1) Boylan wasn't sitting on the horse when the photo was taken
(2) Not only was Elliott happy train a horse for Boylan and his criminal associates but he kept a share in the horse too
(3) One assumes that Elliott didn't give to charity his share of the proceeds from the remarkable rejuvenation of Labaik at Cheltenham.
If you play with fire then you are likely to get burned. Elliott is extremely fortunate that he received such a short ban though I suspect, as well as the loss of some horses, there is still a chance that he might receive an unwelcome visit or two!
As to 'bad-faith discourse' and 'unrelated arguments': Racing here, racing there; the process and outcomes are similar. People claiming to 'care' speculate on an animal's chances in a competition in which the participant - the horse - has no choice but to appear. The risk of injury and / or death is there every time. I call it exploitation. You call it sport.
Assuming the truth has been told, the photo of GE was taken following the death of a horse in training. How many horses die in, or as a result of training? If the owner / trainer was compelled by rules to disclose the matter each and every time a death occurred, numbers could be collated and put into the public domain. A request to do this has been put to the people in governance. Do you think that they will agree to the request? If not, why not? (Some sort of 'client confidentiality' excuse, e.g. 'On private property', perhaps).
I do not wish to harm others, be they people or animals. I think it reasonable to believe that a horse does not wish to be harmed - or to be put into a position, by humans, whereby it could be harmed.
My thoughts about life and respect for other creatures led me to adopting a plant-based diet. That was nearly 25 years ago.
If the entire global population of mice, as an example, were wiped out in the process of finding effective cancer treatments that save human lives then I would consider that to be valid and worthwhile.
If you believe that the life of a horse, a dog, a mouse, an ant (or do you draw the line on certain living things) or any other creature is of equal value to a human being then your thoughts about life are, in my opinion, obscene.
Anyway, and I have made this point before, if those who wish to stop racing were successful or even part successful by banning Jump Racing, all that would happen is that people would stop breeding racehorses - around 14,000 foals come in every year so they would just cease to exist. Its obviously a very difficult value judgement to deny a type of sentient being an existence because some people don't like the sport and a minority of those thoroughbreds just might have a miserable existence. I'm tempted to suggest that if you put this question to a panel of thoroughbred horses they wouldn't vote for breed extinction. Interestingly on Countryfile the other week they were bemoaning the virtual extinction of the Shire Horse breed in the UK because we no longer have a productive role for them.
I don't believe that I have ever received a response from Anna_Kissed over this point and I don't expect you to either.