General Chat

[Hurdles or chasing]

That's a likely outcome, owners/horses wont be banned, its an individual who is being investigated.

Owners could move stables, but I would guess that if any intend to do this (after the IHRB ruling, and awaiting any appeal) they wouldn't do that until after Cheltenham.

I am not worried at all about Festival bets on horses at Elliotts stable.

Not even a little bit? Surely you can see how much smoother the Cheltenham Festival would go if they didn't have to deal with horses trained by Gordon Elliot or trained by Elliots assistant winning races. I'm not sure what the rules are but can certainly see them trying to avoid all that.

I do get that it would be punishing owners ect who have nothing to do with it.

You reckon they would just be moved to a different yard and would still run?

All I know is I've no idea what the outcome of this is going to be but as it goes on it seems to be getting more serious for him and the industry as a whole.

[Big Chac]

I certainly do, the idiot who did this, could cause serious problems for the sport.

Isn't Gordy the idiot who did this and not the person posting the pic?

[Old Vic]

Isn't Gordy the idiot who did this and not the person posting the pic?

Two Idiots

[ryanh97]

People wilI know that I'm no Gordon fanboy but I'm very uncomfortable about him being branded guilty without a trial.

He has offered an explanation as to the circumstances. While that explanation sounds unlikely it is not impossible and without other proof it's doubtful that he would be found guilty in a court of law. In a disciplinary hearing it will be more down to the balance of probabilities but, if the photo remains anonymous and no-one else comes forward to support the 'trophy photo' story, it's hard to see how anyone prosecuting the case can provide even that level of proof.

As a by the by, if the horse is Morgan, he died as a 7yo, ie in 2019.

I agree Archie. Absolutely, but there would be no problems finding him guilty of bringing the sport into disrepute.

[Spectre]

In fact the person should be rewarded.

I presume you don't really believe this person should be rewarded for the untold damage that is currently being done to the sport by dragging it through the gutter by posting a 4 year old picture on social media, just because they want to pursue a personal vendetta? How can you possibly believe that?

[Big Chac]

Two Idiots

Spot on Vic.......very silly from all involved.

[Saxon Warrior]

Not even a little bit? Surely you can see how much smoother the Cheltenham Festival would go if they didn't have to deal with horses trained by Gordon Elliot or trained by Elliots assistant winning races. I'm not sure what the rules are but can certainly see them trying to avoid all that.

I do get that it would be punishing owners ect who have nothing to do with it.

You reckon they would just be moved to a different yard and would still run?

All I know is I've no idea what the outcome of this is going to be but as it goes on it seems to be getting more serious for him and the industry as a whole.

No, not a bit, if I was concerned I would have cashed out by now, or thought about it, and I havent.

[archie]

I agree Archie. Absolutely, but there would be no problems finding him guilty of bringing the sport into disrepute.

Only if you can disprove his version of events.

[Muswell]

Or a pattern of behaviour

[ryanh97]

Only if you can disprove his version of events.

Surely even with his version of events. Whatever his reasoning for taking a seat on a dead horse, whether that is a joke or whether it was to take a phone call, its an unacceptable action that has done untold damage.

[Eggs]

....watching ATR for the last few hours there is real anger and disgust at Elliott’s actions. The picture is there for all to see, Elliott has provided his explanation which I think has made the situation far worst. He’s not simply rested his backside on the poor animal to conclude a phone call, it looks to me like he’s sitting astride it.

I’m all for giving the bloke a fair trial, but the evidence at hand is strong enough to impose an immediate suspension whilst the investigation takes place. From a personal perspective, I’m sure I’m not alone in having lots of bets tied up on Elliott horses and it just makes a nonsense of all the time and monies that go into assembling a portfolio.

it’s a sad day for the sport.

[Muswell]

If they didn’t suspend Byrnes pending they can’t suspend Elliott

[Spectre]

The fact that some are already redirecting their anger away from the professional sitting on the dead horse is exactly why the rest of the world have no faith in racing’s ability to get its house in order. There will always be someone else to blame The reality is if racing cannot fix what is perceived as broken itself then others will do it for them. This is simply the way of the world.

How do we feel when we see a footballer partying when the rest of us are adhering to lockdown protocol. Do we feel angry at the footballer or the person that posted the image. This is exactly how the outside world will view this.

You're isolating this to one part of a complete picture. I haven't read anywhere on this entire thread that anyone thinks Elliott has done anything but the wrong thing, and won't be held to account. I also haven't read anyone redirecting anything away from him, Just that there is another party here who isn't innocent either, and sees fit to post this on social media as part of a personal vendetta, rather than send it to the authorities.

I'm genuinely surprised some seem to think this part of it is okay, or even to be rewarded.

The fact that this is instant trial by social media is highly likely to kill our sport, or at least damage it to the extent it will struggle to recover from it.

The football analogy isn't relevant either. This has been posted by a racing insider to specifically bring down Elliott because of a personal vendetta. It's been done maliciously, and has much wider implications to literally everyone that works in the industry, or follows the sport.

[Quevega]

Only if you can disprove his version of events.

He's apologised for something though hasn't he ?

His version provides some context, not absolvement.

He is already guilty and has admitted it.

Betfair have properly shafted him in your eyes then ? - I think they have.

FWIW, I think the O'Leary's have done one of the first good things I think I can remember them doing.
Their statement was objective and fair.
Also brave as if other things emerge then they'll have to deal with it, but any change of tack would be completely understandable.

[Birds Nest]

Imagining thinking the photo taker deserves credit for this... One look at the caption would convince you otherwise.

Dont think we can assume it was the photo taker who released either. Why release 2wks before this chelt and not 2wks before the last one.