General Chat

[Geordieboy83]

Hopefully situation gets resolved quickly and we can all just move on, and get full festival mode going.

[Redbridge]

From their point of view, why wouldn’t they? They aren’t here to help you win money an escape bets that won’t win!

I would have imagined the concession applied to Official Notices posted not rumours as in the Kilcruit case, otherwise any idiot can start a rumour.and to a degree even Gordon Elliott's case prior to any RHA announcement.

[chunker86]

I think the notion that this is some Kangaroo Court that has a predefined outcome is a bit off. Yes the solicitors acting for both sides will have met and discussed the case before hand, but this ruling has to stand up to precedent and appeal and will be deliberated and decided with full legal rigor.

It can then be appealed to a Civil Court or Court of Arbitration for Sport - the chances of this happening are slim, but if the punishment is unduly harsh then no reason that he cannot, and if during these hearings it transpired that there was some behind closed doors deal done before the hearing then the reputational damage would be far beyond anything Gordon has done.




Some interesting extracts from the Byrnes case and appeal, and the link below if anyone is at a loose end!!
Appears the max fine they can impose is 20k
Ban takes effect 14 days after the hearing

Rule 19C confers a wide range of particular powers on the Appeals Body in addition to and not in substitution for any power conferred by any other Rule. These include the power to suspend licences of trainers and to impose fines not exceeding €20,000. In particular the Rule confers a broad power on the Appeals Body “to increase decrease or waive any penalty that may have been imposed by………. the Referrals Committee…..” The Referrals Committee referred in its decision to a case in which the Appeals Body considered the penalty of a fine to be unduly lenient: it replaced it with the suspension of the trainer’s licence.

At the same time, the Appeals Body proceeds, as it must, on the basis that no charge has been brought against Mr Byrnes of being involved either in the doping or the betting activity. Such a charge would have entailed “acts….prejudicial to the integrity, proper conduct or good reputation of horseracing…” contrary to Rule 272 or breaches of Rule 96. Any such charges would be at a different level of seriousness

The Referrals Committee found the “actual and potential consequences of the failure to supervise [the horse]..disturbing.” The “gelding was a danger to all nearby persons and animals.” Any person betting on Viking Hoard was dishonestly deprived a fair run for his money. The Committee considered that Mr Byrnes had indulged in an “unacceptable level of risk-taking..” It felt that a “purely financial sanction on the trainer would be insufficient and inappropriate on the facts of the case.”

Whilst the Appeals Body accepts that there is no evidence that he was aware of the extraordinary and suspicious betting activity on Viking Hoard, it simply cannot ignore the very serious consequences which flowed from his misconduct and dereliction of duty as follows:

1. the very real and significant risk posed to the health, safety and welfare of the horse, jockey and indeed all participants in the race,
2. the financial loss to the affected punters, and
3. the consequential reputational damage to the integrity of the racing industry.

For these reasons, the Appeals Body reaffirms the decision on penalty of the Referrals Committee to order the withdrawal of Mr Byrnes’ licence for the period of six months as well as the fine of €1,000. It holds that the six-month period of time of the withdrawal of licence will, in substitution for the decision of the Referrals Committee made pursuant to Rule 19A, take effect fourteen days from the date of this decision of the Appeals Body.

https://www.ihrb.ie/referrals-appeal...h-october-2018

[Eggs]

.....surprised main Sky News have a reporter at this & broadcasting from the event, even more surprised they are showing the photograph in full.

[ToniC]

Has it been mentioned what time a verdict is expected?

[Eggs]

Has it been mentioned what time a verdict is expected?

...as I say, Sky News reporting from the venue. They are saying the hearing is still going, not mentioning when it might finish, although they say the sanction will surely include a suspension.

I did think it would make the Sports channels but it’s on main Sky News hourly headline now, the result will be high-profile.

[ToniC]

...as I say, Sky News reporting from the venue. They are saying the hearing is still going, not mentioning when it might finish, although they say the sanction will surely include a suspension.

I did think it would make the Sports channels but it’s on main Sky News hourly headline now, the result will be high-profile.

Not been a more eagerly anticipated verdict since the people vs OJ... the suspense is killing me

[riccirich]

Not been a more eagerly anticipated verdict since the people vs OJ... the suspense is killing me

Your forgetting coleen rooney vs rebekah vardy.

[Diamond Geezer]

Sky News live outside the hearing in two minutes

https://news.sky.com/story/watch-sky-news-live-10315632

[Diamond Geezer]

IHB have said they may suspend any announcement for a number of days

[charlie]

6 hours so far, and he's admitted it. Imagine how long the IHRB need for more complicated cases - actually, I don't need to, the Charles Byrnes case took well over 2 years.

[Diamond Geezer]

Whatsapp doing the rounds suggesting 2 year ban, 1 year suspended.

Not on latest news on tickertape on Sky News and they have reporter there so who knows ?

[charlie]

I wouldn't be at all surprised if it sounds and looks a lot more severe and lengthy than it actually is, then after a year once the dust has settled they could reassess

[Muswell]

Anyone catch what this was all about?

https://twitter.com/mousejnr/status/1367885524212588549?s=21

[robith]

Anyone catch what this was all about?

https://twitter.com/mousejnr/status/...212588549?s=21

Believe he made a serious of tweets accusing Gigginstown of callous and disrespectful attitude to horse welfare