posted Dec 11, 2007

leicestersq, did you even read anything about this cae before you posted something so stupid? the aussie guy was allowed to give evidence and point was he was utterly clueless and was of more benefit to the defence!

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 12, 2007

Why doesn,t someone look at the bookmakers for a change,anytime a bet looks dodgy they cry foul and most times withold the money.If it is found to be match fixing of some sort you never hear about bookies giving the money back to punters who lost,Therefore they dont have to pay out on the winning team/player or horse and also keep the money from losing bets involved in the same event

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 12, 2007

leicestersq,from your comments its clear you only read bits about the case.When Jim Mcgrath gave his expert opion to the police they chose to ignore most of what he said and instead went with someone who knows nothing about horse riding style in this part of the world

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 13, 2007

I have no confidence at all that those aquitted haven't "got away with it". What would the jury have said - why were they not allowed to reach a verdict? I certainly saw some extremely dubious evidence come out that warranted this trial.

The argument that REALLY bugs me is that because the jockeys won some of the races they were supposedly fixing this means they didn't do it. If you thought someone was watching you or suspicious of you, would this not be the perfect way to throw people off? I know that's what I'd do. Those text messages would take some explaining and no-one has, at any stage, to my knowledge. Blatantly coded texts

Jim McGrath's evidence should have been given to the defence and this is an irritating c***-up/deliverate act which has backfired massively. That said, McGrath has never ridden a race in his life. Murrihy's opinions purely represented those of anyone with the slightest knowledge of racing watching the Ballinger Ridge fiasco. As an Australian, with a lack of knowledge of British racing, he could never be accused of having alterior motives or bias and he was not risking his future by stating publicly what many think (a strength in many ways rather than a catastrophic failing as portrayed) - he was purely a racing expert. Does anyone know if the judge was a racing expert?

The case had flaws, but due to the nature of racing this sort of thing is always likely to be extrememly difficult to get to the bottom of. Only Fallon et al will know if they've got away with it but those people who believe that there was no evidence or case to answer, are ignoring the race footage itself as well as some very, very, intriguing evidence.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 13, 2007

I've been following this case closely and I thought it would make a good farce should someone care to write it. With so many trainers noting superior rides and so many mistakes made by the prosecution I kept wondering what point the trial would stop. Now I know.

As for the cocaine, this is really strange. Cocaine metabolizes in a human system and you have a metabolite of cocaine. The French didn't report a metabolite, in fact the article I read said it wasn't a metabolite. That means the sample was contaminated. Let us hope the party who contaminated the first sample didn't also handle the second. If they did, the book idea looks even more promising, especially for those who believe in conspiracy theories.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 13, 2007

The British Horseracing Authority are the guilty party in this farce of a trial they have robbed the British racing public of Fallons riding genius for the last 18 months, they should now appologise to Kieron and the other accused jockeys and let the French Racing Authorities deal with their own problems.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 15, 2007

fao steve 1976,the jury didn't get a chance because the judge saw how bad a case agaisnt the jockeys it was.There was some many mistakes on behalf of the prosecution that anybody on the jury could not have found them guilty.Also your saying they are guilty for not trying to win and then when they do,they are only doing it to not look suspicious,my god.I have seen some of the best jockeys over the years make errors,from frankie dettori to willie carson and they were never investigated.And finally i have always said that the top bookies in the country get away murder and no one touchs them because they put so much money into sponsorship,they have been shorting up return odds for the last 5 years and the punter is the one getting robbed.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 17, 2007

Okay,Fallon was aquitted, in criminal law the evidence was not sufficient, however I don't think he, or any of the others originally accused would want to face a retrial in the Civil Court. However, he, the BHA and the racing public have been spared the endless arguments, as his imminent ban for 12 - 18 months has effectively ended a carreer surrounded in controversey since his days riding for the Ramsdens. Fallon may have been a good/great jockey when he applied himself, however he has let an awful lot of people down, not least the team at Coolmore, who have supported him so well over the last 18 months, in the light of the confimed drugs test failure, I say good riddance to bad rubbish.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 18, 2007

hes an addict, hope no one you know ever needs your support with the condition with that attitude.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jul 31, 2008

anyone who thinks some sporting events aren't fixed must be playing ostrich with head in sand .
i have acted in professional capacity at greyhound meetings where (outside my influence) results have been 'affected' .
i am sure from contacts in the horse world that this happens also.
just look at stock market /traders to see how any 'betting' event can be manipulated .
unfortunately proof is needed ,not just speculation . however mud sticks in the public's eyes .. would you now bet on a horse ridden by fallon (without insider information)?
sirlearie.

add comment | complain about this comment