|
Title: Panorama - racing bets Post by: rossfourfive on July 30, 2008, 10:01:43 PM Did anyone watch panorama?
Interesting stuff, i'm no lawyer but surely some of the evidence they had was enough to discipline the jockeys if not the guys betting on the races themselves. Thoughts? Title: Re: Panorama - racing bets Post by: Pelham Boy on July 30, 2008, 10:04:43 PM Shit. Forgot all about it.
Title: Re: Panorama - racing bets Post by: rossfourfive on July 30, 2008, 10:07:00 PM iplayer FTW
Title: Re: Panorama - racing bets Post by: ripple11 on July 30, 2008, 10:08:29 PM Unbelievable a Judge threw it out, if he saw the evidence Panorama presented.
Title: Re: Panorama - racing bets Post by: ripple11 on July 30, 2008, 10:14:42 PM Great quote from the jockey who was met by the gambler in the pub, half an hour after he had lost on the heavily laid horse........"what was in the bulging envelope given to you by Mr. Gambler? Answer: " Mothercare vouchers" rotflmfao rotflmfao Title: Re: Panorama - racing bets Post by: rossfourfive on July 30, 2008, 10:28:02 PM Great quote from the jockey who was met by the gambler in the pub, half an hour after he had lost on the heavily laid horse........"what was in the bulging envelope given to you by Mr. Gambler? Answer: " Mothercare vouchers" rotflmfao rotflmfao hahaha yea pure comedy, there is a dodgy market for mothercare vouchers i hear. The guy kicking the presenter was pretty comedy aswell. It was so clear they're guilty just from the way they act when the presenter asks the questions and points a camera in their face, unfortunately not clear enough in law. Title: Re: Panorama - racing bets Post by: boldie on July 31, 2008, 08:28:14 AM crap missed it. Will catch it on iplayer later.
the mistake with the jockey trial was that everything was linked to Fallon. Once the case against Fallon fell through (As everyone in racing knew it would) they had no choice but the let the other guys off...and the other guys definitely had a case to answer. (in my opinion) Title: Re: Panorama - racing bets Post by: ripple11 on July 31, 2008, 10:14:45 AM crap missed it. Will catch it on iplayer later. the mistake with the jockey trial was that everything was linked to Fallon. Once the case against Fallon fell through (As everyone in racing knew it would) they had no choice but the let the other guys off...and the other guys definitely had a case to answer. (in my opinion) I missed the first bit, but yes the case against Fallon was less convincing than against the other jockeys. The evidence was all there. Betfair betting patterns, regarding times and amounts, taped phone conversations,meeting in Pubs with envelopes, writtern records. Anyone with half a brain and a basic knowledge of racing would see there is a case to answer. I know the Australian "Racing expert" said he couldn't observe anything wrong in any of the races, but that shouldn't have swayed the judge to throw it out, with all the other evidence. Title: Re: Panorama - racing bets Post by: boldie on July 31, 2008, 10:27:49 AM crap missed it. Will catch it on iplayer later. the mistake with the jockey trial was that everything was linked to Fallon. Once the case against Fallon fell through (As everyone in racing knew it would) they had no choice but the let the other guys off...and the other guys definitely had a case to answer. (in my opinion) I missed the first bit, but yes the case against Fallon was less convincing than against the other jockeys. The evidence was all there. Betfair betting patterns, regarding times and amounts, taped phone conversations,meeting in Pubs with envelopes, writtern records. Anyone with half a brain and a basic knowledge of racing would see there is a case to answer. I know the Australian "Racing expert" said he couldn't observe anything wrong in any of the races, but that shouldn't have swayed the judge to throw it out, with all the other evidence. The Australian racing expert was a joke...that was such a clear case of the people prosecuting not understanding what they were prosecuting it was unreal. Title: Re: Panorama - racing bets Post by: steeveg on July 31, 2008, 11:09:18 AM crap missed it. Will catch it on iplayer later. one of the biggest fiddlers in racing was trainer Ken Payne,in his autobiography he admits he stopped his horses from winning for years, but he also explains he never once gave orders for a jockey to pull a horse, there was no need he says, all i ever had to do was give the wrong riding instructions for that horse for it to loose, if it needed to make the pace i would tell the jockey to hold it up,if it needed covering up i would tell the jockey to give the horse plenty of space, nearly all horse need to run there race in a certain way, i would be checking the records for this if i wanted evidence of race fixingthe mistake with the jockey trial was that everything was linked to Fallon. Once the case against Fallon fell through (As everyone in racing knew it would) they had no choice but the let the other guys off...and the other guys definitely had a case to answer. (in my opinion) I missed the first bit, but yes the case against Fallon was less convincing than against the other jockeys. The evidence was all there. Betfair betting patterns, regarding times and amounts, taped phone conversations,meeting in Pubs with envelopes, writtern records. Anyone with half a brain and a basic knowledge of racing would see there is a case to answer. I know the Australian "Racing expert" said he couldn't observe anything wrong in any of the races, but that shouldn't have swayed the judge to throw it out, with all the other evidence. The Australian racing expert was a joke...that was such a clear case of the people prosecuting not understanding what they were prosecuting it was unreal. Title: Re: Panorama - racing bets Post by: boldie on July 31, 2008, 11:15:18 AM crap missed it. Will catch it on iplayer later. the mistake with the jockey trial was that everything was linked to Fallon. Once the case against Fallon fell through (As everyone in racing knew it would) they had no choice but the let the other guys off...and the other guys definitely had a case to answer. (in my opinion) I missed the first bit, but yes the case against Fallon was less convincing than against the other jockeys. The evidence was all there. Betfair betting patterns, regarding times and amounts, taped phone conversations,meeting in Pubs with envelopes, writtern records. Anyone with half a brain and a basic knowledge of racing would see there is a case to answer. I know the Australian "Racing expert" said he couldn't observe anything wrong in any of the races, but that shouldn't have swayed the judge to throw it out, with all the other evidence. The Australian racing expert was a joke...that was such a clear case of the people prosecuting not understanding what they were prosecuting it was unreal. Agreed, this is why they have trainers declare any change in tactics in some other countries...something that should have been introduced in the UK ages ago. Title: Re: Panorama - racing bets Post by: steeveg on July 31, 2008, 11:23:20 AM crap missed it. Will catch it on iplayer later. the mistake with the jockey trial was that everything was linked to Fallon. Once the case against Fallon fell through (As everyone in racing knew it would) they had no choice but the let the other guys off...and the other guys definitely had a case to answer. (in my opinion) I missed the first bit, but yes the case against Fallon was less convincing than against the other jockeys. The evidence was all there. Betfair betting patterns, regarding times and amounts, taped phone conversations,meeting in Pubs with envelopes, writtern records. Anyone with half a brain and a basic knowledge of racing would see there is a case to answer. I know the Australian "Racing expert" said he couldn't observe anything wrong in any of the races, but that shouldn't have swayed the judge to throw it out, with all the other evidence. The Australian racing expert was a joke...that was such a clear case of the people prosecuting not understanding what they were prosecuting it was unreal. Agreed, this is why they have trainers declare any change in tactics in some other countries...something that should have been introduced in the UK ages ago. |