Panorama - racing bets

[rossfourfive]

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?

[Pelham Boy]

Shit. Forgot all about it.

[rossfourfive]

iplayer FTW

[ripple11]

Unbelievable a Judge threw it out, if he saw the evidence Panorama presented.

[ripple11]

 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"

 

[rossfourfive]

 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"

 

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.

[boldie]

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)

[ripple11]

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.

[boldie]

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.

[steeveg]

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)

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 fixing

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.

one of the biggest fiddlers in racing was trainer Ken Payne, he admits in his autobiography to stoping his horses for years, but he also says he never once had to ask a jockey to pull a horse, there was no need he says, all i had to do was give the wrong riding instructions, if the horse needed holding up i would tell the jockey to make the pace, if it needed covering up i would tell him to give the horse plenty of space, i wonder if the australian expert was looking for this sort of thing

[boldie]

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.

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 fixing

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.

[steeveg]

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.

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 fixing

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.

never knew that, yes now you mention it, this is good rule, ive lost count of the number of horses ive backed and they come out the stalls and go 5 lenghts clear in a mile and half race, i am thinking whats he playing at ,the horse comes from behind, you know the horse is going to beat after 2 furlongs,