Gordon Elliott

irish_major

lemush wrote: »

What the **** has that got to do with anything?

Oh not much other than he part owned a horse with a convicted drug dealer

posturingpat

irish_major wrote: »

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/high-court/ninety-per-cent-of-cheltenham-winning-horse-bought-with-proceeds-of-crime-court-1.4063092

Surrounded by scumbags? We all know about Labaik for **** sake. How is that "surrounded" he has hundreds of horses in training every year for decent people like myself, other people on here and other regular Joe soaps.

EICVD

irish_major wrote: »

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/high-court/ninety-per-cent-of-cheltenham-winning-horse-bought-with-proceeds-of-crime-court-1.4063092

So that’s one person, care to post articles of all the other ‘scumbags’ he’s surrounded by?

Francie Barrett

What Elliott did is pretty awful, and reflects the type of ignorant person that he portrays. At the same time, he hasn't really done much wrong here. The horse died, he sat on it, even for him, I doubt he did it as a joke. It was likely just a spur of the moment thing that looks worse than what it is. To suggest he should be banned is ridiculous.

Motivator

EICVD wrote: »

So that’s one person, care to post articles of all the other ‘scumbags’ he’s surrounded by?

If you’ve ever been at a racecourse and you have a pair of eyes, you wouldn’t need to ask who he’s referring to in fairness.

On balance, I think this should be the end of his career, he obviously has no real regard for horses with an attitude like this. It's sad that the gambling addicts can't see this.

jakiah

lemush wrote: »

What the **** has that got to do with anything?

You can expect everyone who is anti-racing to be all over this, its a disaster. Hopefully the sport we all enjoy will handle the PR better than the wagon-circling exercise from connections we've seen so far on here (it's fake, it's no big deal, its the person who took the pictures fault, his apology was heartfelt (!), attacking anyone who finds this distasteful etc.)

Hoboo

jakiah wrote: »

The fact that someone else in the yard took it and also thinks its a lark surely makes it worse? That points to the general attitude of the yard being one of disrespect toward the animal, rather than a 'moment of madness' by one individual.

Some of you lads would be best placed saying nothing at all.

Exactly this. As the leader he sets the culture and what is acceptable behaviour. The others present also find it acceptable. This is not a once off that happened to be photographed

Dodge

Francie Barrett wrote: »

What Elliott did is pretty awful, and reflects the type of ignorant person that he portrays. At the same time, he hasn't really done much wrong here. The horse died, he sat on it, even for him, I doubt he did it as a joke. It was likely just a spur of the moment thing that looks worse than what it is. To suggest he should be banned is ridiculous.

Might be the quickest flip flop I’ve ever seen

EICVD

Motivator wrote: »

If you’ve ever been at a racecourse and you have a pair of eyes, you wouldn’t need to ask who he’s referring to in fairness.

Plenty of times, so the plane man? Hardly in the same bracket as a drug dealer. Or is there someone I just haven’t a clue who they are?

eastie17

Statement was stupid regarding why he sat on it and all that, you cant explain the unexplainable. Should have just apologised and left it at that. The news cycle will move on and it'll blow over, once his owners dont pull yard, which most wont, then its somewhat irrelevant in the perspective of it causing him any damage or their being some retribution.

EICVD

[Deleted User] wrote: »

On balance, I think this should be the end of his career, he obviously has no real regard for horses with an attitude like this. It's sad that the gambling addicts can't see this.

You do know not everyone interested in racing is a gambler at all never mind an addict

posturingpat

Motivator wrote: »

If you’ve ever been at a racecourse and you have a pair of eyes, you wouldn’t need to ask who he’s referring to in fairness.

I had a chat with him and the Pipes at a racecourse a while back. Are they scumbags?

Francie Barrett

Dodge wrote: »

Might be the quickest flip flop I’ve ever seen

I meant what he did was disrespectful.

But unless it can be shown animals under his care are subject to cruelty, I don't see why he should be banned.

posturingpat

Francie Barrett wrote: »

I meant what he did was disrespectful.

But unless it can be shown animals under his care are subject to cruelty, I don't see why he should be banned.

You can get banned for doing anything that can damage the image of the sport. Maybe that's only in British rules though. If he doesn't get one the BHA will ban him from there.

jakiah

Francie Barrett wrote: »

I meant what he did was disrespectful.

But unless it can be shown animals under his care are subject to cruelty, I don't see why he should be banned.

If you cant see why posing sitting gurning for a jokey picture on the carcass of an animal you've just worked to death for sport wouldn't be perceived as cruel, then I don't know what to tell you.

If someone prominent in the meat industry was pictured taking the piss with the carcasses of slaughtered beef coming off the line in a slaughterhouse they'd be sacked.

The Tetrarch

jakiah wrote: »

Elliot worked this horse to death.

Do you have any facts to support that?

Itziger

The Tetrarch wrote: »

Do you have any facts to support that?

Well............

The Tetrarch

jakiah wrote: »

an animal you've just worked to death for sport

Can support that claim with facts?

jakiah

The Tetrarch wrote: »

Do you have any facts to support that?

Not sure this is a serious question. What do you think Horse Racing is? The horse died on the gallops, training to win races. That's the context the outsider sees this in.

The Tetrarch

MOD NOTE to jakiah

You are new to the Horse racing forum
We have a Forum Charter. Please read it before posting again.

Spamming
Topics/posts that are just complete nonsense will be deleted, and the user will be infracted/banned.

Trolling
A troll is someone who posts controversial, inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.

Francie Barrett

jakiah wrote: »

If you cant see why posing sitting gurning for a jokey picture on the carcass of an animal you've just worked to death for sport wouldn't be perceived as cruel, then I don't know what to tell you.

If someone prominent in the meat industry was pictured taking the piss with the carcasses of slaughtered beef coming off the line in a slaughterhouse they'd be sacked.

Anyone can pull a face on a camera, it's not representative of anything. Also, I doubt the incident was a joke to Elliott. In purely financial terms, he lost a decent horse that was providing him an income.

I think a full investigation should be done on his yard to ensure the welfare of his horses. I don't think he should be banned for a photo that could have taken the incident out of context.

The Tetrarch

jakiah wrote: »

Not sure this is a serious question. What do you think Horse Racing is? The horse died on the gallops, training to win races. That's the context the outsider sees this in.

Yes it is a serious question.
I am a MOD, and when I ask a question of a poster I am being serious.
You said a trainer worked a horse to death, suggesting a link between his training and the horse death. Can you prove the link you are suggesting?

jakiah

Francie Barrett wrote: »

Anyone can pull a face on a camera, it's not representative of anything.

A picture of one of the most recognisable faces in racing in this context is representative of something - its representative of racing. A heavily publically-subsidised sport which already has a PR battle on its hands. That's the whole point.

This is a disaster for any racing fan. Threatening to ban me for pointing it out doesn't change the fact.

Francie Barrett

Francie Barrett wrote: »

Anyone can pull a face on a camera, it's not representative of anything. Also, I doubt the incident was a joke to Elliott. In purely financial terms, he lost a decent horse that was providing him an income.

I think a full investigation should be done on his yard to ensure the welfare of his horses. I don't think he should be banned for a photo that could have taken the incident out of context.

Why is he smiling then?

jakiah

The Tetrarch wrote: »

Yes it is a serious question.
I am a MOD, and when I ask a question of a poster I am being serious.
You said a trainer worked a horse to death, suggesting a link between his training and the horse death. Can you prove the link you are suggesting?

All of the deaths of horses in racing are directly attributable to the animals being used for sport. That's just fact. As racing fans we accept this. What we don't accept is pictures of people taking the piss while sitting on the carcasses of animals who've just died on the gallops.

realdanbreen

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Why is he smiling then?

Sweet Jesus!

famagusta

Envoi 5/4 on the machine, the BHA would want to look at their own problems before they even think of banning Elliott

NaiveMelodies

The Tetrarch wrote: »

Can support that claim with facts?

Haha post of the thread for sure.

The real mccoy 91

I am struggling to get behind the 'he done nothing wrong camp' if you drove past a couple of lads doing something similar in a park or a field I'm sure the majority would have plenty to say about. What elliot has or hasnt done in the racing world should be irrelevant he cant get a pass on the grounds that he has good horses. He has massively tarnished the image of the sport and should face consequences for that. What them consequences should be well that's not for me or us to be deciding here.



Between this picture and the stories doing the rounds of late it paints quite a bad picture of the man and someone is really out to get him