Please Can Someone Explain...

R

Relkeel

At the Start
Joined
Oct 21, 2003
Messages
828
Location
Monmouthshire
...how, when Robert Tierney has just been warned-off for six years for running ringers in point-to-points, Charlie Mann is still allowed to train?

For those of you that don't recall, Mann has been found guilty of running ringers on three occasions.
 
In Mann's case, it was incompetence rather than a sinister plot.

The old school tie might have helped as well.
 
Agreed. Charlie is very personable, good company, clubbable - an insiders' insider in racing terms.
It should not have excused what he did esp as at least one horse was killed as a result.
I suppose he was able to blame his staff for the mistakes - for loading the wrong horse onto the box - but it beats me that that could happen anyway!

In any yard I've been in, and there's only been one where the horses' names aren't on the door or wall of the box or stall, the staff all KNOW which horse is which, let alone which box it's in :suspect:
 
I have never met him, and I may be doing him a disservice, if so I apologise, but I suspect that he's one of those numberless not-very-bright ex-public schoolboys who manage to gain pleasant employment in racing by virtue of family wealth/connections (latest one I've discovered is A. Loughran).
 
Originally posted by Relkeel+Feb 17 2008, 12:37 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Relkeel @ Feb 17 2008, 12:37 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Headstrong@Feb 17 2008, 01:41 AM
Charlie is very personable, good company, clubbable - an insiders' insider in racing terms.
Click to expand...

Oh, well that makes it OK then. Carry on Charlie. [/b][/quote]
I expressly pointed out that although that no doubt helped him in Portman Square, it DOES NOT make it OK.
Not in my book anyway

Charlie Mann is very bright - a real shrewdie, and a 'businessman' in the way he runs his yard.
Which makes the whole sage even less acceptable
 
If he's that bright he wouldn't have gotten the horses mixed up, not once, not twice, but three times!!!!

Three times cannot be sheer coincidence alone - it hardly ever happens as it is, it's not as though it's a commonplace mistake to make.
 
Sigh :rolleyes:

He's a shrewd businessman - eg doesn't spend on hospitality unless he is 90% sure someone is going to buy a horse etc. Is reputedly very good at the marketing side and bottom line.

That doesn't mean he runs his yard in the way a proper 'horseman' trainer would.
Even if the ringers were mistakes - and I'm pretty sure they were, as one was on box rest anyway and died as a result of jumping with crocked knees - it is imo inexcusable to run the kind of yard regime where staff don't know which horse is which, and where there is apparently no-one in a position of authority loading the horses onto the box to go racing, who knows where the injured horses are stabled, and which horse is which, ie head lad or trainer.
 
I have never understood how this could have happened.

Surely the staff in the yard know their own horses and would know if their horse is due to go racing or not.

It is very difficult to see how this could happen, even in the in the most disorganised yard.
 
maybe his niceness got in the way of him recognising which horses were which...can be a bugbear can niceness

whereas if the person is deemed nasty and bent they can't use it as an excuse...and end up getting warned off

it reminds me of the Ken Dodd/Lester Piggott comparison

both were up for similar charges...it's not hard to see why only one of them served time is it?

funny old place is England :dork:
 
it reminds me of the Ken Dodd/Lester Piggott comparison

both were up for similar charges...it's not hard to see why only one of them served time is it?
Click to expand...

Because only one of them was actually found guilty?
 
This country is still run through "The Old School Network" I'm afraid. I really think that some organisations should be made illegal, as not being in the interests of the national well-being.
 
Originally posted by Venusian@Feb 16 2008, 06:12 PM
In Mann's case, it was incompetence rather than a sinister plot.
Click to expand...
Surely, if that is truly the case, then the question becomes whether he should be permitted to train racehorses at all?
 
Originally posted by walsworth@Feb 17 2008, 09:08 PM
This country is still run through "The Old School Network" I'm afraid. I really think that some organisations should be made illegal, as not being in the interests of the national well-being.
Click to expand...
Yes. I'd start with Eton.
 
Originally posted by Colin Phillips@Feb 17 2008, 08:29 PM
I have never understood how this could have happened.

Surely the staff in the yard know their own horses and would know if their horse is due to go racing or not.

It is very difficult to see how this could happen, even in the in the most disorganised yard.
Click to expand...
Precisely, Colin.

I also know Mann's travelling head girl and she is very good, been doing the job for years and years and years so I too struggled to get my head around how on earth this could have happened, not just the once, but three times!
 
Racing regards getting caught as the crime rather than what you did. If you've got a reasonable explanation for what you did (e.g. your mind was being controlled by aliens) then they'll go easy.
 
Originally posted by Gareth Flynn@Feb 17 2008, 07:47 PM
it reminds me of the Ken Dodd/Lester Piggott comparison

both were up for similar charges...it's not hard to see why only one of them served time is it?
Click to expand...

Because only one of them was actually found guilty?
Click to expand...
that was the point i was making Gareth

reverse the cases...and piggot would have still been found guilty...piggott known for being mean and cocky...dodd would have been the good guy..a comedian...made the jury laugh etc.

did anyone really think a jury in LIVERPOOL would have found ken guilty anyway????

it makes me laugh just thinking about it

there is no doubt that this "good guy" stuff carries weight imho
 
Originally posted by trackside528+Feb 17 2008, 10:40 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (trackside528 @ Feb 17 2008, 10:40 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Venusian@Feb 16 2008, 06:12 PM
In Mann's case, it was incompetence rather than a sinister plot.
Click to expand...
Surely, if that is truly the case, then the question becomes whether he should be permitted to train racehorses at all? [/b][/quote]
Although C. Mann is ultimately responsible, I don't believe it's common practice for the trainer to load the horses for travelling. I just can't envisage Sir M. Stoute, B. Hills, J. Dunlop et.al. loading horses.
 
In smaller or medium sized yards like Mann's if the trainer isn't supervising loading for racing - and most do - there is always someone like the Head Lad/Lass to do it. Similarly, the person 'representing'/saddling the horse at the races, and the lad/lass, should have know which horse they had! The whole thing is bizarre.

In the case of the one which died they even took off it's bandages to load it to go racing - why did they think it's forelegs were all bandaged up ffs? The horse was badly crocked at the time [and broke down over hurdles that day and had to be destroyed]. It shows a total lack of yard organisation, and something seriously wrong with the chain of responsibility at the yard.

Horses are all scanned on arrival now and the chip number checked, so in theory it can't happen :rolleyes:
 
Back
Top