• REGISTER NOW!! Why? Because you can't do much without having been registered!

    At the moment you have limited access to view all discussions - and most importantly, you haven't joined our community. What are you waiting for? Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join Join Talking Horses here!

Point Blank: Don’t Cry Tears for Thurles — It’s Too Late for Them to Get Water

Ken Jones, Lead Sports writer for The Independent, had a phrase I was fond of.

It was: "In my opinion, an opinion no one is obliged to share...."

Well in my opinion, an opinion no one is obliged to share, this is another very good piece of writing.

Slim is free of the conventional constraints of newspaper editors, but he doesn't abuse that freedom - it's not like there's an expletive per paragraph.

And while some might call it visceral, and it is, it's intelligent writing by any measure too.

So much of this item resonates with me, because racing is beset with hypocrisy and the actual truth is often swerved as if it were the plague.

UK Point-to-Point has similarities to Thurles - courses once rightly lauded for being able to produce raceable Good jumping ground in the worst winters now reduced to being like roads the whole year round.

Anyway, I recommend clicking on the link - punchy, articulate, cuts to the chase and, whether you agree or not (and needing to agree with everything you read or hear in order to get anything out of it is vastly overrated), well worth a read.
 
“The track responsible for the most high-profile jockey death in recent years...”

Sorry Slim, but to me this is in poor taste and serves nobody, the O’Sullivan family included. I appreciate your overall contribution and I recognise that it’s in the nature of what you do that you’ll stray beyond the margin of what is acceptable from time to time. I think this is one such example.
 
Regarding your overall argument, that the Thurles management brought this upon themselves, I don’t feel qualified to comment. But that doesn’t stop me from regretting the loss to Irish racing if it does close for good.
 
“The track responsible for the most high-profile jockey death in recent years...”

Sorry Slim, but to me this is in poor taste and serves nobody, the O’Sullivan family included. I appreciate your overall contribution and I recognise that it’s in the nature of what you do that you’ll stray beyond the margin of what is acceptable from time to time. I think this is one such example.

I could easily have cut that line, it has nothing to do with the general point.
 
“The track responsible for the most high-profile jockey death in recent years...”

Sorry Slim, but to me this is in poor taste and serves nobody, the O’Sullivan family included. I appreciate your overall contribution and I recognise that it’s in the nature of what you do that you’ll stray beyond the margin of what is acceptable from time to time. I think this is one such example.
It's more than a little crass and bordering on libel.
 
I think it all hinges on the reader's personal interpretation of the word "responsible."

I read it as a synonym for the venue itself (and not directed at the owners and management of the venue and any duty of care they had) at which a tragic event occurred, but evidently other interpretations could be made.
 
People are reading into it and projecting what I'm not explicitly saying.
The quote is very clear and indefensible. It actually couldn't be any more explicit.

"The track responsible for the most high-profile jockey death in recent years...”

Explain exactly what you were 'trying' to say. You were taking aim at the Maloney family and horrifically crossed the line.
 
The quote is very clear and indefensible. It actually couldn't be any more explicit.

"The track responsible for the most high-profile jockey death in recent years...”

Explain exactly what you were 'trying' to say. You were taking aim at the Maloney family and horrifically crossed the line.
That's your interpretation.
 
I think it all hinges on the reader's personal interpretation of the word "responsible."

I read it as a synonym for the venue itself (and not directed at the owners and management of the venue and any duty of care they had) at which a tragic event occurred, but evidently other interpretations could be made.

That was the intended use of the word 'responsible', whether people believe me or not
 
“The track responsible for the most high-profile jockey death in recent years...”

Sorry Slim, but to me this is in poor taste and serves nobody, the O’Sullivan family included. I appreciate your overall contribution and I recognise that it’s in the nature of what you do that you’ll stray beyond the margin of what is acceptable from time to time. I think this is one such example.

This line has been edited to remove any doubt about what I intended to say.
 
When read with the tone of the article it would be very naive to come to any other conclusion.

Good to see you at least recognised the error and changed the article.

If that was what I intended, I wouldn’t have edited it. I’ve absolutely no desire to go down that road on the subject. My criticisms of Thurles are valid — it lost its unique selling point, and there was no Plan B except to bail out and close the racecourse.
 
This line has been edited to remove any doubt about what I intended to say.
FWIW I think that's the smart move, as IMO it's proved a distraction from an otherwise absorbing article.

Writers with edgy styles, who sail close to the wind may often offend (whether intentionally or not) but they seldom bore the reader.

Taking the personal positives, I'd be fairly sure I've been labelled naive in the crossfire.

If so, I'm ecstatic - I can't remember the last time, if ever, I got called naive.

I choose to interpret naive in this instance as a synonym for youthful (which I'm anything but).

Funny old game, interpretation.
 
Lol, the line wasn't edited, it was deleted. If you’re going to be an 'edgy' writer at least have the courage of your convictions.

The rest of the article, if you could call it that, is also littered with personal views and opinions presented as facts. The 'author' doesn't seem to appreciate the difference between a private owned racecourse and one owned/run by HRI and seems to expect both should be run the same.

You know f%*& all about the Maloney family, f%*& all about running a private racecourse within a professional arena and f%*& all about running a business.

I would say stick to the pen, but you're clearly shite at that as well.
 
Lol, the line wasn't edited, it was deleted. If you’re going to be an 'edgy' writer at least have the courage of your convictions.

The rest of the article, if you could call it that, is also littered with personal views and opinions presented as facts. The 'author' doesn't seem to appreciate the difference between a private owned racecourse and one owned/run by HRI and seems to expect both should be run the same.

You know f%*& all about the Maloney family, f%*& all about running a private racecourse within a professional arena and f%*& all about running a business.

I would say stick to the pen, but you're clearly shite at that as well.

Good to see this wasn't personal.
 
Yes I'm from Thurles I have no connection to the Maloney family but I am related to the O'Sullivan family and quite frankly you can go and fcuk yourself! PRICK.
 
the line wasn't edited, it was deleted. If you’re going to be an 'edgy' writer at least have the courage of your convictions.

The rest of the article, if you could call it that, is also littered with personal views and opinions presented as facts.
I do kinda feel Slim has been put in a no-win situation here - criticised for a line, then accused of cowardice when he deleted it.

And isn't the vast majority of opinion piece journalism, whether in the media or social media, littered with personal views and opinions presented as facts?

That's what an opinion piece is - and in the fast-moving internet era journalism has increasingly morphed from factual reporting into retrospective opinionated news analysis.

Sounds to me like Slim has touched on a subject close to Beef Or Salmon's heart - it happens, and to try to close it down on that basis feels like a denial of free speech to me.

I didn't interpret the word "responsible" the way others apparently did and I see the whole subject of Thurles racecourse as much fair game for opinionated news analysis as anything else.

As a Law graduate ex journalist, who has been threatened with libel action (by the late trainer Arthur Stephenson actually) but ultimately never received so much as a legal letter over the years, I flatter myself I know a bit about what you can, and can't, write and I think, legally, this is a lot of fuss about nothing, not least because the author readily removed the line in question.

One last thought - a lot of people want the next series of Master Chef cancelled on the grounds complainants about Greg Wallace would be upset about seeing Wallace on air.

They don't have to watch it.

No one has to read Slim either.
 
Last edited:
Tabloids covered it and just stated it is the course where O'Sullivan lost his life, which is probs the safe way to bring that event into the article.
With an opinion piece , there's always going to be some at odds with your opinions & people interpret statements coming from different standpoints in the first place.
So poss have to consider that from the outset and either have to be this is my opinion & fk you if you don't like it, without being open to libel, or be very neutral.
I'm not commenting on the rights & wrongs of anything written in the article or reactions to it as I don't have a view, but I do know from corporate world people very easily get a stick up their arse so you have to write stuff there with that in mind.
 
Last edited:

Recent Blog Posts

Back
Top