HRZ Fantasy Football Competition 2010/2011
HRZ Fantasy football competition
Boylesports
Amazon Associates
Social bookmarking

Social bookmarking digg  Social bookmarking delicious  Social bookmarking reddit  Social bookmarking stumbleupon  Social bookmarking slashdot  Social bookmarking yahoo  Social bookmarking google  Social bookmarking blogmarks  Social bookmarking live      

Bookmark and share the address of Horse-Racing Zone on your social bookmarking website


FINDLAY BAN OVERTURNED

View previous topic View next topic Go down

FINDLAY BAN OVERTURNED

Post by Dessie89 on Thu Jul 15, 2010 2:43 pm

ARTICLE FROM SPORTING LIFE


Harry Findlay's six-month disqualification has been overturned on appeal and reduced to a £4,500 fine.

Findlay was last month handed the suspension by a British Horseracing Authority disciplinary panel for breaching rules against owners laying bets on their own horses and attended an appeal on Wednesday.

The well-known owner and gambler felt the punishment was out of proportion and after representing himself at the initial hearing, he brought in specialist lawyers to protest against the severity of the ban.

Findlay admitted two breaches of the rules about laying horses - involving Gullible Gordon at Exeter and Chepstow - with the bets being placed by one of his associates on Betfair, although he was a net backer, as he had placed more money on the horses to win than to lose.

The appeal panel, which is independent, felt unable to decide on the available evidence whether the Exeter lay bet was a mistake, as Findlay had said, and they concentrated on the race at Chepstow.

In this case, large back bets were placed first, followed by smaller lay bets in running as Findlay said he knew the riding tactics were to set off and make the running and he believed lay bets could be placed at odds more favourable to him.

The plan was to reduce his overall exposure to the level he deemed appropriate whilst producing a better financial result than simply placing a smaller back bet.

The strategy worked and produced a better result by almost £4,500.

A BHA statement read: "It was not presented as other than a deliberate betting strategy in which the lay bets were a relatively small part of an overall back bet and in which no-one lost unfairly.

"The panel proceeded on that basis. There was no suggestion that the integrity of the race or Gullible Gordon's running in it was in jeopardy.

"It is clear that Mr Findlay's best financial interests lay in the horse winning.

"There was also the mitigation already mentioned, in particular, Mr Findlay's full co-operation and the fact that it was Mr Findlay himself who drew the BHA's attention to the Exeter race when interviewed concerning the Chepstow betting.

"We feel the panel did not or not sufficiently take into consideration the principle we have mentioned.

"Clearly they must have had in mind that the case did not involve corruption but the reasons do not acknowledge that that fact took it outside the real object of the Rule.

"Maybe they felt constrained by the guide to penalties which only mentions disqualification in this context, albeit elsewhere stating that panels have discretion to impose different penalties from those suggested.

"We are conscious that our jurisdiction under the rules is limited to a review of the panel's decision as opposed to a rehearing, but in the circumstances outlined here, in particular that the panel did not appear to have regarded the matters mentioned above as significantly material to their decision, we feel justified in expressing our own clear view that Mr Findlay should not have been disqualified. To that extent we allow the appeal.

"As to the appropriate penalty, our starting point would have been that the £4,500 by which Mr Findlay improved his position should be removed from him and a further fine imposed which was significant in the context of the very large stakes involved.

"The result could have been a substantial overall fine. However, we cannot undo the fact that Mr Findlay has suffered disqualification and the indignity of it for over a month now.

"That will remain with him and we regard it as a serious penalty in itself.

"He was, for example, prevented from attending Royal Ascot where he would have seen one of his horses win and generally lost every aspect of an owner's participation in racing during the last month.

"We consider that a fine, removing the extra profit made from the Chepstow affair, namely £4,500, will suffice in the particular circumstances of this case which obviously should not be regarded as a precedent by anyone covered by the Rule, contemplating a betting strategy involving lay betting."

IN response to the decision, Betfair spokesman Tony Calvin commented:

"We welcome the pragmatic ruling by the Appeal Board and we will continue to work with British racing to help ensure integrity remains paramount."
avatar
Dessie89
Regular
Regular

Posts : 161
Join date : 2010-07-13
Age : 47
Location : Here, There & Everywhere

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: FINDLAY BAN OVERTURNED

Post by Jack on Thu Jul 15, 2010 3:23 pm

Dessie89 wrote:ARTICLE FROM SPORTING LIFE


Harry Findlay's six-month disqualification has been overturned on appeal and reduced to a £4,500 fine.

Findlay was last month handed the suspension by a British Horseracing Authority disciplinary panel for breaching rules against owners laying bets on their own horses and attended an appeal on Wednesday.

The well-known owner and gambler felt the punishment was out of proportion and after representing himself at the initial hearing, he brought in specialist lawyers to protest against the severity of the ban.

Findlay admitted two breaches of the rules about laying horses - involving Gullible Gordon at Exeter and Chepstow - with the bets being placed by one of his associates on Betfair, although he was a net backer, as he had placed more money on the horses to win than to lose.

The appeal panel, which is independent, felt unable to decide on the available evidence whether the Exeter lay bet was a mistake, as Findlay had said, and they concentrated on the race at Chepstow.

In this case, large back bets were placed first, followed by smaller lay bets in running as Findlay said he knew the riding tactics were to set off and make the running and he believed lay bets could be placed at odds more favourable to him.

The plan was to reduce his overall exposure to the level he deemed appropriate whilst producing a better financial result than simply placing a smaller back bet.

The strategy worked and produced a better result by almost £4,500.

A BHA statement read: "It was not presented as other than a deliberate betting strategy in which the lay bets were a relatively small part of an overall back bet and in which no-one lost unfairly.

"The panel proceeded on that basis. There was no suggestion that the integrity of the race or Gullible Gordon's running in it was in jeopardy.

"It is clear that Mr Findlay's best financial interests lay in the horse winning.

"There was also the mitigation already mentioned, in particular, Mr Findlay's full co-operation and the fact that it was Mr Findlay himself who drew the BHA's attention to the Exeter race when interviewed concerning the Chepstow betting.

"We feel the panel did not or not sufficiently take into consideration the principle we have mentioned.

"Clearly they must have had in mind that the case did not involve corruption but the reasons do not acknowledge that that fact took it outside the real object of the Rule.

"Maybe they felt constrained by the guide to penalties which only mentions disqualification in this context, albeit elsewhere stating that panels have discretion to impose different penalties from those suggested.

"We are conscious that our jurisdiction under the rules is limited to a review of the panel's decision as opposed to a rehearing, but in the circumstances outlined here, in particular that the panel did not appear to have regarded the matters mentioned above as significantly material to their decision, we feel justified in expressing our own clear view that Mr Findlay should not have been disqualified. To that extent we allow the appeal.

"As to the appropriate penalty, our starting point would have been that the £4,500 by which Mr Findlay improved his position should be removed from him and a further fine imposed which was significant in the context of the very large stakes involved.

"The result could have been a substantial overall fine. However, we cannot undo the fact that Mr Findlay has suffered disqualification and the indignity of it for over a month now.

"That will remain with him and we regard it as a serious penalty in itself.

"He was, for example, prevented from attending Royal Ascot where he would have seen one of his horses win and generally lost every aspect of an owner's participation in racing during the last month.

"We consider that a fine, removing the extra profit made from the Chepstow affair, namely £4,500, will suffice in the particular circumstances of this case which obviously should not be regarded as a precedent by anyone covered by the Rule, contemplating a betting strategy involving lay betting."

IN response to the decision, Betfair spokesman Tony Calvin commented:

"We welcome the pragmatic ruling by the Appeal Board and we will continue to work with British racing to help ensure integrity remains paramount."
Never heard of him, shows what I know about horse-racing Embarassed I'm just the forum geek geek
avatar
Jack
Regular
Regular

Posts : 148
Join date : 2010-07-13

View user profile http://horse-racing-zone.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: FINDLAY BAN OVERTURNED

Post by Dessie89 on Thu Jul 15, 2010 5:07 pm

He is a professional gambler Jack who once quoted that there was no place in the sport for cheats
avatar
Dessie89
Regular
Regular

Posts : 161
Join date : 2010-07-13
Age : 47
Location : Here, There & Everywhere

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: FINDLAY BAN OVERTURNED

Post by Jack on Thu Jul 15, 2010 5:12 pm

Dessie89 wrote:He is a professional gambler Jack who once quoted that there was no place in the sport for cheats
Smile
avatar
Jack
Regular
Regular

Posts : 148
Join date : 2010-07-13

View user profile http://horse-racing-zone.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: FINDLAY BAN OVERTURNED

Post by Barclay on Fri Jul 16, 2010 1:32 am

A sad day for the sport IMO, his ability to get off this charge on appeal has now left it open for anyone else to lay their own horses and just plead ignorance...The appeal committee are a disgrace to the sport we love.
avatar
Barclay
Regular
Regular

Posts : 121
Join date : 2010-07-14
Age : 48
Location : Leighton Buzzard

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: FINDLAY BAN OVERTURNED

Post by magpie on Fri Jul 16, 2010 11:40 am

its a tricky one but he is a bit ova dodgy geeza

magpie
Novice
Novice

Posts : 14
Join date : 2010-07-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: FINDLAY BAN OVERTURNED

Post by Jack on Fri Jul 16, 2010 1:04 pm

magpie wrote:its a tricky one but he is a bit ova dodgy geeza
Are you a Cockney? Very Happy
avatar
Jack
Regular
Regular

Posts : 148
Join date : 2010-07-13

View user profile http://horse-racing-zone.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: FINDLAY BAN OVERTURNED

Post by Dessie89 on Fri Jul 16, 2010 2:28 pm

No Jack, Magpie isn't a Cockney, although at times he acts like part of that word Razz
avatar
Dessie89
Regular
Regular

Posts : 161
Join date : 2010-07-13
Age : 47
Location : Here, There & Everywhere

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: FINDLAY BAN OVERTURNED

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum