Chief Stipe

View the full article

View the full article

What's your beef? What's your point?

I don't see your point. I haven't seen that particular Syndicate Agreement but I have seen others from professional syndicators and they are as I say.

You have no idea who is in the Syndicate. You will also probably find that in the Syndicate Agreement/Contract that Mr Ellis and or Te Akau representatives have the say on racing and training matters. LOL! Far from it. If you have followed my posts over the years about Te Akau you will find I have had a balanced view and have been critical at times. I'm no sycophant and never will be. Hence the way BOAY is run. My issue was and still is that a certain individual gave a fantasy version of what happened and through inference and innuendo proceeded cast aspersions against Te Akau that were unfounded. I'll make it clear there was no breach of the rules in terms of lodging the protest and the subsequent hearing. If you are willing to remove the individuals from the debate and discuss the merits or otherwise of the "protest process" then feel free to do so.

You are splitting hairs. He who pays the bills has the final say. Although that doesn't help me much on BOAY. You'll find if you bother to stretch your knowledge that Mr Ellis is a Director of Te Akau Stud and Te Akau Racing. Further did you know that anyone can lodge a protest? (I don't think that rule has changed). As for your democracy comment there isn't much democracy in a judicial system.

Aside from Te Akau Stud having bred the horse it is raced by a Te Akau Syndicate named Te Akau Fine Red. Isn't Mr Ellis the Chief at Te Akau? I'd say he has every right.

No doubt in Petone there is a in-house book being run.

That's their call.

I didn't say I believed it or not. There are conflicting reports from those directly involved (which I've heard first hand from two people) and even from the Stipendiary Stewards. Regardless if this is all it takes for the conspiricists to suck oxygen when there are far bigger issues in the industry then heaven help us. BTW there is no evidence the Biden's were involved in the hearing!

A change in the ARCI's interference policy could come to a possible vote after it was tabled at the previous Model Rules Committee meeting Aug. 8 in Saratoga Springs, N.Y. A shift to Category 1 rules are listed on the agenda to be considered. With the Category 1 standard, disqualifications would likely be more limited as DQs would occur only when it's determined that a horse who was interfered with would have finished ahead of the horse who caused the interference—if not for that foul. With the current Category 2 standard, if the stewards determine interference cost a fouled horse a better placing, the horse that interfered is disqualified and placed behind the horse or horses that it fouled. The United States and Canada are among the few remaining countries operating under Category 2. The International Federation of Horseracing Authorities adopted Category 1 as its model in 2017.

Perhaps but what if the international rule - "would the protesting horse withstanding the alleged interference been able to beat the winner?" In this case I doubt it.

That's not what I've been told. Either way Mr Ellis is entitled to take the action he did. What I object to is Thomaas's fantasy narrative describing what happened. It isn't even good satire.

Will it be Racing NSW's Chief Operating Officer, Graeme Hinton?

Rule Number(s): Careless ridingStewards charged Mr K Chowdhoory with careless riding – r 638 (1) (d) in that he caused interference to CELINE inside the final 150 metres. Mr Chowdhoory (RENOUNCE) did not admit the charge. (Feed generated with FetchRSS)View the full article

Rule Number(s): 969(2)& Use of the Whip RegulationsFollowing the running of Race 9, Hope Racing Stables Trot, an information was filed by Stipendiary Steward, Mr R A Quirk, against Licensed Open Driver, Ms P J Wakelin, alleging that Ms Wakelin, as the driver of RUSTY I AM in the race, “used her whip on more occasions than permitted in the last 400 metres ... (Feed generated with FetchRSS)View the full article

Rule Number(s): Careless ridingStewards charged Mr C Johnson (DANNY GREEN) with a breach of careless riding –r 638 (1) (d) - in that he caused interference to several runners inside the final 200m. Mr Oatham outlined the incident with the use of the video replays. He stated DANNY GREEN was racing one-off the running rail when leading ... (Feed generated with FetchRSS)View the full article

Allpress, Tinsley, Herd. Not sure who the other two are. Gray has had over 15 apprentices. He also worked for Brian Deacon.

That isn't correct. Get over it. At the end of the day the judiciary can call whoever they want to speak.

OK it seems now that you are accusing the Stipes of lying. As for your other assertions I don't lie unlike you. This story is done. Move on.

That wasn't the issue - the issue was his fantasy depiction of what unfolded before and during the inquiry. He probably thinks man didn't land on the moon.

No I wasn't referring to All The Aces - I was referring to Thomaas. As I said I have spoken to two people who were there and I accept what they said. Thomaas has had no direct knowledge.

They do. You don't.

This topic is closed. Mr Ellis was representing Te Akau and he DOES have a right to say what he said. If Collett had nothing to say then so be it. The Stipes made the decision anyway so who cares? End of story. You can even lodge a protest and not say anything. It is up to the Stewards and JCA. Thanks. And before anyone says I'm a Te Akau sycophant I'd say you haven't read many of my posts. I've congratulated them when it was due and when I didn't rate a horse or a ride I've stated my opinion. This topic was started by a lunatic espousing unfounded conspiracy theories and quite frankly I'm sick of those fantasies. A protest was lodged by the Stipes, Te Akau as was their right didn't present an argument and the JCA decided on the evidence. Some punter's win, some owners win, some punters lose, some owners lose.

That's not what it says on the Stipes Report which I posted above. From what I understand is that there was some confusion initially on who was initiating the protest. The Stipes did. 30nov2019auckland.pdf