I read with horror the following: https://www.racingpost.com/news/new...iness-after-wife-suzie-granted-licence/301528 I've had a war in my head for some time now. I love the game? I don't? A certain Billy Newnes told me many moons ago that the "man in the street" was a mug when it come to backing horses. Only back horses in Group races he said. They're having a go. In "other" races... Have they travelled well? Are they having a go? Are they not having a go? I've loved trying to crack handicaps and "spotting the plots" I've backed horses for 45 years. I've believed the "authorities" would look after us. Words fail me. I'm out. Good luck!
I can kind of understand this to a degree. You have to remember the trainer is just the head of what is usually a team of staff. Behind the scenes alot more goes into training a horse than just what the trainer on the race card does. He himself has done wrong, and is rightfully being punished, but why shouldn't the others continue the operation without him? His wife and the other staff he employs have not been found guilty of any wrongdoing, so I don't believe they should be punished too.
Same happened when Karl Burke was banned a few years ago. In the US it's even more common and happens pretty much overnight - trainer gets a ban so stable is transferred into the name of the assistant. It's a tough one, as KS says there's a whole group of people that could lose their jobs. It's also common to transfer the licence in the event of the death of a trainer - Sir Henry and John Hills being recent examples. It allows time for the stable to be wound down without the sudden loss of employment or disrupting horses mid-season.
I don't know what the fuss is. It's quite common for the spouse of a racehorse trainer to be the brains of the operation. Two that come to mind Mrs o'brien and Mrs haggas. He may be banned from the racecourse but most of the work is done at home. All he's gone miss out on is a few champagne lobster lunches.
Ollie Stevens wife Hetta was the real trainer in their yard - Ollie took the licence as she'd given birth to twins, but she was always the one with the ambition. Hence why the pre-training yard they now run is in her name. Rumour has it that another trainer (who shares his name with a jockey) is just the public face of the operation and that all the training is actually done by a couple in his yard.
I am obviously missing something here....he was given a six month ban in December....9 months ago...! Does that not mean he has served his ban?
Well I wouldn't have thought it was rocket science actually training a racehorse. Take it for a run every morning, and feed it properly. It probably helps if your horse is in one of the better yards, as its galloping with better horses on a daily basis. It's the placing of horses where most good trainers earn their money though.
Full list of conditions attached to Mrs Best's licence have been released: https://www.racingpost.com/news/new...over-best-licence-application-revealed/302648
Again I ask the question.....he was banned last December for 6 months, why is he still not allowed anywhere near the business 10 months later?
Here you go, found the original release: http://www.britishhorseracing.com/p...r-penalties-regarding-jim-best-and-paul-john/ "Best – Penalty 59. Taking all of the above facts into account, the Panel concluded that Best has forfeited the right to enjoy the privilege of being a licensed trainer for a significant period of time. The Panel is mindful of the wider effects any period of disqualification will have on the owners who have horses with Best and the staff who rely upon Best for employment but that does not override the Panel’s concern to appropriately censure Best. He is a dishonest individual who corrupted a young man to ensure horses were not run on their merits. For the breaches of (C)45 and A(30) the Panel have determined that Best should be disqualified for 4 years with immediate effect, from 4 April 2016 to 3 April 2020 inclusive. Best’s owners have until 8 April 2016 to remove their horses from his yard. The Panel has also directed that whilst making the necessary arrangements to remove their horses during this period the owners can associate with Best, notwithstanding his disqualified status."
Sorry, that was the original decision that was later appealed. This is the result of the appeal which, as you rightly say, only bans him until June 2017. http://www.britishhorseracing.com/w...st-J-Final-decision-with-penalty-14-12-16.pdf
Bloody hell; typical court hearing rambling. I gave up after reading the same thing about 5 times. Load of wafflers - surprised they even managed to conclude anything
