Anyone willing to speak a bit of truth is better than Fitzy et al, I said already he came across as trying too hard to be controversial on Saturdays programme, but would rather have him than most of the 'gravy train brigade' that has got airtime over the years.

Can I advise you to at least stick the knife in to some of the decisions made by our useless governing body please. You will then go up in a lot of peoples estimation (imo of course).

this bookie fraternity very competitive int they

Flash
How right you are about standing them.Despite what many think on here there's still plenty of us who do bet to an opinion & do stand them.Fair enough I may only be a fiddler but as you say,the ones I don't fancy I'll stand for more,simarly if I fancy one I'll just duck it.Last Saturday for example at Newcastle.First race didn't fancy the winner,stood it for a few hundred,Fighting Fifth again thought we could get the thin un beat but of course that won.However not detered I didn't fancy that Broadway thing,stood it & got that beat.In the last got stuck into the fav.got it beat but went with the winner so despite being wrong two races out of four there was still a nice profit.If I'd messed about trying to make a book I'd have got nowt.
At the points which I love I'm betting to an opinion every race (no exchange to fall back on for those who don't like standing them).I stand them for far more at this game than I do at the races & I love it,proper bookmaking.

Hope Banks not on again
We dont need one dimensional bookies like Banks or Clare on the show.

We need a Big MAC type figure..someone who champions for the punter..not a 1 sided Bookie

didnt mac do adverts for the magic sign

geof are you going to put up "the bankbuster " or something similar nxt time your on ?

Last i heard of Geoff Banks was an article in the Daily Telegraph,and he was having a pop at the racing establishment telling it like it is,and his appearance on Saturday's Morning Line only enhanced my opinion of him.

Hope he's on again soon but will they be brave enough? we need more honest debate or the game will die a slow and painful one.

Geoff, good evening.



Off on a tangent, would say your Dad asking J F for information on F W's horses' ground preferences could be classed as inside information ?....

an accurate description of ruby mr slade.

heard ruby once say that about the punter........had nothing but contempt for us punters

I dont get this at all.

I dont know Geoff Banks and have no axe to grind with him but he contributed nothing to the morning line other than making ridiculous comments to draw attention to himself and/or wind Ruby Walsh up. And lets not pretend if it wasnt some other jockey he wouldnt have got the same treatment as it wouldnt have mattered as long as he was centre of attention. If its controversy you want get Emma to present in nothing but a pair of thigh length boots.

Plenty of comparisons made with Mc Crirrick who could be just as cringe-worthy when trying to wind guest trainers/jockeys up on the show. Its fair to say he contributed more to the show and in his prime offered more than Geoff Banks possibly could but if thats the reason he's started appearing on the show then they will just end up going full circle.

It all depends on what you watch the morning line for. For the record I thought the show was at its best when McCrirricks appearances were less frequent but Francome, Plunkett, Catermole et al were still on. Nick Luck is a good presenter, Graham Cunningham talks sense and Ive even started warming to Tanya after all these years but Fitzgerald just gets on my knockers and Id rather drink a pint of my own phlegm than listen to Richi " can you put into words just what it felt like " Persad. Claire Balding should be burried alive.

Anyway thats my thoughts, dark and perverse as they are...

Some on here need to get real.

I'm a fierce critic of the many gravy train fence sitters that alas populate the racing media circus (check my postings re Lee, Fitzgerald, et al). In a game that is all about opinions it's unforgivable that some (? most) media observers won't comment adversely about anything unless they are an easy target ( unknown conditional, foreign jockey etc).

Banks was prepared to express a view; given that trait I'm prepared to forgive almost anything else. Surely that's what the game is about? However one has to take what any b/m says with a large pinch of salt. His comments re More of That being an example. To me the race was all about MOT's fitness, if fit he wins; if not he is vulnerable. It's simply not possible to assess this without seeing the horse; it was evident at Newbury that he was far from straight and thus in the former category. Unfortunately I backed Cole Harden! The point is that he was ramping a possibly vulnerable favourite on national TV and as a punter my first instinct is to wonder why he'd do that...

If I had to offer some hopefully constructive criticism it would be for him not to look for controversy; it'll find you and you're response will be more genuine and less contrived.

plunkett ffs she has to be the worst ever not including fitz.

Halcyon - I suppose that would be inside information - but times have moved on - want to know what a jockey or trainer thinks now? Read the Betfair columns.. or watch the shows on exchanges
Sport has never been more transparent

And to those who discuss my views, or Ruby's for that matter- I'm not sure it matters nor is it in any way guaranteed we will all share the same views (except to say I detest FOBT's- not many wld disagree there!)

I think it's got to be a good thing when the debate is perky

Finally to those who ask was I deliberately courting controversy by asking about Denman or Quevega. I think the fact there's even that view shows how rarely matters are publicly questioned. I certainly didn't set out to 'be different' i merely asked the questions so many would want to know rather than to ask 'what's the best horse you've ridden' - I mean frankly who cares about such questions

thanks to the sensibles on here for their feedback- now give it to ch4 on twitter. They need to know what people want to see and hear. They want more viewers and the show deserves it - even if we don't all agree who should be on the screen - even me!¬

Yeah, fair enough, scrub the Plunkett comment. Got her mixed up with Alastair Down . My point is that it was a pretty good format with different personalities presenting and a range of panelists so if it didnt suit your taste one week then it was likely to be a different mix the following week. Now we are stuck with the same bunch, week in week out.

I'd also like to take a dump on that bloody touch screen thing that never works. Pah!

Hey Aberdonia, is that not a youthful Willie Miller staring back at me? Real Madrid, Gothenburg, 1983, jumpers for goalposts. Those were the days. Do you stay up in the granite city or have you migrated away?
Ive found myself in deepest Deeside. A yorkshireman in Aboyne. How did that happen??

Why don't they have the 'flash bookie' on Channel 4 Racing?

The ratings would go through the roof!

*that's fine, it's all about opinion.

Holywell

I have no interest in football. And I certainly wouldn't watch such a related programme just to be entertained by pundits personalities !

I watch ML for the horseracing interest. Geoff Banks spoiled his appearance on ML by his ' quips'. But as he stated earlier he hates fobt's, and  I've watched him articulate this aspect and other topics, like tipping services,handicapping, betting etc on the YouTube BetRacingNation  episodes. And he's been excellent. If the ML adopted more of this type of discussion into its format it would be a big improvement imo.
'

surely more people will watch if geoff is on the show this week

"Plenty of comparisons made with Mc Crirrick who could be just as cringe-worthy when trying to wind guest trainers/jockeys up on the show. "

Geoff did make the show a lot more interesting, I usually watch it now out of habit more than anything else, but they do seem to be getting the format right.  And next time they have Geoff on the show, don't wait until the last minute to really wind somebody up !!!

Agree barrys bismark should have been kept as part of the show, and also starting to warm to Richi as well especially when he is presenting the show, but don't keep asking jockeys if this is the best horse they have ever ridden, and "Can you put into words how you are feeling now ?" after they have just ridden a big race winner.

From the ones that went I think Francome was probably the biggest loss.  But I do like Jimbo and Cunningham, Fitz is ok sometimes, Nick Luck is a very good presenter (impression of him shot up after that Stoute interview).  Clare Balding is very professional, but I don't think it's good for the rest of the team to have a presenter who only comes in for the big meetings.  Should have Tanya and Lee together, but not Tanya on her own. And Segal should be a regualr on the team.

But as already mentioned on here, everyone has their opinions, but I do think they are getting the show right and a lot more watchable.  But they do need 1 or 2 strong personalities on the team, and last week's ML was a lot better.