Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
28 Nov 21
19:02
Joined:
Date Joined:
18 Feb 02
By Chris Cook, Senior reporter
6:00PM, NOV 28 2021
A huge week for racing-related hearings starts on Monday, with opening arguments expected to be made at the High Court as Freddy Tylicki sues Graham Gibbons over the 2016 fall at Kempton that ended his riding career and left him paralysed.
As revealed by the Racing Post in April, Tylicki will seek to persuade a judge that Gibbons owes him damages, having allegedly caused the fall by steering his mount across in front of Tylicki's, who then clipped heels.
With the BHA due to open a hearing on Tuesday into whether Robbie Dunne bullied Bryony Frost, it is a momentous week for anyone interested in the question of what duties are owed by jockeys to each other.
It is believed that Tylicki's is the first case between riders to reach a courtroom for 20 years, since Peter Caldwell sued Adrian Maguire and Mick Fitzgerald for spinal injuries he suffered at Hexham in 1994.
Caldwell was unsuccessful, the judge reportedly describing the incident in question as reflecting "the cut and thrust of serious horseracing" and suggesting that in order for a jockey to win such a case, he would have to prove the responsible rider was guilty of more than a simple error of judgement.
Documents lodged in court by Tylicki's solicitors claim that Gibbons "rode dangerously and caused serious interference" to Tylicki's mount, Nellie Deen, either deliberately or "by riding in a way that was likely" to endanger the other man's safety.
Tylicki is said to have tried to alert his rival to the imminent danger by shouting: "Gibbo!" in an effort to "discourage him from persisting on his path into the space alongside the rail which was legitimately occupied" by Nellie Deen.
Defence arguments lodged on behalf of Gibbons, who denies liability, state he was unaware of the position of Tylicki's horse on his inside "until around the time at which the horses first made contact" and specifically deny that he caused Madame Butterfly to move into the path of Nellie Deen. Instead, it is claimed that Tylicki "rode his horse forward ... in circumstances in which there was insufficient room between the defendant's horse and the rail for the claimant's horse to be able to travel safely through".
Ryan Moore, three times champion Flat jockey, is expected to be called as an expert witness by Tylicki's side; he did not take part in the Kempton race.
Jim McGrath, a stablemate of Tylicki's at Sky Sports Racing, is also expected to give evidence. The defence are reportedly relying on the expert evidence of Charlie Lane, a steward and former amateur jockey who rode the Fulke Walwyn-trained Columbus to win the Grand Military Gold Cup in 1988.
6:00PM, NOV 28 2021
A huge week for racing-related hearings starts on Monday, with opening arguments expected to be made at the High Court as Freddy Tylicki sues Graham Gibbons over the 2016 fall at Kempton that ended his riding career and left him paralysed.
As revealed by the Racing Post in April, Tylicki will seek to persuade a judge that Gibbons owes him damages, having allegedly caused the fall by steering his mount across in front of Tylicki's, who then clipped heels.
With the BHA due to open a hearing on Tuesday into whether Robbie Dunne bullied Bryony Frost, it is a momentous week for anyone interested in the question of what duties are owed by jockeys to each other.
It is believed that Tylicki's is the first case between riders to reach a courtroom for 20 years, since Peter Caldwell sued Adrian Maguire and Mick Fitzgerald for spinal injuries he suffered at Hexham in 1994.
Caldwell was unsuccessful, the judge reportedly describing the incident in question as reflecting "the cut and thrust of serious horseracing" and suggesting that in order for a jockey to win such a case, he would have to prove the responsible rider was guilty of more than a simple error of judgement.
Documents lodged in court by Tylicki's solicitors claim that Gibbons "rode dangerously and caused serious interference" to Tylicki's mount, Nellie Deen, either deliberately or "by riding in a way that was likely" to endanger the other man's safety.
Tylicki is said to have tried to alert his rival to the imminent danger by shouting: "Gibbo!" in an effort to "discourage him from persisting on his path into the space alongside the rail which was legitimately occupied" by Nellie Deen.
Defence arguments lodged on behalf of Gibbons, who denies liability, state he was unaware of the position of Tylicki's horse on his inside "until around the time at which the horses first made contact" and specifically deny that he caused Madame Butterfly to move into the path of Nellie Deen. Instead, it is claimed that Tylicki "rode his horse forward ... in circumstances in which there was insufficient room between the defendant's horse and the rail for the claimant's horse to be able to travel safely through".
Ryan Moore, three times champion Flat jockey, is expected to be called as an expert witness by Tylicki's side; he did not take part in the Kempton race.
Jim McGrath, a stablemate of Tylicki's at Sky Sports Racing, is also expected to give evidence. The defence are reportedly relying on the expert evidence of Charlie Lane, a steward and former amateur jockey who rode the Fulke Walwyn-trained Columbus to win the Grand Military Gold Cup in 1988.
Show More
mrspock, I routinely record live racing and was able to examine for myself at the time what happened in the build up to the fall, and posted my opinion on threads at the time, as did others.
As for your question, parispike on this thread has been made reasonable points about it ending up in court.
As for your question, parispike on this thread has been made reasonable points about it ending up in court.
mrsspock, mr combustible posted this earlier on in the thread
my apologies first, there is no mention of the culprit being Irish.
mrcombustible
Date Joined: 18 Feb 02
Add contact | Send message
30 Nov 21 20:13Joined: 18 Feb 02 | Topic/replies: 3,219 | Blogger: mrcombustible's blog
JCM It is in the RP article
"Are you aware on the jockeys' grapevine of a disgraceful incident a few months ago when a well-known former jockey tried to pressure Mr Gibbons to give evidence to help Freddy Tylicki and then assaulted him?"
my apologies first, there is no mention of the culprit being Irish.
mrcombustible
Date Joined: 18 Feb 02
Add contact | Send message
30 Nov 21 20:13Joined: 18 Feb 02 | Topic/replies: 3,219 | Blogger: mrcombustible's blog
JCM It is in the RP article
"Are you aware on the jockeys' grapevine of a disgraceful incident a few months ago when a well-known former jockey tried to pressure Mr Gibbons to give evidence to help Freddy Tylicki and then assaulted him?"
@GeorgeB
Everybody has opinions on every race on every day;however,the elephant in the room is the rules of racing,and stewarding. If a riding offence has occurred,then its the authorities who should be taking appropiate action.
If a precedent IS set,then you could see cases ending up in court on a regular basis.
Everybody has opinions on every race on every day;however,the elephant in the room is the rules of racing,and stewarding. If a riding offence has occurred,then its the authorities who should be taking appropiate action.
If a precedent IS set,then you could see cases ending up in court on a regular basis.
Ryan Moore fends off suggestion of bias from Gibbons' counsel in High Court
https://www.racingpost.com/news/latest/ryan-moore-fends-off-suggestion-of-bias-from-gibbons-counsel-in-high-court/524943
https://www.racingpost.com/news/latest/ryan-moore-fends-off-suggestion-of-bias-from-gibbons-counsel-in-high-court/524943
Ryan Moore insisted he had remained unbiased throughout the process that led to him giving evidence as an expert witness at the High Court on Wednesday and confirmed his view that Graham Gibbons was at fault over the 2016 incident at Kempton when Freddy Tylicki suffered paralysing injuries.
Ryan's expert report does not seem a killer blow.
------------------------------------------------------------
Ryan Moore fends off suggestion of bias from Gibbons' counsel in High Court
Ryan Moore: gave evidence on day three of the High Court hearing into Freddy Tylicki's claim against Graham Gibbons
Ryan Moore: gave evidence on day three of the High Court hearing into Freddy Tylicki's claim against Graham Gibbons
Bryn Lennon (Getty Images)
1 of 1
By Chris Cook, Senior reporter
UPDATED 7:36PM, DEC 1 2021
Ryan Moore insisted he had remained unbiased throughout the process that led to him giving evidence as an expert witness at the High Court on Wednesday and confirmed his view that Graham Gibbons was at fault over the 2016 incident at Kempton when Freddy Tylicki suffered paralysing injuries.
The three-time champion jockey, having what he said was his first experience of a court room, spent more than three hours under forensic cross-examination, when his neutrality was questioned by the defence barrister, Patrick Lawrence QC.
Lawrence put it to him that, having had several conversations over many months with Tylicki's solicitors in the production of his report, Moore's mindset may have changed such that he was "seeking to do your best" for the injured man. Moore, who said he had done the work for free, gave a vivid denial.
Gibbons' breath smelled of alcohol at Kempton, Jim Crowley tells High Court
"This whole thing has been tiresome and boring and sad," he said. "I just wanted to write a report which I felt was fair, about what I believe happened during the race. That's all I was trying to achieve. To be honest, it's a lose/lose either way."
To a question about his sympathy for the claimant, Moore replied: "I do feel a great deal of sympathy for Freddy. I also feel a great deal of sympathy for Graham. It's a horrible situation." Although he felt Gibbons' riding had caused the 2016 fall, he also described the defendant as "an excellent horseman, a fantastic rider".
Moore's report has not been made public but an excerpt in the published arguments for Tylicki describes Gibbons as exerting "considerable tension on the right rein" while rounding the bend, and continues: "He would only have done that in order to encourage Madame Butterfly across Nellie Deen's racing line," a reference to the two horses involved.
Graham Gibbons: described as "an excellent horseman" by Ryan Moore but whose riding caused the Kempton fall in 2016
Graham Gibbons: described as "an excellent horseman" by Ryan Moore but whose riding caused the Kempton fall in 2016
Mark Cranham (racingpost.com/photos)
Asked what he would have done if, in Gibbons' situation, he had noticed a horse on his inner, Moore replied: "If I'm turning a bend and making the running and someone goes up my inside, my natural instinct is, I wasn't expecting that and usually I'll be steering away. You don't want to cause interference.
"I would always think, I don't like that, but the safest thing is to leave more space. It's happened to me in the past."
Lawrence argued that Moore had not become champion three times by giving way to his rivals and that in fact he would not do so if he found someone unexpectedly moving up between him and the rail. "Respectfully, your suggestion is wrong," the jockey countered.
"Many times over the years . . . I can recall a moment at the Curragh with 100 yards to go and I just felt him there, there was a shout. I didn't want to put him through the fence, so I had to accept the situation and get beat. It happens. As riders, we all understand there are risks involved. It is high-risk but we have to respect one another.
"It's competitive and you want to win but your first obligation as a rider is to the other riders and the horses in the race. That is our first priority. You can't win anything if you're suspended."
Moore's report included an acknowledgement that it was prepared by Tylicki's solicitors after consultation with him. "I never sit at a computer. I ride horses," Moore explained, but that led to questions from Lawrence as to whether parts of the report reflected the jockey's views or those of the solicitors.
In particular, Lawrence attacked what he described as a "ridiculous" assertion that Gibbons should not just have noticed Tylicki's presence and given him room, but that he should also have "slowed down" Madame Butterfly. "This is a slip-up because this report has been prepared by someone else," Lawrence suggested, adding that Moore would never do such a thing himself.
Tylicki recalls 'shout for survival' as claim against Gibbons is heard in court
"It hasn't come across the way I meant it," Moore conceded, but he insisted that in such a situation, he would "take a hold of the horse's head" to ensure he had full control of it and could avoid an accident.
As he had done with Jim Crowley on Tuesday, Lawrence sought to neutralise Moore's impact as a witness by raising an instance when his riding had been found at fault, aboard Tilsit at Goodwood last year, when Moore was suspended for five days after causing interference.
Moore accepted he should have reacted faster but said: "It didn't take place over three to four seconds, it happened over half a second where the horse shifted to his right. No horse went down, there were no injuries."
When the hearing continues on Thursday, Jim McGrath of Sky Sports Racing will return to the witness stand, having just begun to undergo cross-examination on Wednesday. He stood by his position that Gibbons should have been found guilty of dangerous riding, even though the raceday stewards ruled the interference was accidental.
Lawrence called attention to the experience of the stewards and asked if McGrath really believed they were capable of such a "complete howler". "There were mitigating circumstances but yes, that's my view," McGrath replied.
"I think from the very limited transcript available, which Mr Gibbons said yesterday took five minutes, in light of the fact this was one of the most serious Flat racing incidents I can recall, and bearing in mind the little bit of evidence that was discussed raised questions that needed answers, and some of the jockeys were not interviewed, for obvious reasons, I think they were panicked."
Gibbons denies negligence in relation to the 2016 fall. The hearing is due to end on Friday.
------------------------------------------------------------
Ryan Moore fends off suggestion of bias from Gibbons' counsel in High Court
Ryan Moore: gave evidence on day three of the High Court hearing into Freddy Tylicki's claim against Graham Gibbons
Ryan Moore: gave evidence on day three of the High Court hearing into Freddy Tylicki's claim against Graham Gibbons
Bryn Lennon (Getty Images)
1 of 1
By Chris Cook, Senior reporter
UPDATED 7:36PM, DEC 1 2021
Ryan Moore insisted he had remained unbiased throughout the process that led to him giving evidence as an expert witness at the High Court on Wednesday and confirmed his view that Graham Gibbons was at fault over the 2016 incident at Kempton when Freddy Tylicki suffered paralysing injuries.
The three-time champion jockey, having what he said was his first experience of a court room, spent more than three hours under forensic cross-examination, when his neutrality was questioned by the defence barrister, Patrick Lawrence QC.
Lawrence put it to him that, having had several conversations over many months with Tylicki's solicitors in the production of his report, Moore's mindset may have changed such that he was "seeking to do your best" for the injured man. Moore, who said he had done the work for free, gave a vivid denial.
Gibbons' breath smelled of alcohol at Kempton, Jim Crowley tells High Court
"This whole thing has been tiresome and boring and sad," he said. "I just wanted to write a report which I felt was fair, about what I believe happened during the race. That's all I was trying to achieve. To be honest, it's a lose/lose either way."
To a question about his sympathy for the claimant, Moore replied: "I do feel a great deal of sympathy for Freddy. I also feel a great deal of sympathy for Graham. It's a horrible situation." Although he felt Gibbons' riding had caused the 2016 fall, he also described the defendant as "an excellent horseman, a fantastic rider".
Moore's report has not been made public but an excerpt in the published arguments for Tylicki describes Gibbons as exerting "considerable tension on the right rein" while rounding the bend, and continues: "He would only have done that in order to encourage Madame Butterfly across Nellie Deen's racing line," a reference to the two horses involved.
Graham Gibbons: described as "an excellent horseman" by Ryan Moore but whose riding caused the Kempton fall in 2016
Graham Gibbons: described as "an excellent horseman" by Ryan Moore but whose riding caused the Kempton fall in 2016
Mark Cranham (racingpost.com/photos)
Asked what he would have done if, in Gibbons' situation, he had noticed a horse on his inner, Moore replied: "If I'm turning a bend and making the running and someone goes up my inside, my natural instinct is, I wasn't expecting that and usually I'll be steering away. You don't want to cause interference.
"I would always think, I don't like that, but the safest thing is to leave more space. It's happened to me in the past."
Lawrence argued that Moore had not become champion three times by giving way to his rivals and that in fact he would not do so if he found someone unexpectedly moving up between him and the rail. "Respectfully, your suggestion is wrong," the jockey countered.
"Many times over the years . . . I can recall a moment at the Curragh with 100 yards to go and I just felt him there, there was a shout. I didn't want to put him through the fence, so I had to accept the situation and get beat. It happens. As riders, we all understand there are risks involved. It is high-risk but we have to respect one another.
"It's competitive and you want to win but your first obligation as a rider is to the other riders and the horses in the race. That is our first priority. You can't win anything if you're suspended."
Moore's report included an acknowledgement that it was prepared by Tylicki's solicitors after consultation with him. "I never sit at a computer. I ride horses," Moore explained, but that led to questions from Lawrence as to whether parts of the report reflected the jockey's views or those of the solicitors.
In particular, Lawrence attacked what he described as a "ridiculous" assertion that Gibbons should not just have noticed Tylicki's presence and given him room, but that he should also have "slowed down" Madame Butterfly. "This is a slip-up because this report has been prepared by someone else," Lawrence suggested, adding that Moore would never do such a thing himself.
Tylicki recalls 'shout for survival' as claim against Gibbons is heard in court
"It hasn't come across the way I meant it," Moore conceded, but he insisted that in such a situation, he would "take a hold of the horse's head" to ensure he had full control of it and could avoid an accident.
As he had done with Jim Crowley on Tuesday, Lawrence sought to neutralise Moore's impact as a witness by raising an instance when his riding had been found at fault, aboard Tilsit at Goodwood last year, when Moore was suspended for five days after causing interference.
Moore accepted he should have reacted faster but said: "It didn't take place over three to four seconds, it happened over half a second where the horse shifted to his right. No horse went down, there were no injuries."
When the hearing continues on Thursday, Jim McGrath of Sky Sports Racing will return to the witness stand, having just begun to undergo cross-examination on Wednesday. He stood by his position that Gibbons should have been found guilty of dangerous riding, even though the raceday stewards ruled the interference was accidental.
Lawrence called attention to the experience of the stewards and asked if McGrath really believed they were capable of such a "complete howler". "There were mitigating circumstances but yes, that's my view," McGrath replied.
"I think from the very limited transcript available, which Mr Gibbons said yesterday took five minutes, in light of the fact this was one of the most serious Flat racing incidents I can recall, and bearing in mind the little bit of evidence that was discussed raised questions that needed answers, and some of the jockeys were not interviewed, for obvious reasons, I think they were panicked."
Gibbons denies negligence in relation to the 2016 fall. The hearing is due to end on Friday.
Dec 1, 2021 -- 6:33PM, geoff m wrote:
bizzare that Crowley said it was a regular thing Gibbons smelling of alcohol .Says nowt @ the time
Could the stewards have made such a "complete howler" in ruling the interference was accidental?
This was Jim McGrath's response:
Lawrence called attention to the experience of the stewards and asked if McGrath really believed they were capable of such a "complete howler". "There were mitigating circumstances but yes, that's my view," McGrath replied.
"I think from the very limited transcript available, which Mr Gibbons said yesterday took five minutes, in light of the fact this was one of the most serious Flat racing incidents I can recall, and bearing in mind the little bit of evidence that was discussed raised questions that needed answers, and some of the jockeys were not interviewed, for obvious reasons, I think they were panicked."
This was Jim McGrath's response:
Lawrence called attention to the experience of the stewards and asked if McGrath really believed they were capable of such a "complete howler". "There were mitigating circumstances but yes, that's my view," McGrath replied.
"I think from the very limited transcript available, which Mr Gibbons said yesterday took five minutes, in light of the fact this was one of the most serious Flat racing incidents I can recall, and bearing in mind the little bit of evidence that was discussed raised questions that needed answers, and some of the jockeys were not interviewed, for obvious reasons, I think they were panicked."
Moore really shouldn’t have got involved in this. It’s all well and good him making statements about what a rider ‘should’ do, etc, but it was entirely predictable that GG’s brief would simply point to an example of Moore being done by the stewards. I doubt there’s many jockeys couldn’t have the same accusation made against them. Moore’s defence of himself, that ‘no horses went down, there were no injuries’, is completely beside the point (and McGrath falls into the same trap with the ‘most serious Flat racing incidents’ comment) - the act is either negligent or it is not.
My thoughts exactly geoff m - I can’t see any reason why Crowley would perjure himself, but it doesn’t reflect well on him that, by his own admission, he failed to report GG to the stewards, as he’d be bound to do. This whole episode reflects very poorly on the weighing room in general.
if gibbons is in front
doesnt being behind weigh more on what happened
asking? never rode a horse in my life
doesnt being behind weigh more on what happened
asking? never rode a horse in my life
This is a civil case.
There is no Jury.
It does not have to be proven "Beyond reasonable doubt"
The Judge will decide based on "The Balance of Probabilities"
Gibbons his in more trouble than many on here seem to think.
There is no Jury.
It does not have to be proven "Beyond reasonable doubt"
The Judge will decide based on "The Balance of Probabilities"
Gibbons his in more trouble than many on here seem to think.
Hello jimnast, long time no see! Doing ok thanks. Life has got in the way of getting to the racecourse for a while now, but hoping to get to Haydock before too long. you still betting there and getting about?
yes had a day out there today dr gonzo annual member so go to almost all the meetings other than royal ascot saturday ,poor card today but enjoyed plenty of chat with people out in the fresh air ,hopefully see you there soon ,that said i am away for the february meeting.
are u still doing a ew heinz barstool ?
skybet stopping b.o.g on extra place races was a blow
skybet stopping b.o.g on extra place races was a blow
Hi xmx,
still do a multiple every day, L15 or 31 usually. Always ew, not enough runners most days for a heinz. Do the multis on 365 now.
Stay lucky.
still do a multiple every day, L15 or 31 usually. Always ew, not enough runners most days for a heinz. Do the multis on 365 now.
Stay lucky.
Glad to hear it jimnast - will try and give you a shout on here next time I go, you’ll have to let me buy you a pint
Philip Makin has tweeted that he drove GG to Kempton that day and he never got a smell of alcohol during the 4 hour trip.
They could allege he had a drink at the track, if he gave him a lift back from the track and didnt smell alcohol that would be more useful.
THE SPORTS CHAMPION JOCKEY
has been stood down for failing drink test ,failed drug tests ,lied about both incidents,was seen/other jocks heard about him been completely bladdered 12 hrs before racing,but every jock in uk quite happy to ride in a race with him a week after he lost control of a horse in a paddock just averting a serious incident to racing staff and public
has been stood down for failing drink test ,failed drug tests ,lied about both incidents,was seen/other jocks heard about him been completely bladdered 12 hrs before racing,but every jock in uk quite happy to ride in a race with him a week after he lost control of a horse in a paddock just averting a serious incident to racing staff and public
Is the suggestion that Oisin was drunk at Salisbury?
the fact is he was absolutely shoite faced 12 hrs earlier and the stewards were tipped off
The stewards were tipped off at Newmarket where he was stood down.
I never saw Salisbury get a mention regarding alcohol where the horse got loose in the paddock?
I never saw Salisbury get a mention regarding alcohol where the horse got loose in the paddock?
If Tylicki had got up and walked away from the incident would have never heard another murmur.
Sadly its risks jockeys take everyday of their lives. This smacks of a rallying cry of how much damages can we screw out of the situation for the unfortunate Tylicki.
Opens a right can of worms if found in Tylickis favour.
If you are looking to go up the inside as a professional jock you know the risk you are taking and 9/10 any good jock is going to close the door on you.
A very bad week for the weighing room in general
In both cases Frost/Dunne and Tylicki/Gibbons it doesnt come up smelling of roses from an outsider looking in.
Sadly its risks jockeys take everyday of their lives. This smacks of a rallying cry of how much damages can we screw out of the situation for the unfortunate Tylicki.
Opens a right can of worms if found in Tylickis favour.
If you are looking to go up the inside as a professional jock you know the risk you are taking and 9/10 any good jock is going to close the door on you.
A very bad week for the weighing room in general
In both cases Frost/Dunne and Tylicki/Gibbons it doesnt come up smelling of roses from an outsider looking in.
the thing is with the bha, it takes the headliners to get any action or change, yet on a daily basis you see issues within the sport, they are not fit for purpose, they make a lot of noise about being politically correct or welfare orientated, but in the background the sport as a whole is a mess run & managed by muppets
yes agree geoff - looks bad - then there's the Skelton case, the Jim bolger doping accusations - not to mention what we see day in day out of dodgy rides, unfit horses, a few owners who dominate the sport and can what they want - hot on the heels of Gordon Elliot as well. Yet nobody seems to criticise the powers that govern the sport for allowing this culture - its a rotten arrogant culture and clique - and they are just getting the headlines they deserve imo and ironically its us punters who are vilified for giving opinions that are largely in the best interests of the sport (albeit with some pocket talking occasionaly :))
But regardless of all the other cases - wtf is actually going on the weighing room. Drunks, bully's, race fixers - then how many suicides? I mean in any other sport or work situation where this was happening the people who govern the sport would be accountable and be forced to resign and they would get on top of all this for the reasons that the people who work in the sport deserve so much more.
you can also point the finger at the media and pundits, none of whom have the b@lls to ask the right questions for fear of themselves being alienated, don't rock the boat or we won't let you in so it effectively condones the poor management of the sport and hides the dirty side of racing
sparrow 02 Dec 21 13:01
If the stewards would just use the dangerous riding rule instead of pretending it doesn't exist then most of these incidents would cease to occur.
If the stewards would just use the dangerous riding rule instead of pretending it doesn't exist then most of these incidents would cease to occur.
geoff m
If you are looking to go up the inside as a professional jock you know the risk you are taking and 9/10 any good jock is going to close the door on you.
Because it's been permitted. Why so, however? "Close the door" appears to be a euphemism for taking action to deliberately impede an an opponent.
If you are looking to go up the inside as a professional jock you know the risk you are taking and 9/10 any good jock is going to close the door on you.
Because it's been permitted. Why so, however? "Close the door" appears to be a euphemism for taking action to deliberately impede an an opponent.
Yep happens ever day in race riding. How can Moore give that evidence and keep a straight face
crowley made me laugh, he was done for improper (one of the early ones) then appealed and got it down turned to careless
geoff m 02 Dec 21 13:52
Yep happens ever day in race riding. How can Moore give that evidence and keep a straight face
What is your opinion of the "dangerous riding" rule" Geoff and how would you define it?
Yep happens ever day in race riding. How can Moore give that evidence and keep a straight face
What is your opinion of the "dangerous riding" rule" Geoff and how would you define it?
he probably did geoff, thing is when everyone walks away they just bang heads in the weighing room and self manage, the code of silence stops them from hanging each other, yet here they all are in two courts stabbing each other in the back
maybe one of them should have called thommo as a witness / character reference
As for jockey witnesses its been a case of sweep it all under the table until something serious happens.
racing,moore and rsacing media in a nutshell
bloke in a wheelchair for life
bloke getting sued for 6 million plus
star prosecution witness says on the stand
I,M BORED WITH IT ALL , CAN I GO HOME NOW,
bloke in a wheelchair for life
bloke getting sued for 6 million plus
star prosecution witness says on the stand
I,M BORED WITH IT ALL , CAN I GO HOME NOW,
Just hope Moore, Crowley, Cosgrave dont cut anybody up in future, glass houses and stones etc
Moore has made himself look a fool or a liar with his statement.
Gibbons says he was only a half horse width from the rail, which means there was never room for Freddie to go up the inner. The head on must show if Gibbons version is true or not?
Gibbons says he was only a half horse width from the rail, which means there was never room for Freddie to go up the inner. The head on must show if Gibbons version is true or not?
you really need to have 2 horse widths to go for it dont you,1 means unless the one in front moves off when he see,s you coming ,contact of some sort is inevitable, in gibbons case if your in front defending anything under 2 horse widths should be easy enough for a brief
Freddy Tylicki incident was 'easily avoidable', Jim McGrath tells High Court
By Chris Cook, Senior reporter
7:00PM, DEC 2 2021
The mid-race collision which paralysed Freddy Tylicki was "easily avoidable", Jim McGrath told the High Court on Thursday. The veteran broadcaster and racing analyst was speaking on day four of a hearing to determine whether Tylicki's injuries were the result of negligence on the part of his fellow jockey Graham Gibbons, who denies it.
While watching footage of the race, McGrath called attention to what he said was "a discernible movement" by Gibbons, changing his grip on the reins and resulting in his mount, Madame Butterfly, moving back towards the inside rail. In McGrath's view, this was what led to Nellie Deen, under Tylicki, running out of room some seconds later.
"What is the only real possible outcome if the jockey on the outside continues with that manoeuvre?" McGrath asked the court. "Trouble with a capital 'T', and not just for Mr Tylicki. Mr Gibbons has tightened the lead at the head of a packed field.
"Now, sometimes jockeys make split-second decisions, they have to. My gripe with the situation is at this stage of the race, Mr Gibbons is on the best horse and was well positioned, he was half a mile from home, there was nothing really to be gained by doing what he appears to have done. It was easily avoidable."
Patrick Lawrence QC, defending Gibbons, argued with McGrath, suggesting the footage showed "no trace of any significant lateral movement of Madame Butterfly towards the rail" before the collision. "There is in my opinion," McGrath said.
Lawrence questioned whether McGrath was qualified to make the claim that Gibbons had been guilty of dangerous riding. "What is it in your life," the barrister asked, "that entitles you to give expert evidence to this court as to whether his riding was far below that of a competent and careful rider?"
"My experience as a race-reader and commentator and my knowledge of the rules," McGrath replied. When Lawrence insisted that did not amount to "sufficient expertise", the irritated McGrath called attention to the solicitor Rory Mac Neice, sitting behind the barrister and alongside Gibbons.
"Mr Mac Neice works regularly for the PJA," said McGrath. "The PJA thought I was sufficiently experienced to ask me to help in the case of a jockey, Richie McGrath. They clearly thought I had some experience and knowledge that was worth presenting to a tribunal.
"Off the back of that, they asked me to be involved in two more cases. I declined. I'm not a gun for hire. Like Ryan Moore said yesterday, to me this is tiresome and unpleasant, I don't take any pleasure in being here saying these things. Yes, I do think overall I can give a reasonable opinion to the court."
The hour-long exchanges between the pair ended on a testy note, when Lawrence asserted: "This was an incident of a type that is very commonplace, a clash between two horses close to the rail. What is remarkable is the severity of the injuries but ultimately it was no more than a racing incident and your evidence that Mr Gibbons was guilty of dangerous riding is without any foundation."
"Absolute rubbish," McGrath responded.
Mac Neice found himself being dragged into the evidence again while the defence's expert, Charlie Lane, was on the stand. Edward Faulks QC cross-examined him about three other races mentioned in his report, one of which resulted in a ban for Moore, an expert witness for Tylicki this week. Lane said those races had been suggested to him by Mac Neice as alternative examples of careless riding.
Ryan Moore fends off suggestion of bias from Gibbons' counsel in High Court
Faulks pointed out that, as an expert, Lane's first duty was to the court and queried whether it could be right for him to include three races "cherry-picked" by solicitors acting for Gibbons. "The only race [besides the Kempton one] the court was shown this week was a race involving Mr Moore, an expert witness for the claimant. Did you think it was just a coincidence that his only suspension for careless riding that year was among the three races chosen?"
"I think it may well not have been," Lane replied, "but I don't know. I didn't ask, I'm afraid."
Lane said he was a steward of 30 years' experience, who had started out at Kempton and still officiated there occasionally. He said he knew the stewards who had been on duty on the day of the incident but did not see that as an obstacle to his offering a fair appraisal of their verdict of accidental interference, with which he agreed.
Faulks questioned him as to whether the stewards should have adjourned their inquiry, in view of the fact the four jockeys who had fallen or been unseated were not available to describe events. Lane said: "To me, what you see on the film is sufficient for the stewards to reach a decision. I accept there may be others who would disagree."
In a passage of evidence which may be of concern to racing's regulator, Lane agreed with a number of propositions put to him by Faulks that jockeys might not always be frank and open when speaking in a stewards' inquiry. The questions arose from Tuesday's testimony by Pat Cosgrave that, in addressing the Kempton stewards, he had been trying to abide by a jockeys' "code of conduct . . . to not get involved or say too much".
"Jockeys may be taciturn in terms of what they say happened about a race," Faulks suggested. "It may not always be easy to get as full a picture as you would want from a jockey."
"I agree," Lane said.
The week-long hearing is set to conclude on Friday with closing arguments for both sides. An immediate verdict is not expected.
By Chris Cook, Senior reporter
7:00PM, DEC 2 2021
The mid-race collision which paralysed Freddy Tylicki was "easily avoidable", Jim McGrath told the High Court on Thursday. The veteran broadcaster and racing analyst was speaking on day four of a hearing to determine whether Tylicki's injuries were the result of negligence on the part of his fellow jockey Graham Gibbons, who denies it.
While watching footage of the race, McGrath called attention to what he said was "a discernible movement" by Gibbons, changing his grip on the reins and resulting in his mount, Madame Butterfly, moving back towards the inside rail. In McGrath's view, this was what led to Nellie Deen, under Tylicki, running out of room some seconds later.
"What is the only real possible outcome if the jockey on the outside continues with that manoeuvre?" McGrath asked the court. "Trouble with a capital 'T', and not just for Mr Tylicki. Mr Gibbons has tightened the lead at the head of a packed field.
"Now, sometimes jockeys make split-second decisions, they have to. My gripe with the situation is at this stage of the race, Mr Gibbons is on the best horse and was well positioned, he was half a mile from home, there was nothing really to be gained by doing what he appears to have done. It was easily avoidable."
Patrick Lawrence QC, defending Gibbons, argued with McGrath, suggesting the footage showed "no trace of any significant lateral movement of Madame Butterfly towards the rail" before the collision. "There is in my opinion," McGrath said.
Lawrence questioned whether McGrath was qualified to make the claim that Gibbons had been guilty of dangerous riding. "What is it in your life," the barrister asked, "that entitles you to give expert evidence to this court as to whether his riding was far below that of a competent and careful rider?"
"My experience as a race-reader and commentator and my knowledge of the rules," McGrath replied. When Lawrence insisted that did not amount to "sufficient expertise", the irritated McGrath called attention to the solicitor Rory Mac Neice, sitting behind the barrister and alongside Gibbons.
"Mr Mac Neice works regularly for the PJA," said McGrath. "The PJA thought I was sufficiently experienced to ask me to help in the case of a jockey, Richie McGrath. They clearly thought I had some experience and knowledge that was worth presenting to a tribunal.
"Off the back of that, they asked me to be involved in two more cases. I declined. I'm not a gun for hire. Like Ryan Moore said yesterday, to me this is tiresome and unpleasant, I don't take any pleasure in being here saying these things. Yes, I do think overall I can give a reasonable opinion to the court."
The hour-long exchanges between the pair ended on a testy note, when Lawrence asserted: "This was an incident of a type that is very commonplace, a clash between two horses close to the rail. What is remarkable is the severity of the injuries but ultimately it was no more than a racing incident and your evidence that Mr Gibbons was guilty of dangerous riding is without any foundation."
"Absolute rubbish," McGrath responded.
Mac Neice found himself being dragged into the evidence again while the defence's expert, Charlie Lane, was on the stand. Edward Faulks QC cross-examined him about three other races mentioned in his report, one of which resulted in a ban for Moore, an expert witness for Tylicki this week. Lane said those races had been suggested to him by Mac Neice as alternative examples of careless riding.
Ryan Moore fends off suggestion of bias from Gibbons' counsel in High Court
Faulks pointed out that, as an expert, Lane's first duty was to the court and queried whether it could be right for him to include three races "cherry-picked" by solicitors acting for Gibbons. "The only race [besides the Kempton one] the court was shown this week was a race involving Mr Moore, an expert witness for the claimant. Did you think it was just a coincidence that his only suspension for careless riding that year was among the three races chosen?"
"I think it may well not have been," Lane replied, "but I don't know. I didn't ask, I'm afraid."
Lane said he was a steward of 30 years' experience, who had started out at Kempton and still officiated there occasionally. He said he knew the stewards who had been on duty on the day of the incident but did not see that as an obstacle to his offering a fair appraisal of their verdict of accidental interference, with which he agreed.
Faulks questioned him as to whether the stewards should have adjourned their inquiry, in view of the fact the four jockeys who had fallen or been unseated were not available to describe events. Lane said: "To me, what you see on the film is sufficient for the stewards to reach a decision. I accept there may be others who would disagree."
In a passage of evidence which may be of concern to racing's regulator, Lane agreed with a number of propositions put to him by Faulks that jockeys might not always be frank and open when speaking in a stewards' inquiry. The questions arose from Tuesday's testimony by Pat Cosgrave that, in addressing the Kempton stewards, he had been trying to abide by a jockeys' "code of conduct . . . to not get involved or say too much".
"Jockeys may be taciturn in terms of what they say happened about a race," Faulks suggested. "It may not always be easy to get as full a picture as you would want from a jockey."
"I agree," Lane said.
The week-long hearing is set to conclude on Friday with closing arguments for both sides. An immediate verdict is not expected.
No one mentioned that McGrath is a colleague of Tylicki on Sky Racing so may not be 100% independent
"Lane said he was a steward of 30 years' experience, who had started out at Kempton and still officiated there occasionally. He said he knew the stewards who had been on duty on the day of the incident but did not see that as an obstacle to his offering a fair appraisal of their verdict of accidental interference, with which he agreed."
Which begs the question, why aren't the stewards that were on duty on the day giving evidence?
Are they still comfortable with their decision on the day?
Do they feel in retrospect that they should have referred the enquiry onto the BHA given jockeys involved weren't able to give evidence?
Were they "panicked" into making a decision on the day, as Mr McGrath suggested?
Which begs the question, why aren't the stewards that were on duty on the day giving evidence?
Are they still comfortable with their decision on the day?
Do they feel in retrospect that they should have referred the enquiry onto the BHA given jockeys involved weren't able to give evidence?
Were they "panicked" into making a decision on the day, as Mr McGrath suggested?
Dec 2, 2021 -- 8:30PM, mrcombustible wrote:
Maybe they were asked and declined?
Highly likely. They would have simply said that they stood by the decision they made on the day. Without the injuries FT suffered, that inquiry would probably never have been thought of again.
you'd have thought one side or the other would have wanted to call at least one of them, either to grill or to substantiate evidence, strange none have been asked so far
Whether you agree or disagree with the current rules and their interpretation by the stewards, there has been a widening between UK rules and those in other jurisdictions, in the last 20 years.
In the US for example, you often see jockeys pulling their mounts off others in the stretch, even when it lessens their chance of winning.
Because such manoeuvres, intended or otherwise, often cost them the race (although US rules have come more into line with ours in the last couple of years).
There's a balance to be found between horse and rider safety, and the principle of allowing a result where the best horse wins.
As a punter I favour the more egalitarian principles that our rules have embraced in recent times.
In the US for example, you often see jockeys pulling their mounts off others in the stretch, even when it lessens their chance of winning.
Because such manoeuvres, intended or otherwise, often cost them the race (although US rules have come more into line with ours in the last couple of years).
There's a balance to be found between horse and rider safety, and the principle of allowing a result where the best horse wins.
As a punter I favour the more egalitarian principles that our rules have embraced in recent times.
Lawrence questioned whether McGrath was qualified to make the claim that Gibbons had been guilty of dangerous riding. "What is it in your life," the barrister asked, "that entitles you to give expert evidence to this court as to whether his riding was far below that of a competent and careful rider?"
oi, how many winners have you ridden?
oi, how many winners have you ridden?
McGrath was also an expert witness for the prosecution in the Fallon,Lynch,Williams trial. His statement was not helpful to the prosecution as he stated he did not see anything suspicious about the rides so the prosecution did not use him and the statement became part of the unused material which should be disclosed to the defence.
However through incompetence or something more sinister his staement was not disclosed until after the trial started and it was one of a few reasons the case collapsed at enormous expense to the taxpayer.
Fallon had brought an application to dismiss shortly before the trial but that failed, if the Judge and Fallon's team were aware of the undisclosed statement of McGrath it is likely the application would have succeeded and the Trial would never have taken place.
However through incompetence or something more sinister his staement was not disclosed until after the trial started and it was one of a few reasons the case collapsed at enormous expense to the taxpayer.
Fallon had brought an application to dismiss shortly before the trial but that failed, if the Judge and Fallon's team were aware of the undisclosed statement of McGrath it is likely the application would have succeeded and the Trial would never have taken place.
so jimbo.owner ,big punter basically saying if his jock on his hores thats backed with his money is in front and just off rail if something tries to get up his inside to avoid any accidents he,d instruct his jockey to pull further off the rail and let the other horse through
did a pig go flying past the court room
in every walk of life /work every accident is preventable thats why they hold debrief,s. accident /health and safety enquiries, accident books etc,etc, the health and safety people dont even use the word accident,
if a so called expert like jimbo thinks this was easily preventable their should be more than gibbons in the dock,in the extreme every jocks life is in danger a 1000 times a week and like jimbo says easily preventable ban horse racing and jimbo loading the gun for those that would like it to happen
did a pig go flying past the court room
in every walk of life /work every accident is preventable thats why they hold debrief,s. accident /health and safety enquiries, accident books etc,etc, the health and safety people dont even use the word accident,
if a so called expert like jimbo thinks this was easily preventable their should be more than gibbons in the dock,in the extreme every jocks life is in danger a 1000 times a week and like jimbo says easily preventable ban horse racing and jimbo loading the gun for those that would like it to happen
Youve only got to watch Rubys analysis of races where he praises the jocks who close the door on rivals. Altho there is a fine line between good proffesional riding and dangerous riding .
I wonder if they have been made aware of Phil Makin’s tweet about driving gibbons to Kempton and not smelling any alcohol. The information coming from the case is a little muddling as well. We are told Jim said he smelled alcohol on GG’s breath that night but the only quote we get is of Jim saying that it was a common occurrence to smell it on his breath on racedays. Either Jim would be outright lying, Makin is lying or Gibbons drank alcohol at the course which sounds a bit far fetched.
is jim mcgrath the one who had horses with fahey who tylici rode before or is he the aussie commentator
That" how many winners have you ridden" doesn't really cut it with me.
I'm not a Michelin star winning chef but I know when I've been served a cr@ppy meal!
I'm not a Michelin star winning chef but I know when I've been served a cr@ppy meal!
it's the posh one that used to do c4 racing not the aussie one
or if that doesn't help the one that always talks with his eyes shut
I know him I once had a conversation with him and made him walk into a lamppost
I find it very condescending behaviour personally, shows a distinct lack of class.
Never had any time for McGrath as a pundit and lost all respect for him when he never mentioned a horse he was involved with winning a race covered by a rival broadcaster. Jimbo failed to disclose that the horse was well fancied and backed off the boards and punters only became aware of winning coup when his fellow gravy slurpers mobbed him with congratulations after the horse crossed the winning line! If memory serves me well I believe the animal was called Toogoodtobetrue, which rather rubbed salt in the wound! McGrath was and continues to be a member of the Rhubarb Society of Punditry, motto "Keep 'em in the dark and feed them shyte". It's sad to see the smug barsteward getting airtime now after being exiled to the wilderness where he rightly belongs!
udge to deliver verdict on Tylicki-Gibbons case before Christmas
Freddy Tylicki: left paralysed after a fall at Kempton in 2016
Freddy Tylicki: left paralysed after a fall at Kempton in 2016
Edward Whitaker (racingpost.com/photos)
1 of 1
By Peter Scargill
UPDATED 6:22PM, DEC 3 2021
The £6 million High Court case brought by former jockey Freddy Tylicki against ex-weighing room colleague Graham Gibbons closed on Friday with judge Karen Walden-Smith informing the court of her intention to deliver a verdict before the Christmas break on December 21.
Closing arguments were heard for both the defence and the claimant after a week of evidence that laid bare the crucial decision-making required of jockeys in races, with the judge set to determine the role of Gibbons and his ride on October 31, 2016 in the fall that left Tylicki paralysed.
Edward Faulks QC, for Tylicki, told the court that this was “an exceptional case in terms of riding and the outcome” and that there had been “a breach of the standard of care” between competing jockeys which had caused Tylicki’s mount Nellie Deen to collide with Madame Butterfly, ridden by Gibbons, and subsequently led to the fall that paralysed Tylicki.
By contrast, Patrick Lawrence QC, for Gibbons, said in his closing argument that “if it was anything it was a momentary misjudgement coming around the bend with an ambitious move by Mr Tylicki when in hindsight he should have taken a pull” to avoid a coming together which Gibbons was unaware would happen.
Lawrence argued that the scenario fell “some way short of breaching the high bar set by Caldwell”, referring to the case brought by Peter Caldwell, a former jockey injured in a fall at Hexham, against Mick Fitzgerald and Adrian Maguire in 2001 in which the judge found in favour of the defendants.
Lawrence added: “One does need to show more than mere carelessness. In theory, these circumstances [at Kempton] were avoidable. But these sort of coming togethers around a bend is something that may happen from time to time no matter how careful your riding is.
“It comes down to a period of two to three seconds when horses are going around the bend when the gap wasn’t reasonably sufficient and there was a coming together.”
Lawrence said that a ruling against Gibbons had the potential to “open the floodgates” for similar claims in the future, but in his closing argument Faulks countered that the “circumstances are crucial” in the judge reaching her decision.
He added: “The question is really this: is this a racing incident with a momentary lapse of skill or error of judgement? If so, then there’s no breach. There’s no need for there to be reckless disregard [shown], but it must be above oversight, errors of judgement and lapses.
“This was not an everyday incident. This was a Flat race and it was very unusual for an incident of this nature to take place – maybe unprecedented. It cannot be said that this was an everyday incident and it is dangerous to draw a relationship between the [Caldwell and Tylicki] races.”
Faulks also questioned the reliability of the evidence provided by Gibbons, pointing to convictions for drink driving and his disqualification from riding, which he hopes to return to according to Lawrence, and the assertion by Jim Crowley during his testimony that he had smelt alcohol on the rider’s breath at Kempton.
When questioned by the judge, Faulks made it clear he was not asking for a decision to be made on whether the rider was under the influence of any substances when riding that day.
Summing up, Judge Walden-Smith said: “I cannot say for certain when I will make my judgement, but I shall do so as swiftly as I can. Hopefully before the [Christmas] vacation, that is my intention.”
Freddy Tylicki: left paralysed after a fall at Kempton in 2016
Freddy Tylicki: left paralysed after a fall at Kempton in 2016
Edward Whitaker (racingpost.com/photos)
1 of 1
By Peter Scargill
UPDATED 6:22PM, DEC 3 2021
The £6 million High Court case brought by former jockey Freddy Tylicki against ex-weighing room colleague Graham Gibbons closed on Friday with judge Karen Walden-Smith informing the court of her intention to deliver a verdict before the Christmas break on December 21.
Closing arguments were heard for both the defence and the claimant after a week of evidence that laid bare the crucial decision-making required of jockeys in races, with the judge set to determine the role of Gibbons and his ride on October 31, 2016 in the fall that left Tylicki paralysed.
Edward Faulks QC, for Tylicki, told the court that this was “an exceptional case in terms of riding and the outcome” and that there had been “a breach of the standard of care” between competing jockeys which had caused Tylicki’s mount Nellie Deen to collide with Madame Butterfly, ridden by Gibbons, and subsequently led to the fall that paralysed Tylicki.
By contrast, Patrick Lawrence QC, for Gibbons, said in his closing argument that “if it was anything it was a momentary misjudgement coming around the bend with an ambitious move by Mr Tylicki when in hindsight he should have taken a pull” to avoid a coming together which Gibbons was unaware would happen.
Lawrence argued that the scenario fell “some way short of breaching the high bar set by Caldwell”, referring to the case brought by Peter Caldwell, a former jockey injured in a fall at Hexham, against Mick Fitzgerald and Adrian Maguire in 2001 in which the judge found in favour of the defendants.
Lawrence added: “One does need to show more than mere carelessness. In theory, these circumstances [at Kempton] were avoidable. But these sort of coming togethers around a bend is something that may happen from time to time no matter how careful your riding is.
“It comes down to a period of two to three seconds when horses are going around the bend when the gap wasn’t reasonably sufficient and there was a coming together.”
Lawrence said that a ruling against Gibbons had the potential to “open the floodgates” for similar claims in the future, but in his closing argument Faulks countered that the “circumstances are crucial” in the judge reaching her decision.
He added: “The question is really this: is this a racing incident with a momentary lapse of skill or error of judgement? If so, then there’s no breach. There’s no need for there to be reckless disregard [shown], but it must be above oversight, errors of judgement and lapses.
“This was not an everyday incident. This was a Flat race and it was very unusual for an incident of this nature to take place – maybe unprecedented. It cannot be said that this was an everyday incident and it is dangerous to draw a relationship between the [Caldwell and Tylicki] races.”
Faulks also questioned the reliability of the evidence provided by Gibbons, pointing to convictions for drink driving and his disqualification from riding, which he hopes to return to according to Lawrence, and the assertion by Jim Crowley during his testimony that he had smelt alcohol on the rider’s breath at Kempton.
When questioned by the judge, Faulks made it clear he was not asking for a decision to be made on whether the rider was under the influence of any substances when riding that day.
Summing up, Judge Walden-Smith said: “I cannot say for certain when I will make my judgement, but I shall do so as swiftly as I can. Hopefully before the [Christmas] vacation, that is my intention.”
Chris Cook's ferocious attack on the BHA for failing to bother having a presence in the court during the hearing:
https://www.racingpost.com/news/latest/how-can-the-bha-have-missed-the-significance-of-tylicki-v-gibbons/525666
A BHA presence last week would have been a reassuring sign that in fact the sport is well run and its top people can tell what really matters. Instead, I'm left imagining a group of people chiselling away in their own little silos and nobody sticking their head outside to see if there's something that might need to be dealt with.
https://www.racingpost.com/news/latest/how-can-the-bha-have-missed-the-significance-of-tylicki-v-gibbons/525666
A BHA presence last week would have been a reassuring sign that in fact the sport is well run and its top people can tell what really matters. Instead, I'm left imagining a group of people chiselling away in their own little silos and nobody sticking their head outside to see if there's something that might need to be dealt with.
Part of a piece by Greg Wood in yesterdays Guardian.
"For the claim to succeed, Tylicki and his legal team must satisfy Judge Karen Walden-Smith that Gibbons neglected his duty of care to fellow riders. The obvious precedent for the judge to consider as she weighs up the evidence is a case from 2001, in which a former jump jockey, Peter Caldwell, sued Adrian Maguire and Mick Fitzgerald over a fall at Hexham in 1994 which left him with career-ending spinal and head injuries.
At the time, the case was believed to be the first of its kind. Caldwell’s claim was rejected after the judge decided that the incident “reflected the cut and thrust of serious horse racing … in theory avoidable but in practice, something that is bound to occur from time to time, no matter how careful is the standard of riding.”
The judge in the Caldwell case also decided that “the relevant circumstances in many sports … mean that a mere error of judgment or skill will not suffice” to prove negligence, and that a case could require evidence of “reckless disregard” for the claimant’s safety to succeed. The decision was upheld on appeal, apparently setting what Patrick Lawrence QC, for Gibbons, suggested last week is a “high bar” for a rider seeking to show negligence by a fellow jockey.
A potentially significant difference between the Caldwell and Tylicki cases, meanwhile, is that while the Hexham stewards found Fitzgerald and Maguire guilty of careless riding, the officials at Kempton decided that Tylicki’s fall was the result of “accidental” interference and took no further action.
In terms of the wider implications of the case, and whatever its outcome might be, it seems inevitable that the decision of the stewards at Kempton will be closely scrutinised. They did not hear Tylicki’s account of events before deciding that the incident – in which four horses fell - was an accident, and more generally it remains the case that the last finding of dangerous riding by a jockey in the UK was in 2009.
Has the standard of riding improved so much over the last dozen years that dangerous riding is now a thing of the past? Or have racecourse stewards gradually adopted what the trainer John Berry recently suggested is “an unwritten policy that everything is just classified as careless riding, without thinking”? Just two of the many questions for racing to ponder when Judge Walden-Smith hands down her decision later this month".
"For the claim to succeed, Tylicki and his legal team must satisfy Judge Karen Walden-Smith that Gibbons neglected his duty of care to fellow riders. The obvious precedent for the judge to consider as she weighs up the evidence is a case from 2001, in which a former jump jockey, Peter Caldwell, sued Adrian Maguire and Mick Fitzgerald over a fall at Hexham in 1994 which left him with career-ending spinal and head injuries.
At the time, the case was believed to be the first of its kind. Caldwell’s claim was rejected after the judge decided that the incident “reflected the cut and thrust of serious horse racing … in theory avoidable but in practice, something that is bound to occur from time to time, no matter how careful is the standard of riding.”
The judge in the Caldwell case also decided that “the relevant circumstances in many sports … mean that a mere error of judgment or skill will not suffice” to prove negligence, and that a case could require evidence of “reckless disregard” for the claimant’s safety to succeed. The decision was upheld on appeal, apparently setting what Patrick Lawrence QC, for Gibbons, suggested last week is a “high bar” for a rider seeking to show negligence by a fellow jockey.
A potentially significant difference between the Caldwell and Tylicki cases, meanwhile, is that while the Hexham stewards found Fitzgerald and Maguire guilty of careless riding, the officials at Kempton decided that Tylicki’s fall was the result of “accidental” interference and took no further action.
In terms of the wider implications of the case, and whatever its outcome might be, it seems inevitable that the decision of the stewards at Kempton will be closely scrutinised. They did not hear Tylicki’s account of events before deciding that the incident – in which four horses fell - was an accident, and more generally it remains the case that the last finding of dangerous riding by a jockey in the UK was in 2009.
Has the standard of riding improved so much over the last dozen years that dangerous riding is now a thing of the past? Or have racecourse stewards gradually adopted what the trainer John Berry recently suggested is “an unwritten policy that everything is just classified as careless riding, without thinking”? Just two of the many questions for racing to ponder when Judge Walden-Smith hands down her decision later this month".
I agree that the bar is high but it is not insurmountable. Natural justice dictates that there MUST be a point where a riding offence breaches the line set by Caldwell otherwise nothing is actionable. The question is where that line should be and did Gibbon cross it?
In my view once it's established in a given case that the defendant made a move knowing or not caring whether it results in an incident the line has been crossed. Effectively the judge to to determine "mens rea" and really only one person, in this case Gibbons, can KNOW that. the alleged presence of alcohol adds a further complicating factor.
I do not envy Judge Walden-Smith her task. Given her non racing background she may rely heavily on the expert witnesses - whose duty is to the court not the claimant or defendant.
I suspect whatever happens there will be appeal to a higher court.
In my view once it's established in a given case that the defendant made a move knowing or not caring whether it results in an incident the line has been crossed. Effectively the judge to to determine "mens rea" and really only one person, in this case Gibbons, can KNOW that. the alleged presence of alcohol adds a further complicating factor.
I do not envy Judge Walden-Smith her task. Given her non racing background she may rely heavily on the expert witnesses - whose duty is to the court not the claimant or defendant.
I suspect whatever happens there will be appeal to a higher court.
And still there is hardly any mention of the Dangerous Riding Rule and why virtually everyone in racing seems to pretend it doesn't exist. At least John Berry has come out and asked the question.
The case of "dangerous riding" that Greg Wood refers to in 2009, I presume was Tony Culhane on Mazzola at Newcastle, where he made a manouevre to cross to the rail which resulted in a horse being fatally injured and Paul Mulrennan being taken to hospital.
So that was what it took for a "dangerous riding" call to be made by the stewards.
There's a little bit of detail about it here:
https://www.olbg.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=26882
So that was what it took for a "dangerous riding" call to be made by the stewards.
There's a little bit of detail about it here:
https://www.olbg.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=26882
pundits at weekend said this shouldnt be judged on what effect it has on the sport going forward,
but if he wins any interference in future which results in someone losing their right/ability to make a living because of the well used/known pundits comment, THE JOCKEY LET IT DRIFT ACROSS.will be open to a legal challenge,doesnt even have to be dramatic/on a tight bend etc
thinking crowley/moore in grade ones this season
but if he wins any interference in future which results in someone losing their right/ability to make a living because of the well used/known pundits comment, THE JOCKEY LET IT DRIFT ACROSS.will be open to a legal challenge,doesnt even have to be dramatic/on a tight bend etc
thinking crowley/moore in grade ones this season
ruk,atr,walsh,fitzy,AP will be out of a job everytime they say
he/she shut the door
he/she tightened him up
etc,etc their giving possible evidence to/against someone
he/she shut the door
he/she tightened him up
etc,etc their giving possible evidence to/against someone
Wouldn't wish what happened to Tylicki on anyone , but ewasnt a fortune raised on Just Giving towards his future care. Then the next thing I saw was he was buying horses at the sales, for thousands??
i fail to see how an incident deemed 'accidental'by the kempton stewards can then deemed to be intentional by a judge.
Which goes to show Rico that while you may have been very good at effectively past posting to make a living you have no idea how civil law operates.
Luckily the judge will know how the civil law works, and the chances of FT winning this or bigger than the 999/1 offered on here on fallers. Simply not possible for a judge to rule anything other than for the defendant.
then why hasnt the tylicki barrister come to this conclusion before this began?
There has been no proof of GG men’s rea being anything other than that of any other person in his position at the time. I’m amazed they wasted the courts time with this. I know those no win no fee adverts are everywhere, but someone has sadly led FT up a path looking for the end of a rainbow.
Every court case has a winner and a loser, except the lawyers both win regardless of the outcome.
Rico-Dangleflaps 07 Dec 21 22:41
i fail to see how an incident deemed 'accidental'by the kempton stewards can then deemed to be intentional by a judge.
While this is a reasonable point, the judge also has to consider what a vastly experienced top jockey thought happened:
Ryan Moore insisted he had remained unbiased throughout the process that led to him giving evidence as an expert witness at the High Court on Wednesday and confirmed his view that Graham Gibbons was at fault over the 2016 incident at Kempton when Freddy Tylicki suffered paralysing injuries.
Moore's report has not been made public but an excerpt in the published arguments for Tylicki describes Gibbons as exerting "considerable tension on the right rein" while rounding the bend, and continues: "He would only have done that in order to encourage Madame Butterfly across Nellie Deen's racing line," a reference to the two horses involved.
So Rico, why should the judge take the view of the stewards over that of Moore's, iyo?
i fail to see how an incident deemed 'accidental'by the kempton stewards can then deemed to be intentional by a judge.
While this is a reasonable point, the judge also has to consider what a vastly experienced top jockey thought happened:
Ryan Moore insisted he had remained unbiased throughout the process that led to him giving evidence as an expert witness at the High Court on Wednesday and confirmed his view that Graham Gibbons was at fault over the 2016 incident at Kempton when Freddy Tylicki suffered paralysing injuries.
Moore's report has not been made public but an excerpt in the published arguments for Tylicki describes Gibbons as exerting "considerable tension on the right rein" while rounding the bend, and continues: "He would only have done that in order to encourage Madame Butterfly across Nellie Deen's racing line," a reference to the two horses involved.
So Rico, why should the judge take the view of the stewards over that of Moore's, iyo?
One would start from the point, that Ryan Moore is no better qualified to talk about it than a 5lb claimer. His experience counts for nothing, if anything it goes against him as he has built a career of letting horses drift under pressure to stop the opposition getting past. Aside from that he wasn’t riding in the race, mentioned how bored he was of the whole affair. Cracking witness for the defence imo.
OR, he might have carefully studied the various angles, spotted the pressure being applied to the right rein to pull the horse back to the rail, and decided he would testify because he could see Gibbons was at fault?
As for the stewards enquiry, ? three witnesses were unable to give their evidence because of their injuires, and Pat Cosgrave has admitted he was following some sort of unwritten weighing room conduct when it comes to speaking in stewards enquiries.
Moore's report has not been made public but an excerpt in the published arguments for Tylicki...
So it sounds like Moore has had more to say about what he thought happened
So it sounds like Moore has had more to say about what he thought happened
How long a ban did Aiden say Ryan deserved after taking Tarnawa right across the course in the Irish Champion??
Hypocrisy @ its finest.
Listen to me what i say not as i do.
COuld have a career in politics.
Hypocrisy @ its finest.
Listen to me what i say not as i do.
COuld have a career in politics.
Rico-Dangleflaps07 Dec 21 23:05Joined: 07 Sep 18 | Topic/replies: 7,410 | Blogger: Rico-Dangleflaps's blog
so iyo my point is totally irrelevant?
Given the absence of several highly pertinent witnesses the Steward's conclusions can hardly be regarded as persuasive.
so iyo my point is totally irrelevant?
Given the absence of several highly pertinent witnesses the Steward's conclusions can hardly be regarded as persuasive.
disciplinary hearing into allegations that Robbie Dunne bullied fellow rider Bryony Frost adjourned on Wednesday for the three-person panel to consider their verdict and a decision on the case is expected by noon on Thursday.
Dunne, 36, has been charged by the BHA on seven breaches of the rules of racing, four relating to conduct prejudicial to the integrity, proper conduct and good reputation of the sport, which he denies, and a further three of acting in a violent or improper manner, with one breach accepted although the wording used is disputed.
The incidents span a period between February 13, 2020 and September 3, 2020, and the culture of the weighing room and the manner in which jockeys address and behave towards each other was put firmly under the spotlight during the five days of evidence heard at the BHA’s headquarters in London.
Louis Weston, representing the BHA, said in closing submissions that Dunne had subjected Frost, 26, to a “vendetta” that included sexually inappropriate behaviour and foul language, and culminated in his alleged “promise” to put Frost “through a wing” after a race at Southwell in September last year.
Addressing the panel, Weston said: “If what is being said, when you come to determine this case, there is a weighing room culture that allows one jockey to threaten another with serious injury to them or their horse, or to call another a ****, a slut or a slag then that culture is one that is sour, rancid and one that we say should be thrown out and discarded. Its time, if ever it had its time, has gone.”
Countering Weston’s points on the weighing room, Roderick Moore told the panel that it would be “grossly unfair” to Dunne to judge him on anything other than how the weighing room is at present as opposed to any desire anyone might have for it to change.
“The way the weighing room is should not come as big news to anyone, there are BHA officials coming in and out all of the time,” he said. “What would be grossly unfair is to make a judgement of Mr Dunne against a scenario that isn't the real one.
“If something needs to change, that's for the future, that's a policy matter, a political matter. You can only judge Mr Dunne against the present weighing room.”
Moore further added that the "weapons grade language" used by riders also needed to be taken in the context of a dangerous profession.
He also outlined what he believed were failings in Frost’s “credibility”, primarily around her alleged “fear” of Dunne, with his highlighting the exchange in the Southwell changing room when she told Dunne to “f*** off” after their altercation.
“She gave back,” he said. "That's not a criticism but it stands ill alongside other matters that she fears him.”
Weston said the defence had sought to “overcomplicate” the case and that Frost had been targeted because she had “stepped up and confronted” Dunne on behaviour he likened to “1950s Carry On humour”.
He added: “It cannot be that Ms Frost can be allowed to compete on a racecourse on a level playing field only to find when she comes back to the weighing room she's met by Mr Dunne acting out a role of some patriarchy re-enacting social attitudes of the 1950s in his capacity of self-appointed enforcer of traditions he perceives to be put in place in the weighing room. It's just unacceptable.”
Following closing submissions, Brian Barker, chair of the disciplinary panel, said: "We have a number of matters to review. We hope to come to a decision by noon tomorrow."
Dunne, 36, has been charged by the BHA on seven breaches of the rules of racing, four relating to conduct prejudicial to the integrity, proper conduct and good reputation of the sport, which he denies, and a further three of acting in a violent or improper manner, with one breach accepted although the wording used is disputed.
The incidents span a period between February 13, 2020 and September 3, 2020, and the culture of the weighing room and the manner in which jockeys address and behave towards each other was put firmly under the spotlight during the five days of evidence heard at the BHA’s headquarters in London.
Louis Weston, representing the BHA, said in closing submissions that Dunne had subjected Frost, 26, to a “vendetta” that included sexually inappropriate behaviour and foul language, and culminated in his alleged “promise” to put Frost “through a wing” after a race at Southwell in September last year.
Addressing the panel, Weston said: “If what is being said, when you come to determine this case, there is a weighing room culture that allows one jockey to threaten another with serious injury to them or their horse, or to call another a ****, a slut or a slag then that culture is one that is sour, rancid and one that we say should be thrown out and discarded. Its time, if ever it had its time, has gone.”
Countering Weston’s points on the weighing room, Roderick Moore told the panel that it would be “grossly unfair” to Dunne to judge him on anything other than how the weighing room is at present as opposed to any desire anyone might have for it to change.
“The way the weighing room is should not come as big news to anyone, there are BHA officials coming in and out all of the time,” he said. “What would be grossly unfair is to make a judgement of Mr Dunne against a scenario that isn't the real one.
“If something needs to change, that's for the future, that's a policy matter, a political matter. You can only judge Mr Dunne against the present weighing room.”
Moore further added that the "weapons grade language" used by riders also needed to be taken in the context of a dangerous profession.
He also outlined what he believed were failings in Frost’s “credibility”, primarily around her alleged “fear” of Dunne, with his highlighting the exchange in the Southwell changing room when she told Dunne to “f*** off” after their altercation.
“She gave back,” he said. "That's not a criticism but it stands ill alongside other matters that she fears him.”
Weston said the defence had sought to “overcomplicate” the case and that Frost had been targeted because she had “stepped up and confronted” Dunne on behaviour he likened to “1950s Carry On humour”.
He added: “It cannot be that Ms Frost can be allowed to compete on a racecourse on a level playing field only to find when she comes back to the weighing room she's met by Mr Dunne acting out a role of some patriarchy re-enacting social attitudes of the 1950s in his capacity of self-appointed enforcer of traditions he perceives to be put in place in the weighing room. It's just unacceptable.”
Following closing submissions, Brian Barker, chair of the disciplinary panel, said: "We have a number of matters to review. We hope to come to a decision by noon tomorrow."
"Smelling alco" means nothing. He either passed/failed a breathalyser etc.. surely for it to be of any effect
When questioned by the judge, Faulks made it clear he was not asking for a decision to be made on whether the rider was under the influence of any substances when riding that day.
It is without doubt a tragic case and I am sure the majority can empathise with Freddy and his family.However anyone who has viewed the incident can surely only conclude that it was a tragic accident albeit one that ended in a circumstance no one would have envisaged?
I am certain most of this Forum and the racing fans in general have witnessed many close calls worse than the actual events leading to this Court Case? Any race on any day could have resulted in similar circumstances in literally a split second,if the Court finds in favour of Freddy then either horses will have to run in lanes or the sport banned.
That I think is the long and short of finding in his favour and why I think it will go the way of Gibbons.As for his witnesses,someone should advise Jim Crowley that he never at any time smelled alcohol on Gibbons breath and ask Ryan Moore about what may have happened if Colin Keane had held his line on Tarnawa when what looked intentional by Moore failing to correct St Marks Basilica?
More hinges on this case the simply a claim for money!!!
I am certain most of this Forum and the racing fans in general have witnessed many close calls worse than the actual events leading to this Court Case? Any race on any day could have resulted in similar circumstances in literally a split second,if the Court finds in favour of Freddy then either horses will have to run in lanes or the sport banned.
That I think is the long and short of finding in his favour and why I think it will go the way of Gibbons.As for his witnesses,someone should advise Jim Crowley that he never at any time smelled alcohol on Gibbons breath and ask Ryan Moore about what may have happened if Colin Keane had held his line on Tarnawa when what looked intentional by Moore failing to correct St Marks Basilica?
More hinges on this case the simply a claim for money!!!
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539