Forums
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Twoboyz
21 Dec 21 14:33
Joined:
Date Joined: 19 Feb 03
| Topic/replies: 3,938 | Blogger: Twoboyz's blog
Won his case

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
Page 1 of 3  •  Previous 1 | 2 | 3 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 80
By:
LoyalHoncho
When: 21 Dec 21 14:42
Good luck to the chap.  I doubt whether any amount of compo will be able to replace what he has lost.  I hope he is still pursuing his agent career, successfully.
By:
CROPSICK
When: 21 Dec 21 14:48
yes good luck to Freddie, but this is gooing to cause huge ramifications accros all competitive sport not just horse racing
By:
tanglefoot
When: 21 Dec 21 14:49
Maybe it will wake up the stewards.
By:
CROPSICK
When: 21 Dec 21 14:50
Hope so they need to.
By:
CROPSICK
When: 21 Dec 21 14:50
not only stewards but jockeys as well
By:
Rico-Dangleflaps
When: 21 Dec 21 14:54
stewards dont see anything..non racing person says reckless..

only in this fcked up silly world.
By:
ballyregan
When: 21 Dec 21 14:56
will footballers now sue for career ending tackles keano and haaland for instance
By:
Wesdag
When: 21 Dec 21 14:56
Stewards need to go down the USA route, interference = disq

Will cut out the win at costs rides.
By:
sparrow
When: 21 Dec 21 14:57
Freddy Tylicki has succeeded in his claim against Graham Gibbons over the 2016 fall at Kempton that paralysed him, the High Court ruled on Tuesday. Judge Karen Walden-Smith issued her judgement at 2pm, declaring: "The actions of Mr Gibbons were . . . undertaken in reckless disregard for the safety of Mr Tylicki."

Tylicki said he was "delighted" by the news in a statement issued through Stewart-Moore solicitors. "It has taken five years for me and my legal team to overcome the injustice of the stewards' inquiry which took place at Kempton immediately after the race," the former jockey said.

"Today's result has finally provided me with closure and I look forward to putting this all behind me and moving on with my life. I hope though that this judgement acts as a reminder that competing in a dangerous sport like horseracing is no justification for competing with a reckless disregard for the safety of your fellow competitors."

The sum of money which must now be paid in compensation has yet to be determined.

The judgement is sure to be much scrutinised and fretted over in the coming days, being the first occasion on which a jockey has made a successful claim for damages against another jockey for a midrace incident. In particular, there will be questions about the future of the indemnity insurance available to jockeys and what it might mean for the sport if such insurance were to become unavailable.

This story is being updated and more news will follow shortly. You can also follow the Racing Post on Twitter (@RacingPost) to get the latest alerts
By:
Wesdag
When: 21 Dec 21 14:57

Dec 21, 2021 -- 2:56PM, ballyregan wrote:


will footballers now sue for career ending tackles keano and haaland for instance


There have been cases in the past, Elliot v Saunders springs to mind.

By:
Wesdag
When: 21 Dec 21 14:58
*all costs
By:
sparrow
When: 21 Dec 21 14:58
Agree with westdag.
By:
sparrow
When: 21 Dec 21 15:02
My agreement with wesdag was regarding the win at all cost rides.
By:
mrcombustible
When: 21 Dec 21 15:03
Guess there will be an appeal
By:
barstool
When: 21 Dec 21 15:04
A pleasing outcome for Freddie and I am not at all surprised by the Judgement.
By:
Blackrock
When: 21 Dec 21 15:05
Can't see how this judgement has been arrived at. Sparrow makes an excellent point regarding the insurance of jocks now.
By:
CROPSICK
When: 21 Dec 21 15:10
who the hell is going to insure an apprentice or even amateurs now.
By:
racing6699
When: 21 Dec 21 15:11
So Gibbo was insured?
By:
elise
When: 21 Dec 21 15:13
i'm surprised he won, not because gibbons made a mistake but because they had to convince a judge that the stewarding was incorrect first. the verdict is as much about the bha /stewards as it is about that incident and if they did their jobs properly and had the b@lls to use dangerous riding more often rather than soft call it to keep the jockeys onside they'd perhaps not have had any of this happen, that's before they even touch on drugs / alcohol and the testing
By:
barstool
When: 21 Dec 21 15:14
If you drive a car recklessly or without due care and attention on the road you get punished. It looks like the judge has taken the same view for horse race riders. Not surprising when tested in a Civil Court were only probable cause is needed.
By:
acey deucy
When: 21 Dec 21 15:17
All the money in the world could not compensate Freddie for what he has lost....The guy was riding on a crest of a wave then had it all snatched away in an instant.....Fair play to the man for making another career in the game, i am a big fan.
By:
sparrow
When: 21 Dec 21 15:25
Blackrock 21 Dec 21 15:05 
Can't see how this judgement has been arrived at. Sparrow makes an excellent point regarding the insurance of jocks now.




It was from the Racing Post article Blackrock but I agree the insurance situation has to be looked at.
By:
scrabbler
When: 21 Dec 21 15:27
The initial stewards' enquiry was pretty certain to be subsequently judged inadequate as Tylicki was unable to have any input.
By:
elise
When: 21 Dec 21 15:33
which then leaves the question given the seriousness of his injuries why didn't they refer it and have the bha conduct a full review in the aftermath, simple fact is they are inept
By:
GEORGE.B
When: 21 Dec 21 15:36
Rico-Dangleflaps 21 Dec 21 14:54 
stewards dont see anything..non racing person says reckless..
only in this fcked up silly world.


I think the stewards took what might have seemed the easiest option on the day given the circumstances. This is what I posted on the day:

GEORGE.B 31 Oct 16 17:31 
The stewards report is up on the BHA site, no mention of the incident that led to the clipping of heels, where FT went from being in a gap to being squeezed out.
All that matters is the wellbeing of the jockeys, but that stewards report is unsatisfactory imo.


GEORGE.B 31 Oct 16 18:43 
Unfortunately, there was a clear incident that led to the clipping of heels, with Tylicki being squeezed out of a gap having seemingly had room initially on the rail. The incident that led to the clipping of heels has been, for whatever reason, ignored by the stewards in their report.

In my view, a thorough review of what happened needs to be undertaken, if only to see if any lessons can be learnt (for example rail alignment on the bend) that may prevent such a shocking incident occurring again.

It appeared Tylicki had his mount part of the way upsides the mount of Gibbons, but then the camera angle changes and you see Tylicki having to stop riding and lose his position which in turn unfortunately led to the horrific incident.

Obviously what matters is the jockeys wellbeing, but some of us were watching live and can't just turn a blind eye to a stewards report that leaves questions unexplained.
By:
tony6499
When: 21 Dec 21 15:40
I wonder how much this has cost and where any compo will come from ?
By:
elise
When: 21 Dec 21 15:59
gibbons may have indemnity insurance, but whether they will pay out if he's been found negligent or it falls outside of his cover is going to be another question, be very interesting to see where it places the bha if he hasn't got cover too, they might be in the firing line yet
By:
longbridge
When: 21 Dec 21 16:24
Pleased for Freddie.  But this shouldn't rely on someone being at fault or the IJF - if we want to see young men and women risking themselves in this game there should be an industry-wide system to ensure those who are injured in the pursuit of it are looked after, without years-long court battles.
By:
xmoneyx
When: 21 Dec 21 16:26
whos going to insure a jockey
By:
barstool
When: 21 Dec 21 16:26
You can reckon on costs of about £75k before it gets to Court and about £30k a day in Court. Which is why a lot of Civil cases get settled before Court, often by Mediation. The only sure winners are the Lawyers.
By:
parispike
When: 21 Dec 21 16:27
elise - the insurance is there to indemnify him precisely because he's been negligent and has been found legally liable! Ye Gods!


ballyregan21 Dec 21 14:56Joined: 19 May 21 | Topic/replies: 1,980 | Blogger: ballyregan's blog
will footballers now sue for career ending tackles keano and haaland for instance

Yes, and they should succeed - "ordinary" fouls are part of the game and are part of the risks that players implicitly consent to when playing. Egregious, reckless "tackles" such as that are not part of the game and players do not consent to that.
By:
parispike
When: 21 Dec 21 16:29
longbridge21 Dec 21 16:24Joined: 25 Nov 10 | Topic/replies: 2,997 | Blogger: longbridge's blog
Pleased for Freddie.  But this shouldn't rely on someone being at fault or the IJF - if we want to see young men and women risking themselves in this game there should be an industry-wide system to ensure those who are injured in the pursuit of it are looked after, without years-long court battles.

That's a no fault system and COULD be applied to every/any activity. It's expensive.
By:
sixtwosix
When: 21 Dec 21 16:31
I have been sick and tired of watching races with interference and stewards ignoring it and the 'experts' on the tele telling me there was nothing in it and the best horse won ......perhaps this will now stop.
By:
GEORGE.B
When: 21 Dec 21 16:31
Is it fair to say that in recent months we were seeing results changed following interference that might not have been changed previously under the current rules?

So in light of this case happening had the BHA off the record already been taking steps to tighten the interference rules, or rather attempt to send a message to jockeys that they need to do more to prevent interference?

So what will happen to the interference rules as a result of this case?

Are we going to be seeing more DQs, and will the double result concession be gone within months?
By:
elise
When: 21 Dec 21 16:35
indemnify for an error yes or as you say an ordinary foul, indemnify for dangerous, or wilful or poss under the influence, not quite as sure they'd say yes
By:
Wesdag
When: 21 Dec 21 16:37
Are we going to be seeing more DQs, and will the double result concession be gone within months?

Small price to pay if it results in safer riding.

The US should be the model to follow imo, if you interfere with a horse, you get put behind it.
By:
sparrow
When: 21 Dec 21 16:39
I will believe it when I see the dangerous riding rule recognised and actually used by the stewards.
By:
parispike
When: 21 Dec 21 16:45
elise21 Dec 21 16:35Joined: 04 Jan 03 | Topic/replies: 33,849 | Blogger: elise's blog
indemnify for an error yes or as you say an ordinary foul, indemnify for dangerous, or wilful or poss under the influence, not quite as sure they'd say yes

Having spent 43 years in the legal liability insurance game I suspect I'm a bit better qualified than you to comment.

There is no possibility of an insurer seeking to avoid providing indemnity in these circumstances. None whatsoever.
By:
elise
When: 21 Dec 21 16:46
well after 43 years paris you'd probably know that acting unlawfully or under the influence often does have clauses on an insurance policy
Page 1 of 3  •  Previous 1 | 2 | 3 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
‹ back to topics
www.betfair.com