irishone, perhaps you should consider talking about the 'failings' of your own IRHB? Or are you too embarrassed to do so?

IHRB*

geoff m05 Jan 22 11:49Joined: 23 Feb 03 | Topic/replies: 17,952 | Blogger: geoff m's blog
irishone04 Jan 22 20:15Joined: 22 Sep 06 | Topic/replies: 47,536 | Blogger: irishone's blog
Chadfan04 Jan 22 19:16
Just out of interest Irishone, what punishment do you think Dunne should have got considering he pleaded guilty to some of the charges?

...he didnt ....get yer facts straight


irishone05 Jan 22 13:45Joined: 22 Sep 06 | Topic/replies: 47,537 | Blogger: irishone's blog
Geoff m ....the rancid sun headline "dunn pleads guilty to charges" is now the level we are at is it ? Dunn pleaded guilty to one charge of the six. FACT


pLEASE HELP WHAT AM I MISSING HERE??

Now now tiger .....no need to insult someone speaking the truth.

Quoting geoffm above "he pleaded guilty to some of the charges?" ? ???? . A complete and utter lie.

whats England's Football,Cricket and Rugby teams
got to do with Dunne and Frost?
cheers.

Chadfan did not specify the amount by the use of some hence that includes 1.

*learn

The other thing was why did the bha do her for careless riding three out on the 14th November . Never seen that before, so far out on the course but  two weeks before the case.

It would suggest somebody around the top of the tree had a word

Why wouldn't we be ?

Absolutely seething at his treatment .....

Cant move on whilst British racing is in such a deplorable state

....

A microaggression is a comment or action that negatively targets a marginalized group of people or person. A microaggression can be intentional or accidental. It is a form of discrimination.

Hope that helps chadfan. Irish racing, jockeys, trainers, owners , horses get it all the time on this forum .....just as your cognizance develops your aptitude for sarcasm

I see, thanks guys.
An itsy-bitsy teeny-weeny rascist sounds better, but I'm over 5ft.

I’ve removed the username of this post as it’s not relevant. Irishone is the biggest “bully” and hypocrite on here. Nothing Micro about his posts.


Username removed.
I said I had many heated disagreements with him and said things I should not have and am not proud of but then I met the bloke many times racing, I bought and had beers with him, I laid him bets, I gave him free tickets to the races, I may have disagreed with him a lot and argued but also went out of my way to help him.

You on the other hand bullied him right up until his sad death, you are a vile piece of sheet that doesn't have the balls to come out form behind your username, you wouldn't have the balls to meet up with any of the people you regularly  abuse on here.

You can search for all of my past posts or post what you like about me now as I rarely if ever pop my head in here anymore and it's water of a ducks back to me, however I felt it right to call you out on this hypocritical bullsheet you posted when I've never seen anybody slaughter anybody online as bad you did that man.



irishone
irishone 05 Mar 21 14:34 Joined: 22 Sep 06 | Topic/replies: 47,553 | Blogger: irishone's blog
My o p was directed at handling guilt.

I take your points but obviously disagree.

If you let ignorance take over we will all be in the sheet as you say.

We had two choices , walk as you did or fight as I did.

I dont blame you for that at all. You have to fight ignorance in my opinion not ignore it and walk away.

Just my opinion, is there any way we can forget about it and just move on ?

Im off down the beach for a walk now , hope the rain is getting warmer over there !



jimnast
Joined: 03 Jan 01 | Topic/replies: 10,496 | Blogger: jimnast's blog
premier

is woodmanchester the lad who always came on with his haydock fancies ?


Hibore
Hibore 05 Mar 21 16:25 Joined: 23 Jun 07 | Topic/replies: 2,887 | Blogger: Hibore's blog
I have to agree with your assessment Premier. Obviously hasn’t got much in life apart from online bullying.

Pretty funny seeing that the one thing that all the jocks agreed on (sans Frost obv) was her uncanny knack of jumping into others one in the lead! Not only did the think the jocks were lying about what they witnessed re the bullying but they seem to be saying they (the panel )know more about riding horses. Obv  the whole sheitshow needs reforming top to bottom route, branch twig and everyhtung else!

https://www.racingpost.com/news/latest/robbie-dunne-has-seven-days-to-appeal-18-month-ban-as-written-reasons-released/530694

Robbie Dunne rode in a 'deliberately intimidatory' manner against Bryony Frost
Jockey has seven days to appeal against 18-month ban in high-profile case

Robbie Dunne was banned for 18 months after being found guilty of bullying Bryony Frost
Robbie Dunne was banned for 18 months after being found guilty of bullying Bryony Frost
1 of 1
By Peter Scargill
UPDATED 2:40PM, JAN 6 2022
 
Robbie Dunne’s “intimidatory” riding on two occasions was cited as a key component in a disciplinary panel’s finding that he engaged in a sustained campaign of bullying and harassment against Bryony Frost which resulted in him being banned for 18 months, a report has revealed.

During the hearing, races at Leicester on February 13, 2020 and Market Rasen on July 27, 2020 were reviewed, with the BHA outlining that the second occasion was the moment when it became apparent to Frost that Dunne “was bullying her”.

Dunne told the panel that suggestions he had been riding in an “intimidating” way were “an exaggeration”, but in written conclusions released on Thursday, the panel stated his actions in the races had formed part of his “attempts to intimidate Ms Frost”.

At Leicester, the panel said Dunne’s riding showed “a deepening culpability, now extended to actions on the racecourse” after his horse, Lickpenny Larry, had jumped left on three occasions down the back straight when in close proximity to Frost on This Breac but straight otherwise.

“Tactics we found were harassing and deliberately intimidatory,” the panel explained.

Who is Robbie Dunne? From struggling conditional to weighing room 'enforcer'

At Market Rasen, which had followed an incident at Stratford in July 2020 where Dunne had allegedly called Frost a “f****** slut” and a “dangerous c***”, the panel deemed the jockey had again ridden in a way to “intimidate” Frost.

During her evidence, Frost had said Dunne’s manoeuvre aboard Buyer Beware to put pressure on her and her mount Wisecracker rounding the home turn was unusual.

“I don’t see a reason for that aggressive riding,” she said. “You shouldn’t be putting weight on a horse like that around the bend – the jockeys in front of me weren’t doing that.”

The panel noted the replay showed the rail bending twice as a result of Dunne’s move and that the horses around Dunne and Frost were not being ridden in the same manner.

“We find this a further attempt by Mr Dunne to intimidate Ms Frost as part of the course of prejudicial conduct,” the panel wrote.

Robbie Dunne: has seven days to appeal after the written reasons were published
Robbie Dunne: has seven days to appeal after the written reasons were published
Alan Crowhurst (Getty Images)
Dunne was found guilty of four breaches of rule (J) 19 relating to conduct prejudicial to the integrity, proper conduct and good reputation of racing between February and September 2020, which culminated in the rider’s “promise” to Frost that he would “put you through a wing” after a race at Southwell.

Dunne, 36, was banned for 18 months, three of which were suspended, and has seven days from the publication of the written reasons to appeal. His legal team had indicated this was a strong possibility on the day of the verdict last month.

In a postscript to the written reasons for its judgement, the panel addressed what it felt was the gravity of the case against Dunne and the 'culture' of the weighing room, which came under considerable scrutiny in the hearing and the days following the verdict.

The panel wrote: “In this case we were not troubled by any borderline decision on either guilt or sanction. The threshold in rule (J)19 was plainly crossed and this case overwhelmingly called for a penalty of some potency. In future hearings, however, the decision might be less clear cut.

“As part of our inquiry, we had to consider the culture, as it was often described, among the community of professional jockeys or in the weighing room. As these reasons show, we had some concerns about it. Our role was to inquire into the conduct of Mr Dunne. It is for others to reflect upon more general matters.”

The panel also criticised the length of time between Frost making her complaint against Dunne in September 2020 and the case being heard last month, saying “more urgency and precision should have been applied to the investigatory process and the charging decision”.

It also said the leak of details of the case to the Mail on Sunday and the Sunday Times “is a grave matter” but added that “what appeared in the media before or during the hearing had not the slightest bearing” on the decision that was made.

The decision of the panel, formed of Brian Barker, James O’Mahony and Alison Royston, was laid out at the foot of the near 11,500-word written report. In seven paragraphs, the panel detailed why Dunne had been found in breach and why he had been given his penalty.

The panel's decision
141. This was deliberate, unwarranted targeting of a colleague over a considerable time. Mr Dunne’s words, and behaviour, were wholly inappropriate for a professional athlete in an equal opportunity sport and would not be tolerated in any other walk of life or workplace.  Expletives in the heat of the moment are one thing, but expressions such as “I am going to hurt you” and/or “I’ll put you through a wing” have dark implications. The context of this case moved the effect beyond that of mere words.

142. There was little, if any, indication of Mr Dunne’s understanding. There was no expression of remorse. The defence involved calculated attacks in various directions. The plea entered was so limited by comparison to the conduct found that it attracted neither credit nor reduction.

143. We took into account matters submitted in mitigation and the evidence of Mr Dunne’s character witness. We reminded ourselves, in his favour, that some at least of the facts found involved Mr Dunne operating within a culture approbated by his peers. Observers observed without intervention. If this is the weighing room culture, then it is out of step in equal opportunity race-riding. We were scrupulous to avoid treating Mr Dunne as the sole individual finding the impugned behaviour acceptable.

144. A financial penalty was wholly insufficient to meet the justice of this case. Suspension of licence was inevitable. The matters proved were consecutive, occurred over six months, as time went by deepening in spitefulness, and consequently the words and acts achieving the increasingly chilling effect upon the victim which Mr Dunne intended. As well as falling foul of the regulations as pleaded, such behaviour, from someone who presented himself as one of the elders of the sport, setting standards and allegedly offering wise counsel to junior jockeys was hypocritical.

145. The events at Southwell were the gravest. The proper approach was to fix a cumulative period and to impose it concurrently for each offence.

146. Given the context, the entry point in the Guide to Penalties and Procedures did not bear on this case. Whatever the pressures and dangers of racing, and whatever the traditions of the weighing room, Mr Dunne’s conduct had no place in it. The strikingly aggravating feature was the determined consistency, in the knowledge that Ms Frost could not prepare herself for what would come next, as she was unable to predict what or where it would be.

147. Mr Dunne’s licence as a jockey will be suspended for 18 months. However, taking into account some of the personal matters urged, the final three months will be suspended for two months. Any transgressions in months 16-18 would make it most likely that the three months would be activated. Mr Dunne is suspended from December 10, 2021 until March 9, 2023 inclusive.

146. Given the context, the entry point in the Guide to Penalties and Procedures did not bear on this case.



Outside the guide ? Whose fault is that then ?

or is it just.convenient ?

"It also said the leak of details of the case to the Mail on Sunday and the Sunday Times “is a grave matter” but added that “what appeared in the media before or during the hearing had not the slightest bearing” on the decision that was made."

LIES LIES AND MORE DAMNED LIES

I am afraid everyone on this planet is influenced by the media

Since when did an Irishman ever get justice in a british court or indeed a kangaroo court ?

It does

Thnx

A total stitch up.