This is of concern

[Maximus]

1 hour ago, von Smallhaussen said:

Karaka sales are looming and I would say the thrust of the appeal is Ellis getting his name and that of Te Akau in the headlines. Any advertising is good advertising as the saying goes..

TA doesn't need more publicity. This (appeal of an appeal decision) is about strong-arm tactics to get OP, their blue-eyed boy, at the scene of their next publicity campaign (Karaka Millions). IMO it was totally inappropriate for Ellis to 'sit in' on the hearings in the first place - but for him then to be able to make an 'impassioned plea' says it all. Money is talking.  The JCA must not allow the judicial process to be adversely influenced by TA.

MM

[von Smallhaussen]

27 minutes ago, Maximus said:

TA doesn't need more publicity. This (appeal of an appeal decision) is about strong-arm tactics to get OP, their blue-eyed boy, at the scene of their next publicity campaign (Karaka Millions). IMO it was totally inappropriate for Ellis to 'sit in' on the hearings in the first place - but for him then to be able to make an 'impassioned plea' says it all. Money is talking.  The JCA must not allow the judicial process to be adversely influenced by TA.

MM

Herr Gluteus I wholeheartedly agree 

[Maximus]

17 minutes ago, VvD said:

Using this data Opie Bosson has a better career winning strike rate, when riding either the first or second favourite, than Danielle Johnson, Lisa Allpress, Jonathan Parkes, Chris Johnson and Tina Comignaghi.  Haven't checked any others but suspect you would struggle to find one with a better strike rate (other than perhaps some of the tops jumps jockeys).

Who gives a toss about OP's strike rate? The issue is whether or not the suspension from 1 Jan (consecutive race infringements of careless riding that could have caused avoidable injury to other horses and riders) is fair and just.

MM

[mardigras]

37 minutes ago, VvD said:

Using this data Opie Bosson has a better career winning strike rate, when riding either the first or second favourite, than Danielle Johnson, Lisa Allpress, Jonathan Parkes, Chris Johnson and Tina Comignaghi.  Haven't checked any others but suspect you would struggle to find one with a better strike rate (other than perhaps some of the tops jumps jockeys).

I assess chance ignoring jockey, and over the last 10 years, he has won 40 races less than I've assessed the chances of his mounts. That is quite significant.

Of course, you may just say my assessments are shit. However Betfair are on record as suggesting my assessments are rare in regards the overall assessment ability from their collective customers.

[Maximus]

21 minutes ago, VvD said:

wMe!  If you haven't noticed this thread started as a discussion about the suspension and the judicial process (eg. allowing David Ellis to sit in, etc..) but then another discussion spun off from that around whether Opie's riding ability warranted the effort to avoid the suspension. I think you might have even commented on that secondary discussion.

As for the original topic, I don't give a toss whether Opie gets to ride on KM day or not.   They estimate that he could lose $80k (might have the figure wrong) in stakes earnings.  I say just fine him that much and let him take his chances.

What I care about is the integrity of the process. Ellis was granted a seat at the table (on Jan 1) under strict criteria but then somehow got to make an 'impassioned plea' and was there again for the appeal hearing (unless I am mistaken). He and others have argued verbally and/or in writing that Bosson is an essential requirement for KM night. Bollocks! His ability to pay a fine (in lieu of suspension) is also irrelevant and would set a dangerous precedent.

MM

 

[Hesi]

The rule is quite clear for a judicial hearing on race day, 

916 (1) Subject to sub-Rules (2) and (3) of this Rule, a person shall not be represented by Counsel or a lay advocate at any hearing held by a Judicial Committee in respect of a matter which arises on a Race day and which is held on that day.

But permissible for the appeal, which was held other than the race day.  But he had Paul Dale QC, so why is Ellis bobbing up again

916 ((4) At a hearing held by a Judicial Committee which is heard other than in the course of a Race day each person against whom and/or against whose horse an information has been filed may represent himself or be represented by Counsel or a lay advocate.

[mardigras]

On 1/13/2021 at 8:06 PM, mardigras said:

I assess chance ignoring jockey, and over the last 10 years, he has won 40 races less than I've assessed the chances of his mounts. That is quite significant.

Of course, you may just say my assessments are shit. However Betfair are on record as suggesting my assessments are rare in regards the overall assessment ability from their collective customers.

Since some asked who I would prefer to Bosson, If I had the choice of jockey for any race - these would be some I would consider (in no order)

T Harris

L Allpress 

A Comignaghi

J Fawcett

D Johnson

H Tinsley

H Andrews

S Weatherley 

R Schofer

J Parkes

Jockeys such as 

O Bosson

S Wynne

K Asano

I would not put on.  I'd likely be happy with most of them in being able to ride without sacrificing chance. The top ones are less likely to affect the price of my runner. Obviously in a G1, S Wynne and K Asano are less likely to affect price as well. So that list is in general.

My view is that Bosson gives me no advantage (in winning the race) from his riding to many jockeys. That's my opinion of course. I'd expect there are many jockeys that would have the strike rate of Bosson if they had the rides he has. Again my opinion, and it is my assessment of his rides ignoring that he is riding them, is how I have come to that opinion.

The ability to even try and do  that objectively is something that is not able to be done by either the Chief or ATA. That is guaranteed. They are like the majority, look at results and determine therefore they are superior.

Edited January 17, 2021 by mardigras

[Hesi]

The conclusion of the Tribunal is that the Appeals must be dismissed and the decisions of the Raceday Judicial Committee in respect of both Races 3 and 4 upheld.

The detailed "reasons for decision" spoken of above will be available before the close of business on 15 January 2021. The Tribunal thanks all of those who were present today for their courtesy and co­ operation.

DATED this 10th day of January 2021

Murray McKechnie

Chairman

[Hesi]

Did anyone see these "reasons for decision" published

[brown fox]

Danielle will be pleased😉

[curious]

42 minutes ago, Hesi said:

Did anyone see these "reasons for decision" published

http://jca.org.nz/non-race-day-hearings/appeal-o-bosson-v-riu-reasons-decision-of-appeals-tribunal-dated-12-january-2021-chair-mr-m-mckechnie

[curious]

On 1/10/2021 at 1:43 PM, curious said:

Be interesting to see what they argued should mitigate the penalty. It looked pretty robust to me based on precedent etc.

Sounds like the High Court agreed.

[Maximus]

MM thinks the High Court decision is correct.

OP is our best jock, no question, but his ongoing disregard for the safety of others needed to be addressed. He showed he wasn't listening by repeating the initial mistake in the very next race on 1 Jan - riding a well-fancied TA horse that got caught too wide for too long in the Royal Stakes, if memory serves, and finished last. Expensive for all its backers, and as it turned out, even more expensive for OP.   

[Hesi]

Of course it is the right decision, the whole basis for appealing was based on

"Mr Bosson was not seeking special treatment but rather penalties consistent with the NZTR revised Penalty Guidelines"

If that was the case, why did we need all this extraneous bs, from self interested people, an example below

"The Tribunal was furnished with a letter of support addressed to the Chief Stipendiary Steward from Mr Brendon Lindsay, principal of Cambridge Stud. This spoke of the effect of Mr Bosson’s absence on Karaka Million night and what a significant event that is in the New Zealand Racing Calendar"

The Tribunal got it exactly right

"The Tribunal has carefully considered the letters of support. With respect they do not directly bear upon the appropriateness or otherwise of the penalties imposed by the Raceday Judicial Committee. Rather they speak of Mr Bosson’s acknowledged ability and the effect that might follow from his not being able to ride on Karaka Million night."

[curious]

Exactly. Never a sign of any reasons to dispute the raceday decision, let alon support a judicial review of the appeal tribunal decision. All seemed rather frivolous to me.

[curious]

Just now, curious said:

Exactly. Never a sign of any reasons to dispute the raceday decision, let alone support a judicial review of the appeal tribunal decision. All seemed rather frivolous to me.

 

[Turny]

Would have been one hell of a precedent under current rules, but there is a but. 

There should be ability to play a get out of jail card for days like KM, not only the jock suffers here, gotta be a more equitable and fair outcome 

Have no idea how you perameter my thoughts, just initial thoughts 

Something is missing in the continued denial for those who have put in 18 months for the big day with their key player sidelined, just doesn't ring fair to the preparers

[Maximus]

9 minutes ago, Turny said:

Would have been one hell of a precedent under current rules, but there is a but. 

There should be ability to play a get out of jail card for days like KM, not only the jock suffers here, gotta be a more equitable and fair outcome 

Have no idea how you perameter my thoughts, just initial thoughts 

Something is missing in the continued denial for those who have put in 18 months for the big day with their key player sidelined, just doesn't ring fair to the preparers

cant agree mate ..every investor with a horse eligible of KM night has 'put in' 18 months to get to this Saturdayy. TA have o more rights than any others who have paid their way and taken the risks all the way through. OP is simply paying the price fora couple of consecutive careless (ie risky) actions on 1 Jan in Group 2 races.

MM

[Hesi]

13 minutes ago, Turny said:

Would have been one hell of a precedent under current rules, but there is a but. 

There should be ability to play a get out of jail card for days like KM, not only the jock suffers here, gotta be a more equitable and fair outcome 

Have no idea how you perameter my thoughts, just initial thoughts 

Something is missing in the continued denial for those who have put in 18 months for the big day with their key player sidelined, just doesn't ring fair to the preparers

Your mate CWJ, would have liked a few of those get out of jail cards

[Hesi]

9 minutes ago, Maximus said:

cant agree mate ..every investor with a horse eligible of KM night has 'put in' 18 months to get to this Saturdayy. TA have o more rights than any others who have paid their way and taken the risks all the way through. OP is simply paying the price fora couple of consecutive careless (ie risky) actions on 1 Jan in Group 2 races.

MM

That's why it surprises me, that your mates at Cambridge Stud put in a supporting letter to the Tribunal.....superfluous, and they should have had the good sense to accept that

[Turny]

54 minutes ago, Maximus said:

cant agree mate ..every investor with a horse eligible of KM night has 'put in' 18 months to get to this Saturdayy. TA have o more rights than any others who have paid their way and taken the risks all the way through. OP is simply paying the price fora couple of consecutive careless (ie risky) actions on 1 Jan in Group 2 races.

MM

Max, you are coming from the wrong angle, TA could fight it but lost, an I dustry battler couldn't fight it and there is the difference but the law as it is currently apparently prevailed, I suggest change particularly for the battler

[Turny]

1 hour ago, Hesi said:

Your mate CWJ, would have liked a few of those get out of jail cards

Chris has never had one, tho has deserved many but CG has gone so victimisation no longer an issue, as good as a free pass as opposed to a go to jail card 

Anyway Chris dont care much, just gets on with it when he returns

Winners are permanent 

Edited January 18, 2021 by Turny

[Maximus]

2 hours ago, Hesi said:

That's why it surprises me, that your mates at Cambridge Stud put in a supporting letter to the Tribunal.....superfluous, and they should have had the good sense to accept that

I was surprised that they got involved, too.