Piere Strydom pack your bags
- rob faux
-
- New Member
-
- Thanks: 0
Re: That has to be a 3 month ban
9 years 9 months ago
Back to the thread ...........................I think that Striker needs big credit for the way he has handled the issue ...............certainly gone up further in my estimation,and I was already a fan!!!! :oops:
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Dave Scott
-
- Administrator
-
- Posts: 43867
- Thanks: 3338
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Bob Brogan
-
Topic Author
- Administrator
-
- Posts: 82507
- Thanks: 6460
Re: That has to be a 3 month ban
9 years 9 months agorob faux wrote: Back to the thread ...........................I think that Striker needs big credit for the way he has handled the issue ...............certainly gone up further in my estimation,and I was already a fan!!!! :oops:
Admitting you done wrong is hard to do and stepping up and making a sincere apology like he did was top class
The following user(s) said Thank You: johnnycomelately, Garett Murphy
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- davetheflower
-
- Platinum Member
-
- Posts: 11060
- Thanks: 534
Re: That has to be a 3 month ban
9 years 9 months agoShield wrote: I've been following Colin and Dave posts
don't blame Colin
Dave is just arrogant.... needs to go fly a kite and don't involve Colin
I haven't got a kite,will a balloon do?
Are you giving Colin some arse treatment?
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Pulse
-
- Premium Member
-
- Posts: 591
- Thanks: 22
Re: That has to be a 3 month ban
9 years 9 months ago
Colin take it easy bro . If you don't need to post don't. Relax .Take chill pill
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- ROBERT BLOOMBERG
-
- New Member
-
- Thanks: 0
Re: That has to be a 3 month ban
9 years 9 months ago
Hi Bob
In answering your question and to correct a few erroneous posts, I was contacted by Strydom and he has elected to utilise the services of Adv Manny Witz as he is a “family friend.”
The likelihood is that PS will be charged with Rule 62.2.3 which states that: “the rider of a horse shall ride his horse out to the end of a race.” The Guidelines usually followed for this contravention is 3:2:2:1 where your actions cost you 1st,2nd,3rd or 4th place. In other words, PS will probably get a 3 month suspension.
Then the mitigating factors in respect of sentence come into play i.e. the influence the commentator may have had on him, the fact that his view was blocked by 2 other horses on his inside so he never saw the winner, that this was a genuine error, his contriteness and acceptance of guilt and his impeccable record over many years particularly in terms of this Rule.
Precedents in previous matters are also of extreme importance, but on the flipside, you cannot equate dropping your hand a stride or two before the posts and doing so some 50m out and this was one of the worst I’ve seen in many years.
In my opinion taking all the factors into account, the likelihood is that he will get 6 weeks suspended and will therefore get a net suspension of 6 weeks. Having said that, I once acted for Marthinus Mienie who received the customary 3 month suspension and after 2 Appeals as the 1st led to an Inquiry de novo he ended up with a net R25k fine, but then he did have numerous mitigating factors in regard to his ride.
In answering your question and to correct a few erroneous posts, I was contacted by Strydom and he has elected to utilise the services of Adv Manny Witz as he is a “family friend.”
The likelihood is that PS will be charged with Rule 62.2.3 which states that: “the rider of a horse shall ride his horse out to the end of a race.” The Guidelines usually followed for this contravention is 3:2:2:1 where your actions cost you 1st,2nd,3rd or 4th place. In other words, PS will probably get a 3 month suspension.
Then the mitigating factors in respect of sentence come into play i.e. the influence the commentator may have had on him, the fact that his view was blocked by 2 other horses on his inside so he never saw the winner, that this was a genuine error, his contriteness and acceptance of guilt and his impeccable record over many years particularly in terms of this Rule.
Precedents in previous matters are also of extreme importance, but on the flipside, you cannot equate dropping your hand a stride or two before the posts and doing so some 50m out and this was one of the worst I’ve seen in many years.
In my opinion taking all the factors into account, the likelihood is that he will get 6 weeks suspended and will therefore get a net suspension of 6 weeks. Having said that, I once acted for Marthinus Mienie who received the customary 3 month suspension and after 2 Appeals as the 1st led to an Inquiry de novo he ended up with a net R25k fine, but then he did have numerous mitigating factors in regard to his ride.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Titch
-
- Platinum Member
-
- Posts: 9397
- Thanks: 366
Re: That has to be a 3 month ban
9 years 9 months agoClearly the "rot" has not deterred you, but if you really believe what you write then why have anything to do with the industry... :STellina wrote: Nhra must act or drive even more away from this rotten sport
Give everything but up!
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Shield
-
- New Member
-
- Thanks: 0
Re: That has to be a 3 month ban
9 years 9 months ago
hi guys
I lost 20k punting yesterday
it was a genuine mistake from my part
I should have known
But anyways can I have my money back since it was a mistake and I don't often do that ??
what fucken nonsense
and again u wonder why the industry is fucked
I lost 20k punting yesterday
it was a genuine mistake from my part
I should have known
But anyways can I have my money back since it was a mistake and I don't often do that ??
what fucken nonsense
and again u wonder why the industry is fucked
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Titch
-
- Platinum Member
-
- Posts: 9397
- Thanks: 366
Re: That has to be a 3 month ban
9 years 9 months ago
Shield he does not say at any stage that he should not be punished ..all he has done is to have admitted that he was wrong, if that is not good enough then tough sh1t...
Give everything but up!
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Bob Brogan
-
Topic Author
- Administrator
-
- Posts: 82507
- Thanks: 6460
Re: That has to be a 3 month ban
9 years 9 months ago
Shield, he will be punished ,there is no way the Nhra won't ban him
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Bob Brogan
-
Topic Author
- Administrator
-
- Posts: 82507
- Thanks: 6460
Re: That has to be a 3 month ban
9 years 9 months agoTitch wrote:Clearly the "rot" has not deterred you, but if you really believe what you write then why have anything to do with the industry... :STellina wrote: Nhra must act or drive even more away from this rotten sport
Very unfair to Tellina Titch considering your past at handling that FARMER :whistle:
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Titch
-
- Platinum Member
-
- Posts: 9397
- Thanks: 366
Re: That has to be a 3 month ban
9 years 9 months agoCare to elaborate??Bob Brogan wrote: Very unfair to Tellina Titch considering your past at handling that FARMER :whistle:
Give everything but up!
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Time to create page: 0.109 seconds