RVL Silencing the critics - Vic Gallops - Racehorse TALK harm-plan harm-plan

Racehorse TALK



RVL Silencing the critics - Vic Gallops - Racehorse TALK

Author Topic: RVL Silencing the critics  (Read 16553 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Arsenal

  • VIP Club
  • Group 1
  • User 194
  • Posts: 16662
O.P. « 2016-Jun-23, 07:17 PM »

Senior Victoria racing officials will closely monitor the $80,000 in fines handed out to North Melbourne coach Brad Scott and his football club after the coach questioned the integrity of AFL umpires.

Racing officials are poised to strengthen their fining system after a number of hurtful and demeaning outbursts on radio and social media against integrity officers.

Scott was fined $30,000 and North Melbourne $50,000 in an expensive and worrying week which also saw club president James Brayshaw forced to apologise for his comments to journalist Caroline Wilson.

Scott said he was embarrassed and apologised for his claims of bias after an incident in last Friday night's Hawthorn game.

Scott claimed that umpires had told his players that free kicks would not be paid to Lindsay Thomas because he was a "ducker".

It transpired that Scott had been given misinformation by a staff member.

Racing Victoria are believed to be considering a far stronger line on licensed people making damning comments against racing authorities and using social media to question the integrity of those who police the industry in this state. They are also studying the template used by the AFL and NRL to sanction people making remarks that bring their sport into disrepute.

Victorian Racing have had a spate of licensed people making allegations against the Victorian integrity department in the last three months.

On Thursday, a Gippsland stablehand Manny Gelagotis on Tuesday had an appeal on a $1000 fine for using Twitter to abuse Racing Victoria veterinary surgeon Brian Stewart dismissed. Stewart, one of the most respected, regulatory veterinary surgeons in the world was called "incompetent" on a Twitter message sent out by Gelagotis.

And the integrity department of Victorian Racing also asked Sarah Moody, the wife of suspended trainer Peter Moody, to give a "please explain" over tweets she made. With the inquiry still ongoing, Sarah Moody tweeted: "UnderBailey TV movie coming soon. The rise and eventual fall of out of control no questions answered integrity department. Deception at Epsom." Moody is a registered owner in Victoria.

Moody has been warned in the past of her use of social media but has continued to send messages.

Peter Moody, her husband is serving a six-month suspension following a cobalt charge earlier this year.

Racing NSW chief executive Peter V'Landys confirmed that his state also had a social media structure for those who misuse the medium.

"If they are doing it, they're brought in front of stewards for a 'please explain' and if found guilty, there are varying penalties for such a misdemeanour. We have reminded people in the industry of their duty not to bring their industry into disrepute by using social media," he said.
 

Read mo http://www.smh.com.au/sport/horseracing/racing-afl-fines-make-racing-industry-sit-up-and-think-20160621-gpoiyb.html#ixzz4COJzAuBF

Follow us: @smh on Twitter | sydneymorningherald on Facebook

Silencing the critics RVL must be delusional to think they  should adopt the scale of penalties imposed on rich AFL clubs and highly paid coaches for comments on referees .....as V'landys described offending comments as " misdemeanours".......simple offences which are soon forgotten .....they only attract attention when stewards lay charges.

While stewards are often targeted for decisions they make they're not infallible and ought to expect some criticsm occasionally without bringing charges under the bringing racing into disrepute rule.

As reported in the SMH article Sarah Moody faces the RAD board next week...in her case she was given the opportunity to explain herself but she's obviously a strong willed woman and declined to remove her critical tweet...in the circumstances with the stress and drama the Moody's have been through you would think the stewards could have given her a pass instead of going down this track.

Giddy Up :beer:


Offline ratsack

  • VIP Club
  • Group 1
  • User 327
  • Posts: 10834
« 2016-Jun-23, 07:46 PM Reply #1 »
What a lot of rot

i for one will be trying to stop this PC garbage

"THEY" all use this to protect there agenda

I'm over it

if we don't stop this it will be endemic

anyone with me        :/

Offline PoisonPen7

  • Group 1
  • User 55
  • Posts: 21607
« 2016-Jun-24, 12:23 AM Reply #2 »
What a lot of rot

i for one will be trying to stop this PC garbage

"THEY" all use this to protect there agenda

I'm over it

if we don't stop this it will be endemic

anyone with me        :/

I hear ya' brother.

What it actually is, is using an overstated, almost non-existent "issue" to increase power.

Not just RVL. It is a common tactic by a lot of people these days. Worst offenders are company HR departments.

Offline specialweek

  • Group 1
  • User 3
  • Posts: 10043
« 2016-Jun-24, 11:54 AM Reply #3 »
I agree for the most part but people need to be aware that social media is not like the front bar of your local from days gone by before the internet.

Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 1
  • User 326
  • Posts: 5232
« 2016-Jun-24, 08:39 PM Reply #4 »


What part of well deserved derision does RVL not understand?

RVL claiming rights to persecute critics will only ensure that the trickle of critics becomes a flood.

As is now administered, RVL is an absolute disgrace -- and the probabilities are that this will be well illustrated at Flemington tomorrow.

Inflated fields of low-grade horses is a recipe for random outcomes as good horses are impeded by horses that should not be in the fields.

Offline HarmersHaven

  • Listed
  • User 1861
  • Posts: 229
« 2016-Jun-24, 11:19 PM Reply #5 »
Inflated fields of low-grade horses is a recipe for random outcomes as good horses are impeded by horses that should not be in the fields.

You could've logged in Sunday and posted your nonsensical vitriol, but you chose not to.
You could've logged in Monday and posted your nonsensical vitriol, but you chose not to.
You could've logged in Tuesday and posted your nonsensical vitriol, but you chose not to.
You could've logged in Wednesday and posted your nonsensical vitriol, but you chose not to.
You could've logged in Thursday and posted your nonsensical vitriol, but you chose not to.

Perhaps you tried to let water pass under the bridge, let time fog distant memories, God knows how you work. Let me remind you how last Saturday (Melb Metro) panned out:

Inflated fields
Fields of 8,8,9,9,10,12,13,13,14 contested last Saturday. Average field size 10.67. Pretty much perfect. Zero NTD fields.

is a recipe for random outcomes
Winners included three favorites (2.60, 2.80, 2.90), three second favourites (3.70, 4.10, 5.30), a third fave (5.80) and a fourth fave (7.60), One blowout result (nine race card) at 19.30.

Added to this, 3x Tri's paid less than $100, the next 2x paid less than $200 - 5/9 races Tri's were more than gettable.


Without being accused of playing the man instead of the ball, can you seriously STFU unless you have something of relevance/importance/accuracy to add?

Offline PoisonPen7

  • Group 1
  • User 55
  • Posts: 21607
« 2016-Jun-25, 06:46 AM Reply #6 »
I agree for the most part but people need to be aware that social media is not like the front bar of your local from days gone by before the internet.

Isn't it?   :lol:

I think it is evolving that way mate.

Where this all ends up God only knows.

But one thing I know is if you are going to put yourself in the public view you need to have a thick hide.

There is an army of people who parse every sentence spoken by a public figure and have no qualms whatsoever with tweeting and posting things out of context.

Offline wily ole dog

  • Group 1
  • User 218
  • Posts: 27208
« 2016-Jun-25, 08:15 AM Reply #7 »
You could've logged in Sunday and posted your nonsensical vitriol, but you chose not to.
You could've logged in Monday and posted your nonsensical vitriol, but you chose not to.
You could've logged in Tuesday and posted your nonsensical vitriol, but you chose not to.
You could've logged in Wednesday and posted your nonsensical vitriol, but you chose not to.
You could've logged in Thursday and posted your nonsensical vitriol, but you chose not to.

Perhaps you tried to let water pass under the bridge, let time fog distant memories, God knows how you work. Let me remind you how last Saturday (Melb Metro) panned out:
Fields of 8,8,9,9,10,12,13,13,14 contested last Saturday. Average field size 10.67. Pretty much perfect. Zero NTD fields.
Winners included three favorites (2.60, 2.80, 2.90), three second favourites (3.70, 4.10, 5.30), a third fave (5.80) and a fourth fave (7.60), One blowout result (nine race card) at 19.30.

Added to this, 3x Tri's paid less than $100, the next 2x paid less than $200 - 5/9 races Tri's were more than gettable.


Without being accused of playing the man instead of the ball, can you seriously STFU unless you have something of relevance/importance/accuracy to add?


Well said and spot on

I note peter hasn't and wont reply

Offline specialweek

  • Group 1
  • User 3
  • Posts: 10043
« 2016-Jun-25, 09:27 AM Reply #8 »
Isn't it?    :lol:  

I think it is evolving that way mate.

Where this all ends up God only knows.

But one thing I know is if you are going to put yourself in the public view you need to have a thick hide.

There is an army of people who parse every sentence spoken by a public figure and have no qualms whatsoever with tweeting and posting things out of context.
My point being not many would have had legal action against them from bar talk but many are treating the net like it is.

Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 1
  • User 326
  • Posts: 5232
« 2016-Jun-25, 09:38 PM Reply #9 »


Today was illustrative of the rubbish served up by RVL

The F4 dividends included 56k, 22k+, 18k, 9k, 7k, 4k

...........this should not happen........ it is indicative of poor administration............ it is evidence of institutional corruption.

This 'happening' is a regular occurrence -- RVL need to manage the size and quality of the race fields accepted.

Offline HarmersHaven

  • Listed
  • User 1861
  • Posts: 229
« 2016-Jun-25, 10:43 PM Reply #10 »
Nine races.

2x faves won, 2x second faves won, 1x third fave won.

That's 5/9 races (over half the card) won by the top three in the market. Even the mugs you follow in the paper should've pushed the lemmings into those.

Remaining winners at 8.20, 8.20, 9.40 and 17.80.

So over half the card won by the very gettable, pointy end of the market (top three faves), and only one double-figure (rough) result. And still you whinge.

Offline wily ole dog

  • Group 1
  • User 218
  • Posts: 27208
« 2016-Jun-26, 09:52 AM Reply #11 »
Hammers

Pete doesn't talk about winners as he's here for dishonest reasons.
Constantly spews on about F4 divys to perpetrate his lies.

Personally, I found 3 legs of the quaddy as my on top picks and foolishly left out the favourite in my losing leg. I got greedy looking for the value that peter complains about

Offline wily ole dog

  • Group 1
  • User 218
  • Posts: 27208
« 2016-Jun-26, 09:53 AM Reply #12 »
Question for Peter

Which winners yesterday did you find it so hard to find?

Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 1
  • User 326
  • Posts: 5232
« 2016-Jun-27, 01:12 PM Reply #13 »


Critics lacking credibility


The declining relevance of the-is forum is not helped by the speed with which the usual insider suspects jump in to 'defend' the indefensible in a race to the bottom -- nor by the absence of any correcting comment fro others knowing better.

Even I had a collect on the Melbourne quadrella on Saturday -- but it was a close run thing.

The usual lotto dividend (for the professionals) was denied by only small margins to long-priced horses running second -- had the seconds run first the quadrella dividend would have been some $20,000 and the F4 dividends even more disturbingly inflated.

There is a serious recurrent problem of plain unfairness with racing in Melbourne -- it is a management problem and the RVL management needs to embrace 'quality control' as a key performance indicator.

As things stand Melbourne racing is being corrupted by industry greed and disrespect for most customers of race betting.



 


Offline wily ole dog

  • Group 1
  • User 218
  • Posts: 27208
« 2016-Jun-27, 01:38 PM Reply #14 »
So I will ask you the question again.
What winners of what races did you find objectionable?

Online Arsenal

  • VIP Club
  • Group 1
  • User 194
  • Posts: 16662
« 2016-Jun-28, 01:12 PM Reply #15 »
Sarah Moody has been fined $1,500 after being found guilty of posting a tweet that was offensive to Racing Victoria chief steward Terry Bailey.

At a RAD board hearing on Tuesday, Moody was also ordered to delete the tweet, which read:

"Underbailey TVMovie coming soon The rise & eventual fall of an out of control, no questions answered integrity department, Deception at Epsom."

As a registered owner, the wife of suspended trainer Peter Moody is subject to the rules of racing.

Moody was facing charges under AR175(qq), which allows stewards to penalise licenced participants for detrimental comments or actions they make on social media about others in the sport.

Moody pleaded not guilty and said the tweet was tongue in cheek and was posted during what was a stressful time for both her and her family.

No sympathy or understanding  there from the learned RAD board.......it wouldn't have lasted long on twittersphere.... only the stewards brought it to wider public attention....wonder if she'll pay the fine and if not what are the consequences ...go on the defaulters' list....how does RVL recover debts like this in the event of non payment. :o

Giddy Up :beer: 


Offline wily ole dog

  • Group 1
  • User 218
  • Posts: 27208
« 2016-Jun-28, 02:23 PM Reply #16 »
So I will ask you the question again.
What winners of what races did you find objectionable?


Yoooo hooo Peter, cat got your tongue?

Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 1
  • User 326
  • Posts: 5232
« 2016-Jun-28, 10:15 PM Reply #17 »


RVL digging a deep hole -- likely to be a grave

RVL is racing out of control

Racing Victoria board members and senior executives have become incensed at the misuse of social media.

Fairfax Media understand that, if RVL adopts the templates for fines used by the AFL and NRL, Sarah Moody would be facing 10 times Tuesday's fine.

Moody, who claimed on one website that she would not be represented by legal counsel,  was however assisted by Matthew Stirling, who told the RAD board that her  tweet should have been taken in a broader context – referencing the long-running cobalt case against Peter Moody.

Stirling said the tweet was sent with "tongue in cheek",  with the term underbailey a reference to the TV series Underbelly.

 Bailey, who is on holidays with his family,  gave evidence by phone.

Judge John Bowman found Sarah Moody guilty  of being in breach of Australian  Rule of Racing 175(qq). He said that any reasonable reader of the tweet would have reached the same conclusion as Bailey.




Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 1
  • User 326
  • Posts: 5232
« 2016-Jun-28, 10:25 PM Reply #18 »


...............not-so-wily needs counselling

Questions about easily-found winners at Saturday race meetings in Melbourne will be answered on Saturday, most likely, as they have been for the past year or two when 'lotto like' characterizes most quadrella and F4 dividends.

This is a disgrace for RVL -- not diminished by one day when the 'winners' were ranked in the credible field.

Only not-so-wily thinks one swallow heralds a summer in the middle of an eternal winter.


Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 1
  • User 326
  • Posts: 5232
« 2016-Jun-28, 10:31 PM Reply #19 »

Fanciful fines

Presumably fines imposed by RVL are only relevant if the benefit of being licensed is greater than the fine --  a cost of doing business without being bullied.

The fun will start when licensed persons with nothing to lose give RVL people a public career development  interview.

RVL is living loose in a glass house -- the rocks will keep coming.

Offline wily ole dog

  • Group 1
  • User 218
  • Posts: 27208
« 2016-Jun-29, 07:38 AM Reply #20 »
.
« Last Edit: 2016-Jun-29, 05:42 PM by MagiC~* »

Offline wily ole dog

  • Group 1
  • User 218
  • Posts: 27208
« 2016-Jun-29, 01:44 PM Reply #21 »
.
« Last Edit: 2016-Jun-29, 05:42 PM by MagiC~* »

Online Arsenal

  • VIP Club
  • Group 1
  • User 194
  • Posts: 16662
« 2016-Jun-30, 09:11 AM Reply #22 »
Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter COMMENT: Inside the Moody Twitter inquiry
BY BRUCE CLARK - @SNOWYCLARK
1 day ago Horse Racing
Sarah Moody (middle) with her family. (Pic: Sharon Chapman)
Never before have so many earnest words been spoken about 23 of them “dripping in innuendo” that had been written and published via social media. And much of that discussion focused on just two of them.
The subject was the now famous and withdrawn "Underbailey" tweet. And since Sarah Moody posted it, her account had "ballooned" from 673 followers to 1273 at the close of business at the Racing Appeals Disciplinary Board meeting, where the damage of the tweet was vigorously debated.
 
This was like a basketball game starting 98-all with two minutes to go.

In the end, Moody was $1500 lighter in the pocket and it was suggested she would have to budget for more fines in her future Twitter dealings, but the inquiry also allowed her to stoically present the reasons behind the tweet. Not that the RAD Board would ever doubt the "offensive nature" of the tweet, however.

There was always going to be a hint of intrigue about this, if only for the characters who were dragged out in this non-fiction play. There were also plenty of "Underbelly" mentions, despite the fact RAD Board deputy chairman Brian Forrest noting he'd not seen the series.

It also had the absent chief steward Terry Bailey, who was hooked in via telephone from an undisclosed holiday leave location. Racing Victoria had the wrong number, but called called back. It left you wondering, didn't Racing Victoria know the number for their own chief stipe?

And it had the name Moody, wife of champion trainer Peter Moody. Or as she was incorrectly attributed to during proceedings: “Mr Bailey would be aware Mrs Moody is the trainer of Peter Moody.”
Now it might be common knowledge to those who know the Moodys that it is Sarah who wears the black shorts back home at Belgrave South, but it was one many amusing moments
.

The meaning of words and the innuendo behind them were thrashed out, while "hurt feelings" and "crooks" were discussed over a draining three hours. Yet most could read the wind and the outcome when the ball was first bounced.

So welcoming to all at the game at Epsom Road, Flemington was 69-year-old Tom Rutherford (who had his birthday during week) and his own silent protest against Racing Victoria’s integrity department. It had something to do with an old horse-ownership dispute that has left Tom with nothing but a sign and a chair out the front of RV, kicking against the breeze.
 
(Pic: Twitter/@snowyclark)
“I’ve got nothing to lose, I’ve got nothing and I’ve never had so much fun,” said Rutherford.

The very erstwhile, and no doubt expensive, Justin Hooper from the powerful Minter Ellison squad led the Racing Victoria team, declaring the Moody tweet was not only “offensive” to any “reasonable reader” but implied Terry Bailey was a "crook", and that the integrity department was “deceptive” and “out of control”.

Hooper argued that any “reasonable reader” of the tweet would link it directly to that Underbelly TV series, which was of course full of crooks and criminals running amok. Mind you, as Matthew Stirling (representing Moody) pointed out, the series made no reference to corrupt "officials”.

That the integrity department was indeed "under Bailey" was his simple submission.

But how could Terry Bailey be so “offended”, he said, if this was the same man of “strength” and “robustness” who fronted the media after his family home had been shot? At the time, Bailey said it was all part of the job and that everyone should "move on".  :o

At this point, Bailey appeared on the line. After providing his name, "Terrence Glen Bailey", and acknowledging his role, “chairman of stewards", Bailey outlined the offence he took from the tweet.

“This was a slander to me and the integrity department,” Bailey said. "The inference was that 'I’m a crook' and 'on the way out'.

He described the “attacks” as “disappointing when all we are trying to do is our job without fear or favour.”

Bailey conceded in his job that he was open to public criticism and his attitude was to “wear it” and “get on with it”, but that he saw Moody’s "string of behaviour" as disappointing and asked: “How long has the department got to put up with it?”

With that, the chairman of stewards was back on holidays and the “reasonable reader” was back under scrutiny, as was the social media policy and the reach of the rules.

For example: Do social media rules reach a person attending the Melbourne Cup, engaged in an office sweep or indeed simply betting on a race who then makes social media comments that may then defame or “hurt” a person? Yes, was the conceded answer. Yeah, be careful reasonable readers.

Interestingly, the policy makes no mention of owners (e.g. Sarah Moody), but it was more a mention rather than strict interpretation.

And back and forth the parry went about hurt feelings sustained by these 23 words “dripping with innuendo", as Hooper said.

Now, enter Sarah Moody. Did I mention she was stoic? She said she fully understood stewards were there to enforce the rules and regulations and provide a clean racing industry.

And she assured the board that her tweet was unrehearsed.

“Mr Bailey thinks this a personal attack against him," Moody said. "I think it’s more a frustrated reaction to a very long and drawn-out situation that I’ve been involved in. My husband has been openly called a cheat.

“I have three grown daughters who have also been greatly affected by this. As a mother, you can protect your children. My girls on several occasions were extremely upset by what their father has had to go through and how they have had to defend him – to their friends and the general public.

“I am a strong person and put a brave face on, but there have been occasions I need to retaliate with a little bit of an outburst. So I believe my tweet was nothing more than a frustrated reaction to a lot of emotional stress that I’ve been going through.

“I don’t feel it was meant seriously. It was definitely a 'tongue in cheek' tweet to give myself a little bit of sanity and relief. It has been a pretty tough time, and I think I have been extremely controlled.

“I think the occasional tweet has helped me get through all this, no way did I believe my tweet was in any way serious or would have an on-going affect on the way people look at our amazing industry.”

RV’s Hooper eventually expressed sympathy for Sarah Moody’s “context”, but went back to the "reasonable reader’s” interpretation of the tweet. He said it was akin to calling a policeman corrupt, saying a lawyer had no integrity or calling a doctor incompetent.

For Moody, it was nothing more than a “tongue in cheek” comment or “attempted humour, albeit with a barb to it.”

Brad Scott’s recent $30,000 fine got a mention regarding the penalty, as did Eddie McGuire’s recent comments about Caroline Wilson.

In the end, this long-winded case was decided on racing law and interpretation. The outcome was even predicted by Stirling, who nominated the nearest-the-pin mark of $1500 as Tom Rutherford sat out the front of Racing Victoria.

But let's move on. Any "reasonable reader" will tell you racing has far more pressing matters.
X
https://www.g1x.com.au/news/racing/comment-inside-the-moody-twitter-inquiry

Some amusing and confusing details as recountered by G1X Bruce Clark who sat through the RAD board hearing to bring us this insightful inside on what went on and what went wrong.

Well Done Bruce :thumbsup:

Giddy Up :beer:

« Last Edit: 2016-Jun-30, 09:15 AM by Arsenal »

Offline wily ole dog

  • Group 1
  • User 218
  • Posts: 27208
« 2016-Jun-30, 05:06 PM Reply #23 »
Deleted posts  :lol:

Well done magic. I'll  leave you to contribute to the thread :bleh:

Offline HarmersHaven

  • Listed
  • User 1861
  • Posts: 229
« 2016-Jun-30, 05:42 PM Reply #24 »

Critics lacking credibility


The declining relevance of the-is forum


Deleted posts - what a joke.

The prime-antagonist/ :censored: opines that this forum has gone to the dogs, and baselessly suggests that those that are quick to debate (or dare disagree with) his viewpoint lack credibility. Either that or they are industry insiders.

For mine, a forum is a meeting place/gathering (online or real world) whereby people meet, discuss things, debate things, agree on things, disagree on things, teach others, learn from others etc. Communication/information is two-way or multiple directions; not one-way, dictator-style, 'my-way-or-the-highway' rhetoric.

Perhaps the "declining relevance of this forum" is more of his own doing and his own behaviour than he'd care to admit. But what do I know, I'm just a bloke that lacks credibility because I try and use facts/figures/stats/data to offer a differing point of view. On a forum. Who would've thought?


BACK TO ALL TOPICS
Sitemap