OWNER'S BAN IS OVERTURNED
Read more about this story
ROA president Paul Dixon (left) has issued the following thoughts and comments about the implications for racehorse owners that result from Harry Findlay's disciplinary hearing and appeal.
He said: "The Harry Findlay case was never about whether he was guilty of breaking the rules. It was about whether the BHA's punishment fitted the crime - was it proportionate? I am sure I am not the only person in racing who finds it strange that the appeal could have produced such a strikingly different result from the original judgement.
"Without knowing all the facts, none of us are in a position to judge whether the first sentence was proportionate or not. What I would like to know, however, is what was taken into account at the appeal to make the Appeal Board come to a decision that was so different to that of the Disciplinary Panel.
"A sceptic might say it had something to do with the huge tide of publicity surrounding the case. It is very important for owners to have a consistent message about not only what constitutes a breach - that part is clear - but also on the likely penalty that owners will receive from laying their own horses.
"Is a distinction drawn, for instance, between laying a horse to make a profit and laying a horse to protect a position? What deserves a ban and what deserves a fine?
"I have to stress this is not a comment on whether this judgement is better or worse than the first. It is a comment, however, on the need for a consistent approach to be adopted to avoid similar embarrassment for racing in future."
* * *
Owner Harry Findlay has revealed that he left the BHA appeal hearing confident his ban would be overturned.
The professional gambler had been banned for six months after twice laying Gullible Gordon, a horse he part owns, to lose races, although he was a net backer on both occasions.
However, that ban was reduced to a fine of £4,500 after an appeal.
In a statement released by his solicitor, Findlay said: "After two minutes of listening to Sir Roger Buckley (who chaired the Appeal Board), I knew that I was shorter than 1.01 to get the disqualification overturned.
"He was so impressive. He was flanked by two other panellists who, like him, obviously had a thorough knowledge of the case and this is all I wanted. After the undoubtedly toughest four weeks of my life, I very nearly actually smiled when he spoke of a 'gambler's instinct'. I knew then that he understood the case and, in my language, he was simply 'the governor'."
Findlay thanked several of his supporters afterwinning his appeal, reserving special mention for the Sangster Family and Paul Barber, with whom he had owned Cheltenham Gold Cup and dual Hennessy Gold Cup winner Denman until recently.
"Special thanks go to Paul Barber, who never wavered," he said.
"The support of the Sangster family, who I have known for less than two years, has been incredible and, in Sam's case, at times inspiring."
Daryl Cowan, of DC Employment Solicitors, who represented Findlay for free, said: "Speaking for myself and Roderick Moore (the barrister who represented Findlay at the appeal hearing), we are delighted and, frankly, relieved both for Harry and for racing.
"As for Harry, there was no corruption, no intention to profit at the expense of others and he was entirely open about what he did.
"Many members of the public would be surprised to be told that what he did was against the rules.
"A disqualification was plainly wrong, and the Appeal Board, to their great credit, agreed.
"Harry's main concern throughout has been to clear his name. While most people within the racing industry recognised that Harry was in no way dishonest, he was distraught that the general public, who may have a lesser understanding of the way in which betting operates, might think of him as dishonest in some way.
"He is very grateful to the Appeal Board for making it clear, in no uncertain terms, that this was not a case of corruption and that it felt justified '...in expressing [its] own clear view that Mr Findlay should not have been disqualified'.
"He also appreciates that the Appeal Board recognised that Harry suffered what it described as "the indignity" of disqualification for over a month.
"As for racing, a great result too. Characters like Harry are the heart and pulse of the sport and, without them, a very great deal of the fun and interest would simply not be there.
"We feel privileged to have helped him and wish him all the best.
"We would also like to record our thanks to Colin Brown, the former jump jockey who helped put Harry and Roderick in touch with each other, after he sat next to Roderick during a flight in June."
16/06/2010