Gordon Elliott

AdorableAlice said:
Lets hope he can find it in himself to be more polite to her than he normally is to the fairer sex !

I wondered if JP would leave his horses at Elliotts, he seems such a kind gentleman and loves his horses putting huge finance into the racing world and ensuring retirement for his horses.
Click to expand...

I agree about JP, he has a large number of his retirees at Martinstown.

The less said about the other predominant owner the better. Hope to see Tiger Roll retired soon. His feelings towards his horses have been made clear by the fact one of his many is the one in THE photo.

Surely the fact GE can still do all the training, just unable to attend meetings doesn't really constitute a ban.

So effectively if I knew him, he could do all the behind the scenes stuff still, he just can't leave the yard so I'd attend that for him but he would do all the prep I just turn up at the meetings, probably with a detailed list of instructions/ tactics etc to relay.
 
Cortez said:
Here's another one for you: gobshite. In the same family as gombeen, but gombeen's worse. The words have a whole lot more shade and nuance than the dictionary definition, but you kinda have to be Irish to get the full range of meaning. And GE's a gobshite too.
Click to expand...
Thank you, Cortez, I'll add that one to my vocabulary too! I'm on quite a steep learning curve tonight . . . I quite liked the sound of 'cute hoor' although an Urban Dictionary definition startled me somewhat (second one down if you want to look it up!) but it did tell me how to pronounce it (hoor rhymes with sewer) !
 
Last edited:
It’s not much of a ban if he is still permitted to be on the yard and to be directing operations. I’d assumed that a ban meant that he was warned off being present at training establishments as well as racecourses.

Still, it’s a very public putting on the naughty step. Denise Foster sounds like a very decent sort, I hope that her time as the figurehead are not too tricky for her.
 
So have I got that right? No ban from actually directing the training of horses. No ban from earning money from that. Ban from appearing at race courses as anything but a member of the public, and having his name listed as the trainer.

Some "ban".

Sounds like a decent fine, is he wealthy or will that actually sting a bit?
 
He will be very wealthy, as well as the training fees there is 10% of all winnings in there.
I think generally the punishment is a good and fair one. BITD a ban meant banned from all training establishments and racecourses, I don't know if that is still the case. If it is he'll be homeless!
 
Clodagh said:
He will be very wealthy, as well as the training fees there is 10% of all winnings in there.
I think generally the punishment is a good and fair one. BITD a ban meant banned from all training establishments and racecourses, I don't know if that is still the case. If it is he'll be homeless!
Click to expand...

You don't actually earn much from training fees. Say 2k a month per horse basic that 1 persons wages a month. Then you have electric and water bills to pay. Mortgage possibly, land rent for gallops possibly (each set up is different not everyone owns their stuff out right) the upkeep of the gadgets even if the initial cost has been paid off. Maintenance of yard, stables, paddocks etc. So whilst he will have 300 paying horses in he won't really earn himself a huge salery out of it once all overheads are taken into account.
 
Elf On A Shelf said:
You don't actually earn much from training fees. Say 2k a month per horse basic that 1 persons wages a month. Then you have electric and water bills to pay. Mortgage possibly, land rent for gallops possibly (each set up is different not everyone owns their stuff out right) the upkeep of the gadgets even if the initial cost has been paid off. Maintenance of yard, stables, paddocks etc. So whilst he will have 300 paying horses in he won't really earn himself a huge salery out of it once all overheads are taken into account.
Click to expand...

Well said, think its easy to just see the pound signs sometimes with out stepping back and seeing the whole picture with regards to out going expenses x
 
He is definitely a idiot I think he actually got away lightly considering the damage he has done to the racing industry. A jockey said that it’s to harsh it makes you wonder if a lot of that goes on behind the scenes since there is so many people defending him.
 
The damage to his reputation may well be irreversible. He will no longer be the youngest trainer to have a Grand National winner, he will be the guy in the picture that shocked and disgusted the racing world let alone the rest of us. He has not been banned for animal cruelty but for being a gobshite and bringing the sport into disrepute and as such the penalty brought by the IHRB is at the severe end of proportionate. I’m putting my pitchfork away now.
 
Lexi 123 said:
He is definitely a idiot I think he actually got away lightly considering the damage he has done to the racing industry. A jockey said that it’s to harsh it makes you wonder if a lot of that goes on behind the scenes since there is so many people defending him.
Click to expand...
Why would it make you wonder that? I don't see the logic.
 
Cortez said:
As far as I'm hearing it from racing friends, he's off the yard altogether.
Click to expand...
Gordon Elliot just trained a 14 year old to win easily, he’s a brilliant trainer despite dodgy photos emerging. They have also confirmed that Denise Foster is going to be the licence holder but that Gordon will be there assisting. So basically everything will carry on as before but his name won’t appear next to the runners for 6 months.
 
bonny said:
Gordon Elliot just trained a 14 year old to win easily, he’s a brilliant trainer despite dodgy photos emerging. They have also confirmed that Denise Foster is going to be the licence holder but that Gordon will be there assisting. So basically everything will carry on as before but his name won’t appear next to the runners for 6 months.
Click to expand...

Well that's a complete waste of time then. Why is he not banned from racing establishments like normal procedure?
 
bonny said:
Despite what you think, the yard have put out a statement saying the contrary!
Click to expand...

The quote I saw said he would assist. That could mean be at the end of a phone? I assumed you knew he was staying or the yard may have released another statement I haven’t seen.
 
Clodagh said:
Well that's a complete waste of time then. Why is he not banned from racing establishments like normal procedure?
Click to expand...

Well maybe the powers that be think that a 6 month ban from being the named license holder, plus the fine, plus staying away from racecourses, plus the lynching by social media, is enough. He wasn't being done for cruelty/doping/laying bets, and yon ex who (allegedly) released the photo seems to have gotten off lightly, given that's done just as much to bring racing into disrepute as he has.
 
Clodagh said:
Well that's a complete waste of time then. Why is he not banned from racing establishments like normal procedure?
Click to expand...

The statement that was issued about Denise Foster taking over the licence, with GE on hand to assist, sounds like he's sticking two fingers up at the IHRB.
 
scotlass said:
The statement that was issued about Denise Foster taking over the licence, with GE on hand to assist, sounds like he's sticking two fingers up at the IHRB.
Click to expand...
Why ? No one said he couldn’t assist with the training and I’m sure everyone imagined this is what would happen. Or do you really think he should move out for six months ?
 
I don't actually believe the IHRB meant to 'punish' him in the true sense of the word do you? I think this is all just a huge PR exercise to try and retrieve some of the rather iffy reputation that racing already had long before this eejit plonked himself on a dead horse to rest himself while chatting with his pal.
 
bonny said:
Why ? No one said he couldn’t assist with the training and I’m sure everyone imagined this is what would happen. Or do you really think he should move out for six months ?
Click to expand...

I don't think he should move out but I think a ban, in most people's view, would mean you can't earn any money from the activity, and for a trainer also that you can't watch the horses on the gallops, be consulted about how they are working, give advice on what they should do tomorrow, eat, where they should run etc.

A ban where you can effectively carry on the job barring accompanying the horses to the race track, is no ban worthy of the name.

So I hope the fine (and legal fees) stings pretty hard.
 
Mrs Jingle said:
I don't actually believe the IHRB meant to 'punish' him in the true sense of the word do you? I think this is all just a huge PR exercise to try and retrieve some of the rather iffy reputation that racing already had long before this eejit plonked himself on a dead horse to rest himself while chatting with his pal.
Click to expand...

It won't work, either, will it? That photo will resurface again and again until jump racing is as dead as the horse was.
.
 
ycbm said:
I don't think he should move out but I think a ban, in most people's view, would mean you can't earn any money from the activity, and for a trainer also that you can't watch the horses on the gallops, be consulted about how they are working, give advice on what they should do tomorrow, eat, where they should run etc.

A ban where you can effectively carry on the job barring accompanying the horses to the race track, is no ban worthy of the name.

So I hope the fine (and legal fees) stings pretty hard.
Click to expand...

Exactly! If he had to be out the way completely, it would mean the training and analysis would be down to whoever covered him while he's banned. I know he could write training schedules etc down for them but it would be a lot more distanced than him being there day to day, almost as normal...
 
Mrs Jingle said:
I don't actually believe the IHRB meant to 'punish' him in the true sense of the word do you? I think this is all just a huge PR exercise to try and retrieve some of the rather iffy reputation that racing already had long before this eejit plonked himself on a dead horse to rest himself while chatting with his pal.
Click to expand...

The 15k fee is small change. The statement saying he is assisting simply means he is carrying on as normal with just a different name on the licence. The general public will see it for what it is, that being the the racing regulator is a farce and have brushed the outcry under the carpet. Luke Harvey summed up what needs to happen very well. Racing has to be transparent and open to scrutiny and inspection.

Today 2 dead horses, if Cheltenham and Aintree produce a bucket full of dead horses, racing will plummet even further into being an unacceptable spectacle for many.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top