Hoy and Brugman not guilty
- Thread starter HHO admin
- Start date
dieseldog
Well-Known Member
That's Lucky.
severnmiles
Well-Known Member
"Andrew Hoy said: "I have always maintained the fact that I had no involvement in this situation. I welcome the findings which support this position."
The quote above reads to me that he's not denying that there was a 'situation' but he's denying his involvement in it which suggests that there was infact a 'situation' as he puts it. Bizarre.
The quote above reads to me that he's not denying that there was a 'situation' but he's denying his involvement in it which suggests that there was infact a 'situation' as he puts it. Bizarre.
kerilli
Well-Known Member
smoke/fire etc...
Danny1234
Active Member
Hehe. So why is Andrew Hoy pictured next to the article? Why does he, yet again, have to defend himself? Hoy Brugman, not the other way round, and not going for conspiracy, just bad journalism of course.
As we all know, according to FEI rules, the person responsible is always(!) the rider. Who managed to get Hoy dragged in front of the FEI all the same? Most likely the same person who put the boots in Ms Brugmans bag, thinking it was Andrews, as he watched him fumbling about in it then informing the stewarts when Hoy picked the bag up again later. Hence the situation, i.e. not bizarre at all. Since listening to the witness-accounts in late May, Hoy knows very well who it is, naming names will certainly get me sued, so figure out yourself, IF the FEI-hearing minute ever gets published, read closely. Whatever, mission accomplished imho - smoke/fire etc. pp. rumours, bad press for public demand. It might have distracted both Hoys just enough this season? Fab. Yet, with any saga, sooner or later theres always a sequel, not in H+H of course, but watch this space me thinks.
As we all know, according to FEI rules, the person responsible is always(!) the rider. Who managed to get Hoy dragged in front of the FEI all the same? Most likely the same person who put the boots in Ms Brugmans bag, thinking it was Andrews, as he watched him fumbling about in it then informing the stewarts when Hoy picked the bag up again later. Hence the situation, i.e. not bizarre at all. Since listening to the witness-accounts in late May, Hoy knows very well who it is, naming names will certainly get me sued, so figure out yourself, IF the FEI-hearing minute ever gets published, read closely. Whatever, mission accomplished imho - smoke/fire etc. pp. rumours, bad press for public demand. It might have distracted both Hoys just enough this season? Fab. Yet, with any saga, sooner or later theres always a sequel, not in H+H of course, but watch this space me thinks.
Gingernags
Well-Known Member
oooh! scandal and intrigue!!!!
Dammit, wish you could name them and explain further, I love a good gossip!!!
Dammit, wish you could name them and explain further, I love a good gossip!!!
kerilli
Well-Known Member
gosh, Danny123, that's really got me thinking. must admit, i honestly didn't think AH or any other top rider could possibly be daft enough to take such a thing as spiked boots to an International event, let alone try and use them.
hmm, i wonder who on earth it could have been. seriously, haven't a scooby doo. if anyone has, i'd love a pm about it.
hmm, i wonder who on earth it could have been. seriously, haven't a scooby doo. if anyone has, i'd love a pm about it.
dieseldog
Well-Known Member
So is it abuse if you use them at a show but OK to use them at home? Is AH denying that the boots were his? Was this the first time that he had ever seen them?
Will the FEI be publishing the results of the hearing?
Will the FEI be publishing the results of the hearing?
weevil
Well-Known Member
I love the way his main defence seems to be "I wasn't acting as her trainer - so it was nothing to do with me"
CracklinRosie
Well-Known Member
Hhhhmmmm disturbing to say the least!
carys220
Well-Known Member
I'm confused, even after reading all 16 pages of the report. So nobody knows whether the horse had the boots taken off and put back on at any point.....
kerilli
Well-Known Member
Just finished reading the whole thing. hmmm.
i really really can't get my head around the reason for warming the horse up in overreach boots and then taking them off for the round. (very near the end, if anyone can be bothered!) makes no sense at all to me.
and as Danny123 said, the RIDER is always ultimately responsible, no matter what, (as was shown in the ridiculously mismanaged Coral Cove affair), so this just gets curiouser and curiouser.
the FEI stewards sound very at fault too, for not managing the developing situation properly and examining the boots that were on the horse, for goodness' sakes!
so do the accusers usually have it in for AH, just out of interest? is there a big prior story i know nothing about?!
i really really can't get my head around the reason for warming the horse up in overreach boots and then taking them off for the round. (very near the end, if anyone can be bothered!) makes no sense at all to me.
and as Danny123 said, the RIDER is always ultimately responsible, no matter what, (as was shown in the ridiculously mismanaged Coral Cove affair), so this just gets curiouser and curiouser.
the FEI stewards sound very at fault too, for not managing the developing situation properly and examining the boots that were on the horse, for goodness' sakes!
so do the accusers usually have it in for AH, just out of interest? is there a big prior story i know nothing about?!
carys220
Well-Known Member
I've seen lots of competitors take off their OR boots before going in the ring. For e.g. at Anglesey show it usually rains and the warm up ring is a mudbath but the arena has much better drainage so the horse has less chance of catching itself.
Puppy
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
Hmm, just read the full report of this on the FEI website and it makes very odd reading
Link HERE
[/ QUOTE ]
WOW!! That is beyond odd and interesting....
What a total mess. All that time and they've established sweet FA!!
*Surely*, in a legal investigation, (or at least as I understand it
) then you ought to establish whether the incident has actually occurred, before you start squabbling over if someone is a "responsible person" or not, or whether the stewards acted correctly/within the rules...
What a back to front, upside down mess they've made of it all...
As for allowing the witnesses to be privy to info before giving evidence - WTF???
The whole investigation has been made a mess of!! Also, anyone else notice that the focus seemed so much on Hoy rather than Brugman... How odd?
Hmmm, so much more I'd like to say, but know the laws on defamation too well
Would love to know the truth....
Hmm, just read the full report of this on the FEI website and it makes very odd reading
[/ QUOTE ]
WOW!! That is beyond odd and interesting....
*Surely*, in a legal investigation, (or at least as I understand it
What a back to front, upside down mess they've made of it all...
As for allowing the witnesses to be privy to info before giving evidence - WTF???
The whole investigation has been made a mess of!! Also, anyone else notice that the focus seemed so much on Hoy rather than Brugman... How odd?
Hmmm, so much more I'd like to say, but know the laws on defamation too well
teddybrowne
Well-Known Member
I think that had the whole thing gone down as described by the stewards, Hoy would be equally guilty, as he omitted to prevent their use.
What was Andrew doing in the warm up arena if not helping Brugman? Were their times close? Was his horse near by - in which case so would his kit bag? Generally riders don't 'fumble' in their own kit bag - their grooms do!
What I'm thinking, is that if I wanted to set Andrew up, I'd put the boots in a kit bag near Andrews groom, while Andrew was riding. I wouldn't put them in a bag while Andrew was helping someone from the ground - as they'd unlikely end up on or near his horses legs. And he would unlikely get any blame for their use.
If Andrew was on the ground, and his horse and groom were not in the vicinity, it's unlikely anyone would assume that the bag was his.
The accusation by officials was that the boots were worn by, and removed from the horse in question - by Andrew. In order for this conspiracy to work, you'd have to involve an awful lot of stewards, and risk that they wouldn't get cold feet and blurt out the truth. Not to mention the rider witnesses who saw the 'use' of unusual boots - were they in on it too?
I think the stewards handled the situation badly. But these are all but volunteers, who spend most of their time just enjoying the sport. I think they panicked, and probably didn't want to make a scene with a high profile rider, in a collecting ring, at an international 3 day. They should have looked at the boots in situ, and I'm sure all stewards will in future.
I simply think that if I was trying to fix a fellow rider up - I could think of much easier ways.
The mishandling of the situation by stewards, and further departure from protocol by officials, resulted in a complete debacle. Lucky for Brugman and Hoy, as it has let them off the hook.
The moral to this story......... keep your enemies close, and your kit bag closer!
What was Andrew doing in the warm up arena if not helping Brugman? Were their times close? Was his horse near by - in which case so would his kit bag? Generally riders don't 'fumble' in their own kit bag - their grooms do!
What I'm thinking, is that if I wanted to set Andrew up, I'd put the boots in a kit bag near Andrews groom, while Andrew was riding. I wouldn't put them in a bag while Andrew was helping someone from the ground - as they'd unlikely end up on or near his horses legs. And he would unlikely get any blame for their use.
If Andrew was on the ground, and his horse and groom were not in the vicinity, it's unlikely anyone would assume that the bag was his.
The accusation by officials was that the boots were worn by, and removed from the horse in question - by Andrew. In order for this conspiracy to work, you'd have to involve an awful lot of stewards, and risk that they wouldn't get cold feet and blurt out the truth. Not to mention the rider witnesses who saw the 'use' of unusual boots - were they in on it too?
I think the stewards handled the situation badly. But these are all but volunteers, who spend most of their time just enjoying the sport. I think they panicked, and probably didn't want to make a scene with a high profile rider, in a collecting ring, at an international 3 day. They should have looked at the boots in situ, and I'm sure all stewards will in future.
I simply think that if I was trying to fix a fellow rider up - I could think of much easier ways.
The mishandling of the situation by stewards, and further departure from protocol by officials, resulted in a complete debacle. Lucky for Brugman and Hoy, as it has let them off the hook.
The moral to this story......... keep your enemies close, and your kit bag closer!
lucretia
Well-Known Member
I have heard that a very good defence lawyer was hired and as Teddybrowne says if there hadnt been some errors in procedure by the officials things might have been different. As the offending boots were not immediately confiscated there wasnt a case without them. All the rest was hearsay and opinion, there was no proof. People can and will believe what they like but on this occasion no further measures could be taken without the FEI being dragged to proper court themselves.