Noted, but one of them has serious international credibility, he’s connected across the globe, and all he did was make a correct observation about a high profile horse, then he got coruscated for it …scorched….for no reason other than that he knew more than the “cut and paste” dude
I got the same treatment when I quite innocently referenced the same global participant about a minor unimportant matter, purely because I knew of his expertise in the field
It seems to me that a “cut and paste” expert now decides who can comment on what…despite the fact he’s done nothing ( known ) of note in the UK …and if he isn’t given number 1 status about all matters pertaining to NH racing he acts like a tantrum throwing spoilt child
I read what he writes, and it’s my view that his knowledge of tracks etc is very limited and not worth reading, usually he’s just wrong about track / race nuances etc …his knowledge of active horses is quite good though so credit where it’s due there although I suspect 99% of his knowledge is straight from the Racing Post or Sporting Life, rather than actual experience
Personally I think everyone is entitled to their opinion here, even the absolute nillers and saddle sniffers like Tommo and Sunloonchild, but from recent events involving BerriFruit and Tasman Man I’m starting to wonder if the bias is now toward the groupies, the saddle sniffing nillers who’ve done nothing of note, at the expense of those who’ve actually managed to achieve significantly at the highest level in racing, mostly in Australasia, but in some cases across the globe
If you doubt my view let’s agree that the “cut and paste” expert can present his credentials, hopefully he’s done something of note, BerriFruit can do the same, ditto Tasman Man, then let’s see who should be telling who what to do in this zoo
Let’s start with who’s done what in and around the Melbourne Cup, seeing as it’s our hemispheres highest profile race
Just my thoughts Scooby, but as usual I’m correct