MIGHTY mouth John McCririck is best known as the unacceptable face of Channel 4 racing.
Perched on his seat in the corner of the studio, he enlivens the ''Morning Line'' every Saturday by pontificating on a variety of subjects he knows next to nothing about.
These include horseracing.
Earlier this year, he had to abandon the McCririck ''lays of the day'' - his term for a favourite which was certainly going to be beaten - when they then showed an unerring ability to spread-eagle the opposition.
It is said that top trainer Martin Pipe reckoned that the thumbs down from ''Big Mac'' was worth a stone in hand to any horse he sent out.
However, I can reveal the dreadful truth about McCririck.
Underneath his variety of ludicrous headgear, there lies not only a thoroughly nice guy but a keen mind, and perhaps the punters biggest champion in racing journalism.
Mac's mouth may be big but it is certainly not mealy. While other racing journalists have dodged or soft-peddled issues such as the Ladbroke's proposed takeover of Corals or the stitch-up in racing politics, McCririck has met them big, head on.
No-one is more keenly aware than him that the whole industry depends not on the Sheikhs, the trainers, or the jockeys but on the people who back their horses and no-one has been more prepared to speak up fearlessly for the punters' interests when others have ducked the issues. On such subjects then I say more power to the McCririck mouth.
I am Scotland's only fully paid-up member of the McCririck fan club. It is then with great sadness that it is my patriotic duty to put the boot in over his out-rageous remarks this week with regard to Scotland's World Cup chances.
To suggest on a foray north that two million to one might be a better estimate of Scotland's true odds than the 200-1 available was bad enough. To then go on to add that the 8-1 against England was ''about right'' is stretching the famed patience of the Tartan Army just too far, not to mention encouraging the suspicion that he had been over-indulging in cor-porate hospitality.
If England do win it will either be the greatest boost to faith healing in history or Peter Mandelson will have been found to have used the ''cool Britannia'' promotional budget to bribe every official in the tournament.
In contrast, while I don't think the trophy necessarily has Scotland's name on it, the 3-1 widely available against Craig's boys qualifying for the second round is a serious betting proposition in which a sober punter might take an intelligent interest.
When information starts to percolate through about Luca Cumani's current crop of three-year-olds then it is as well to keep them on the right side. Two of the most promising are out today and I can see hopes of a win double emerging from the mists of stable information.
The first and the nap is SPINDRIFT at Newmarket (4.45), who bids to go one better than his racecourse debut earlier this month. Not only has his conqueror Fa-Eq franked the form by since running second in the Irish Guineas but the others in that hot contest have been dotting up all over the place. Spindrift rates a confident nap this afternoon.
The place to be this evening is Musselburgh but there is always the chance to back tax free for the Kempton races. In the 8.20 is LEA GRANDE, the second of Cumani's three-year-olds.
With the likes of Island Story in the field she will not have things all her own way but I suspect she will prove good enough to help build up a betting bank big enough for a patriotic tilt at Scotland's chances in the World Cup.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article