A QUIET post Galway Tuesday morning suddenly came to life this week with the realisation that a betting coup was a foot and orchestrated by none other than Charles Byrnes. Three horses with poor form previously were all well-backed. By the evening the ‘coup’ was landed and the higher estimates were that six figure sums had been won.

However, the whole endeavour divided opinion, with many reverting to the long held belief that this was typical of Irish racing. On days like these, you had to be in the know.

Chris Cook wrote in The Guardian: “The impression given once again is that this is a sport in which insider knowledge is essential, where incoming punters are welcomed only because their losses will provide the winnings of someone who really knows what’s going on

“The list of people aggrieved … includes anyone who backed anything else in those races last night and anyone who backed the Byrnes winners in their recent races, when they did not perform so well.”

Kevin Blake on his At The Races blog added: "While it is just as, if not more common, for gambles to be landed in British racing as it is in Irish racing, the public response to the Byrnes coup in the tone of “typical crooked Irish racing” confirms that Irish racing and particularly Irish National Hunt racing has an image problem that only the Turf Club are in a position to address.”

An outcry from bookmakers is to be expected, they are not going to welcome someone landing a well-planned one at their expense.

Many not “in the know” would have benefitted from backing the three horses once the early morning alerts broke in racing news and in the process made decent winnings from jumping in without taking part in the planning process.

In the age where technology is always at hand and of online transparency, we are not talking of a Yellow Sam or Gay Future-type secret, known only to a few.

War Anthem and Mr Smith cost the Byrnsey Boys Syndicate a bit in purchase and training fees and it may well be a while before they win again. Going up a stone was punishment for Mr Smith. There was still a risk, horses fall, get brought down.

Calls for inquiries are pretty pointless now. When there were no inquiries after poor runs, the horses seemed to be of little ability. Only in hindsight do we know those horses may not have run to the best of their ability at those times, nothing would hold up to challenge.

Any feasible excuse could be offered.

We have seen long odds horses win over the last week at Galway, some run way above their known form, and those horses were not gambled on. A horse can improve dramatically for a switch of stables. It happens regularly.

Whether it is bad for racing’s image is debatable and certainly not proven as many would have maintained this week. It’s always been part of the sport.

We’ve had racing, betting and betting coups down the ages, it’s more difficult with increased TV coverage, stewarding and online betting, to pull one off.

We might be just as well to drop the indignation and say well done, we’ll be watching for the next one.

If you have comments on whether the Roscommon gamble was good or bad - email aduff@theirishfield.ie