- This topic has 6 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 18 years, 9 months ago by
.
- Posts
I had a sizeable bet on Heights of Golan in the 8.55 at Wolverhampton, and was sitting on a dead-heater when I left my computer to watch Mock The Week. I have now returned to see the result awarded to Bond Casino.
Can I ask if the decision was a fair one, or as ludicrous as the recent call at Bath (?)…..
The studio team on William Hill Radio stated that the first two home had come close but that nothing sinister appeared to happen. Obviously I haven’t seen anything of it, so any information is gratefully received.
Correct decision I thought. Given that it was a dead-heat ANY interference will have cost Bond Casino outright victory, and Heights of Golan forced him wide 1f out and continued to edge into him close home.
Unlucky, though.
I should say that I don’t think horses have to collide for there to be interference. If one of them takes evasive action, as Bond Casino did, in order that it is not collided with that surely constitutes interference.
Fair enough. I had debated between the two just before the off and decided to stick with where the bulk of the money appeared to be going.
I can’t agree though that taking evasive action constitutes interference, given that no contact is made (Ronaldo diving isn’t a foul when he clears an opponents leg by a foot-and-a-half) and both horses are similarly affected. There is also the thought that any collision could be to the detriment of the offender, just as well as the offended.
But it’s a fine line, rules wise, and can surely only ever be something which is clear-cut. There’s far too much ‘interpretation’ allowed with offences of this nature these days and it will always give rise to some iffy decisions.
Still, looks as though Hills are paying out on the dead-heat anyway so can’t complain.
Given the fate that befell Heights of Golan, anyone else of the opinion that Distinction was fortunate to keep a share of the spoils in the listed race at Ascot today. He certainly looked to be the chief culprit in causing the interference. I guess it makes a difference when the trainer is Sir Michael Stoute and not Ian Wood.
http://www.attheraces.com/WatchVideo.as … 35&vaff=16
I backed Distinction and agree she was lucky to keep the race, also shocked it was a dead heat cetainly didnt look like one
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.