- This topic has 71 replies, 21 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 2 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
- Total Posts 17716
Let’s just hope and pray that no more horses are killed next April.
Alas, prayer will not serve. There
will
be fatalities next year, or if not then all too soon. And then the whole circus will start again.
Meanwhile, you won’t enjoy watching the race next year, because you’ll be too frightened that "something awful" will occur. And once we stop enjoying the race, the Banning Brigade are in the home straight.
The general public, as manipulated by the media, are really irrelevant to this matter – or would be, if the appeasers within the Racing Community had had the strength and confidence to ignore the press. Ultimately, it is the appeasers who will have to shoulder the blame for the demise not of the horses, but of the race itself.
I think that NH racing is in real danger of being banned all together. Most people I speak to (most of whom are ignorant about horses & racing) think the sport should be banned & many of my colleagues (in the public sector) are horrified that I watch racing & go to race meetings. Some of these people think that all racing should be banned, incidents like Rewilding’s accident do not help here.
The BBC are in a prime position to promote the great aspects of the sport & perhaps a documentary on the very good practice within the sport in stables & on the racecourse. It seems unfortunate that this "reminder" of fatalities in the race should come hot on the heels of the Howard Johnson verdict thereby giving more grist to the antis mill.
Animal rights people do not always care about or even like animals & there are others who are ignorant in the extreme. I asked one of the students where I work what he thought would happen to all the racehorses if the sport was banned & he said that they could live out the rest of their lives in meadows. Another person who volunteers for the RSCA in a charity shop doesn’t think anyone has a right to have an animal & all pets should be banned.
This thought led to a number of animals in a children’s zoo being destroyed in my home city about 20 years ago & did the animal rights brigade think what happened to all the animals in circuses? They just don’t care.In my experience knee jerk responses rarely work, does anyone really believe these changes would have been made without the debacle (most of which was self inflicted by the authorities and course themselves) last April?
What will they do and say when the next fatalities occur?Why I wrote that the BBC are in a position to improve racing’s status is because like Eddie Case I consider they are in many ways to blame for the "knee jerk" reactions & they could at least attempt to redress this by commissioning a positive documentary about the sport.
- Total Posts 17716
Good news does not sell. The BBC these days is far too commercially self-conscious to spend money on feel-good propaganda. You can’t expect any support from the media at all if you’re really keen to save NH Racing. The idea of
"getting them on our side"
(and therefore the General Public, who believe what they’re told) is unfortunately wishful thinking – or, rather, pie in the (b)sky(b).
Take a look at the "report" on the
BBC website
, with its highlit, boxed quote (a mendacious one, by the way) from Animal Aid, and links to negative news articles, Horse Welfare and RSPCA. I see nothing here of "balanced" – or even fair – coverage.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/horse_r … 529603.stm
Help from the media? Forget it.
Trouble is that the sport does itself no favours. Every time a person hears the words ‘Seamus O’Flaherty received a 3 day ban for excessive use of the whip’ they say one of two things …
1. "NOT AGAIN???"
2. Is that all? Are they even serious about stopping this?Honestly, racing does itself no favours at all.
Red Rum will be turning over in his grave. Does anyone know which people this Grand National Review Group consists of? The one’s making the decisions? They may need to be accountable some time in the future.
All this on a day when the Waldorf Hotel has announced it will be serving champagne with traditional afternoon tea. Equally unspeakable.
Indeed, and further proof that Britain is well and truly Broken. Still, could be worse – ‘Afternoon tea will be served with a complimentary can of Fosters’
Incidentally, shouldn’t this thread be better entitled ‘Haydock-ised’? As those fearsome-but-lovely big, black drops have been replaced with perilously forgiving ‘dandy brushes’ on a Fakenham-like track
Unless I’ve missed something, the fences at Newbury remain decently robust and stiffish park fences with the track providing a good galloping test that can hardly be said to favour the speedy type
I used Newbury only to link in with the Hennessey reference, which is what the GN is basically becoming a 4m4f version of
I with Crepello and Pinza to a point , it is impossible to believe that Jumps racing in its present form will exist in 20 years time
For those who read this with rose coloured specs ….look away , as the future is not too bright
We have to wise up , the threat to Jumps racing is closer than we might think
Ricky
I with Crepello and Pinza to a point , it is impossible to believe that Jumps racing in its present form will exist in 20 years time
RickyI think you are understating it Ricky – unless racing gets its collective ar$e in gear to address all the issues facing it, not least financing, there will be NO racing as we currently know it in 10 years time, possibly even less.
There will be some top level racing for the very best horses, with the remainder being ultra low grade bookmakers fodder – horse racing BAGS.
Someone earlier described altering the National course as ‘a knee jerk reaction’
And I suppose these ‘jumps racing is doomed’ posts aren’t a knee jerk reaction then?
As if calls to have it banned are anything new. Calls to have dog racing banned have been around for a similarly long time – Animal Aid station campaigners outside every greyhound meeting every day and it makes not a scrap of difference. No-one pays any attention at all.
I’d give odds of 1/6 that when the first major revision of Becher’s took place, someone gave jumps racing twenty years to live – a revision that took place 21 years ago.
Does anyone know which people this Grand National Review Group consists of? The one’s making the decisions? They may need to be accountable some time in the future.
I would suspect it’s the same folk who presided over the fiasco last National day. Doesn’t exactly fill you with confidence does it.
I worked at Aintree in the mid 90s (marketing manager). We had an excellent relationship with the BBC who agreed to our request not to cover streakers/protesters etc (that’s why you saw nothing of the AR supporters seated protest at the first in 1993)
Aintree and the BBC need, once again, to agree on structured coverage that will show the race in its best light – OK there will be an element of ‘spin’ but that can only re-balance the appalling pictures from this year.
However, they key to these changes, without a shadow of doubt in my mind, is the growing ambivalence of the RSPCA towards the race. The RSPCA wanted changes so changes had to be made (they are pretty light in the grand scheme of things, imo).
Aintree blundered its way into this and the BHA need to take some responsibility on the PR front (I believe it was their welfare man Tim Morris who initiated the dismount and chuck water strategy).
The reality is that the National and Racing simply cannot afford to ‘lose’ the RSPCA. If it does, we’re finished.
- Total Posts 17716
An interesting and revealing post
Steeplechasing
– thank you. It was the harder line of the RSPCA on this which rang the alarm bells with me: previously they’ve seemed reasonable and fair, but it’s clear that now (maybe with changes in management and strategy) they can no longer be regarded as allies.
This is no "knee-jerk"
Scamperdale
. People have commented on the chip-chip-chipping away at NH Racing over the last two decades, and we have been warned. But now we seem powerless to make our voice heard.
I worked at Aintree in the mid 90s (marketing manager). We had an excellent relationship with the BBC who agreed to our request not to cover streakers/protesters etc (that’s why you saw nothing of the AR supporters seated protest at the first in 1993)
That is an appalling admission that Aintree and the BBC would connive to sanitise coverage and effectively censor reportage of what is happening at the course.
- Total Posts 17716
That is an appalling admission that Aintree and the BBC would connive to sanitise coverage and effectively censor reportage of what is happening at the course.
I can’t agree.
Firstly, the decision not to give protesters/exhibitionists the oxygen of publicity (which is what they are after) was and is a national broadcasting standard, not just in Racing but in all sports across the board.
Secondly, it’s not as if reporters were banned from covering the protest: indeed the BBC voice-over made it quite clear exactly why the start was delayed and what was going on. So it was reported.
A lack of pictures does not equal a news black out. There is no human rights legislation granting anyone who wants it TV publicity. And most of us would say "thank goodness for that"!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.