- This topic has 34 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 6 months ago by
.
- Posts
Am I correct that an amateur does not receive a riding fee or a percentage of the winnings.
If so it seems unfair that a professional can loose both & no financial loss for an amateur and may possibly receive a back hander from the owner.
Also a ban does not hurt amateur riders as much due to their infrequent race riding.
Am I correct that an amateur’s percentage then goes to the owner?
If this is the case Paul McMahon’s riding percentage goes to himself as the owner.BHA whip review doc shows that amateurs, flat and jumps are main ‘offenders’ of UK based jockeys.
Surprisingly (to me anyway)there are almost as many amateurs as pros holding licences
Paul McMahon is ‘finished with racing’ according to this article from irishracing.com :
http://www.irishracing.com/v5newsitem?prt=L&prid=56967
I haven’t seen the race in question but from what I hear the ban was very harsh
Paul McMahon is ‘finished with racing’ according to this article from irishracing.com :
http://www.irishracing.com/v5newsitem?prt=L&prid=56967
I haven’t seen the race in question but from what I hear the ban was very harsh
Absolutely farcical. Anyone who found that ride offensive shouldn’t bother with racing.
McMahon had a complete disregard for the rules.
17 times is far too much.
Over double what is allowed.Am glad he doesn’t want to ride again.
21 days is not enough!
Value Is Everything17 times would be far too much in my opinion too, but I would ask you to look at the ride again (free replays of RUK races on the Sporting Life site) before taking such a judgmental position. I can’t for the life of me see how the stewards counted 17 strikes.
17 times would be far too much in my opinion too, but I would ask you to look at the ride again (free replays of RUK races on the Sporting Life site) before taking such a judgmental position. I can’t for the life of me see how the stewards counted 17 strikes.
They weren’t the conventional whip strokes Monkey, a lot were down the shoulder, granted. But it’s still too much and BHA have cameras from all sorts of angles. On RUK coverage the whip was hidden a lot of the time.
Value Is EverythingMcMahon had a complete disregard for the rules.
17 times is far too much.
Over double what is allowed.Am glad he doesn’t want to ride again.
21 days is not enough!
If 21 days is not enough in your opinion what do you think he should have got?
I presume you also think the 14 day ban on Jodie Mogford for not trying was also insufficient.
If 21 days is not enough in your opinion what do you think he should have got?
I presume you also think the 14 day ban on Jodie Mogford for not trying was also insufficient.
All depends on what the stewards saw with their many cameras Bluechariot. McMahon deserves at least a month off. Perhaps as much as double that if stewards believed it was (as far as the whip is concerned) a "win at all costs" ride. Any such ride must be severely punished otherwise the rules won’t work. How many rides will McMahon lose in those 21 days? Not many. Question is: Was having a winner at Cheltenham worth the owner rider’s ban? You could argue it was.
14 days for Mogford is even worse. In my opinion an offence like Modford should have got at least six weeks. Again, depending on how stewards / BHA see an "insufficient effort"; they should (imo) consider withdrawing a jockey’s licence. Not suggesting in this case Modford should have got the full treatment. Those who don’t try hard enough need to have the most severe punishment of all offences.
Value Is EverythingThose who don’t try hard enough need to have the most severe punishment of all offences.
Since the new whip rules came in how many jockeys have the stewards had in for "not trying hard enough"?
A handful?
Significantly less than they’ve had in for breaking the new whip rules despite those rules encouraging not trying hard.
William Buick & others saying they would sooner settle for second than come even close to breaking the whip rules.
Ruby Walsh & others say some of the racing has resembled schooling in public but the authorities have had so few in for not trying hard enough.
Does the lack of action by the stewards send out the right signals and is it an encouragement for corrupt practise?He has effectively got the ban because of the way he applied "hits" down the shoulder ( two hands not on reins). AP’s view on this rule is here http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/horser … anges.html
2 Slapping horses down the shoulder
I don’t really hit horses down the shoulder with my hand off the rein so allowing this would not be for my benefit but I do not think hitting a horse down the shoulder, with either the hand on or off the rein, should count in the total number of ‘hits.’
It is harmless. To put this in context if where you were hitting a horse on its neck there was a wasp and it caught the full force of the slap you would annoy it but you would not put it in mortal danger. It’s the noise of the slap that keeps a horse concentrated and I believe it should be allowed for safety sake especially when it comes to keeping up a tired horse’s momentum going to a fence towards the end of a race. If horses start refusing or lose all momentum going into an obstacle there are consequences for it as well as those horses and jockeys following it.
If you look at Mcmahons ride – and dont comment on it if you havent – it is hard to see any welfare issues or for that matter perceived welfare issues arising from it. To a very significant extent it illustrates how detached rules and associated penalties have become from the purpose of protecting the racehorse.
- Total Posts 17716
If you look at Mcmahons ride – and dont comment on it if you havent – it is hard to see any welfare issues or for that matter perceived welfare issues arising from it. To a very significant extent it illustrates how detached rules and associated penalties have become from the purpose of protecting the racehorse.
Seanryan
, I am impressed by the quality and thoughtfulness of your posts, not least on this particular ride, which does show how far these rules have become divorced from genuine welfare issues as well as the realities of race riding. Anyone who feels this was a "cruel" or incompetent ride should watch it again, with AP’s (and your) comments in mind.
Doubtless you’ll be subjected to intellectual objections from the usual sources; they will say that "rules are rules", without understanding that as this rule stands it blurs other (much more fundamental) rules about trying to obtain the best possible position.
You’re not alone, though. Many of us will welcome the clarity and sense of your contributions here – thank you, and please keep up the good work. Only by patiently explaining and re-educating can we hope to make people understand the facts of the matter and "change the culture" of the appeasers.
Did he hit the horse earlier in the race?
Counting those down the shoulder I could only count 8 – possibly 9 if he hit it close to the line with his left hand.
Did he hit the horse earlier in the race?
Counting those down the shoulder I could only count 8 – possibly 9 if he hit it close to the line with his left hand.
I counted 9 which were definate hits Martin, but with poor picture quality (on sportinglife.com / computer) I could see other possible hits and that’s without all the time the whip was out of view from the one camera angle we have on RUK coverage.
I don’t think we can judge the race with such poor coverage, when stewards have far more cameras and better picture quality. Even with our stewards I’d rather take their word for it. As far as I’ve heard, McMahon hasn’t come out and denied the number of strokes.
Value Is EverythingIf you look at Mcmahons ride – and dont comment on it if you havent – it is hard to see any welfare issues or for that matter
perceived welfare issues
arising from it. To a very significant extent it illustrates how detached rules and associated penalties have become from the purpose of protecting the racehorse.
Sean,
Of course there are "percieved welfare issues" if the stewards see a kockey hit his horse 17 times. To help stop the "actual" welfare issues, then rules must be applied. Anyone can look at rides and say it didn’t hurt the horse etc. But it is similar to laws on driving. Going 40 mph at certain points, at certain times in a 30 mph limit may not be dangerous. But to ensure it is less dangerous for all, the speed limit of 30mph must be applied everywhere.Value Is EverythingHe has effectively got the ban because of the way he applied "hits" down the shoulder ( two hands not on reins). AP’s view on this rule is here http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/horser … anges.html
2 Slapping horses down the shoulder
I don’t really hit horses down the shoulder with my hand off the rein so allowing this would not be for my benefit but I do not think hitting a horse down the shoulder, with either the hand on or off the rein, should count in the total number of ‘hits.’
It is harmless. To put this in context if where you were hitting a horse on its neck there was a wasp and it caught the full force of the slap you would annoy it but you would not put it in mortal danger. It’s the noise of the slap that keeps a horse concentrated and I believe it should be allowed for safety sake especially when it comes to keeping up a tired horse’s momentum going to a fence towards the end of a race. If horses start refusing or lose all momentum going into an obstacle there are consequences for it as well as those horses and jockeys following it.
If "slaps down the shoulder" were all allowed, then you’d just get jockeys changing from hitting in one place to another. What is the point of changing the rules if all it does is move the hit from one place to another? May be there is a possibility of jockeys being allowed one (possibly two) slap/s down the shoulder with the whip away from the reins, but no more. They are already allowed to do so provided the whip does not leave the reins. It certainly would not be "harmless" if a jockey were allowed any amount of hits down the shoulder, being a more boney area.
Value Is Everything
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.