- This topic has 24 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 2 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
https://www.racingpost.com/news/britain/callum-shepherd-banned-for-18-days-for-failing-to-ride-out-finish-in-dead-heat-at-kempton-asCzt6Y90Dm8/
The report from the stewards read: “Callum Shepherd, the rider of Thorntonledale Max, which dead-heated for first, had failed to ride out to the winning post. After being interviewed and shown recordings of the incident, Shepherd was suspended for 18 days for failing to take all reasonable and permissible measures on a horse which would have finished out-right first.”
Compared to –https://www.racingpost.com/news/reports/alec-voikhansky-banned-for-28-days-after-throwing-away-victory-at-bath-a1LEk7H1pldF/
The stewards’ report said: “Alec Voikhansky, the rider of Power Of Twins, placed second, beaten by one length after he failed to ride out to the winning post. After being interviewed and shown recordings of the incident, Voikhansky was suspended for 28 days for failing to take all reasonable and permissible measures on a horse which would have finished first.”10 days difference for not “losing” totally I guess yet both “not taking all reasonable and permissible measures”.
He should have said the horse was spooked by the winning line and he was frightened of falling off. Then he wouldn’t have received any ban.
Oh come on, he hit the horse four times inside the final 150 yards. I don’t think he really eased up, the horse didn’t have more to give. It isn’t anywhere as bad as the Doyle ride.
Here is the incident:
https://x.com/RacingTV/status/1826369583697027347
Agree with ERL that the Doyle case is far worse. As I posted on the Doyle thread, I don’t see how the stewards (two of them on both panels) can deem Shepherd’s ride worse than Doyle’s.
Because in Doyle’s case the horse clearly went left then right and then back left in quick succession, CAS. When a horse does that, it is very possible for a jockey to become unbalanced… And when a jockey becomes unbalanced he/she often stops riding. Now I am not saying Doyle did become unbalanced. Just that the movements of the horse (left, right and left) makes it possible. So presumably Doyle was given the benefit of the doubt.
In Shepherd’s case the horse seems to keep straight. So unfortunately there is no possible excuse for dropping his hands.
Value Is Everything“Now I am not saying Doyle did become unbalanced.”
That’s because he didn’t, Ginger. His excuse is rubbish. His horse only started running about AFTER he stopped riding. It was his fault.
I don’t blame him for talking a good game in the enquiry but I do blame the stewards for believing such rubbish.
To take the recent cases:
Alec Voikhansky: deserved a ban. He had no excuse. I think everyone should be able to agree on that one. 28 days is the penalty under the rules. It can be debated if that is harsh but that is all the stewards could impose as the rules stand.
Callum Shepherd: I think his case was not as bad but he should have ridden to the line. I assume the reduction to 18 days is because he dead heated, otherwise it would have been 28 days.
James Doyle: there is no doubt he stopped riding. His horse also jinked on the line. If either had happened in isolation, he probably would have won. It was the combination of stopping riding and jinking that got him beaten. But he did stop riding.
Given he was perhaps unfortunate with the jink, the quirky turn at Windsor and was on a green two year old, I think the 10 day penalty mentioned by Martin Kelly would have been acceptable. I don’t see how anyone, including Doyle, could seriously argue that some form of ban was not appropriate. The overwhelming consensus across several social media sites is he was very fortunate.
Apparently he didn’t stop riding now. it’s the cameras fault it looks that way and it’s the cameras fault it’s a dead heat.
Speaking to the Racing Post, Shepherd said: “The photo-finish verdict looks questionable to me and a lot of people seem to agree, but I think any appeal has to go through the owners and David [Simcock]. If that is the case, I’ll need to discuss it with them.
He added: “Regardless of that, I feel I gave the horse absolutely every chance to win the race outright and I don’t think there was anything in my riding that detracted from that. I don’t understand how they can say I should have won outright.
Well they at least all have second jobs as politicians, or just comedians.
“That’s because he didn’t, Ginger. His excuse is rubbish. His horse only started running about AFTER he stopped riding. It was his fault”.
What you are saying is “rubbish”, CAS. The horse did not “only start running about after he stopped riding”.
It looks bad on the side on, but have you watched the head on? You can see it on the Doyle thread.
The horse had already gone slightly left and then more so to the right both while still being strongly ridden by Doyle. Then back to his left when he stopped riding just before the line.Imagine riding a horse yourself full pelt when it goes left, right, left in quick succession. Isn’t it possible you’d get unbalanced on the third change of direction?
Value Is EverythingYou are defending the indefensible, Ginger.
The overwhelming majority of the comments here, on the Betfair Forum, on twitter and on the YouTube clip are of the opinion that Doyle should have received some sort of penalty. He lost a race he should have won. You said yourself he was lucky not to get a ban.
Anyway, Timeform has now weighed into the argument. It has described the ban handed out to Shepherd as “draconian” and drew attention to Doyle going unpenalised for a similar offence.
Is “Timeform” talking rubbish?
https://www.sportinglife.com/amp/racing/news/timeform-critical-of-draconian-shepherd-ban/220009
Ed on ITV asked Adele and Jason their opinion on both instances after Ruby Walsh in my opinion gave a reasoned assessment. Neither mentioned the Doyle instance they just talked about Shepherd.
The things I want most in life are the things that I can't win.
I’d need to watch back, but I thought Adele tried to refer to it but was talked over by Jason, who definitely had no interest in discussing it.
Rd should have pressed it further, too.
Full marks to Ruby.Oisin Murphy was on an odds on favourite in the 7pm at Kempton. Finished fourth out of nine, beaten by a short head for third place.
I am not convinced he did everything in his power to finish third. If I was a placepot punter, I wouldn’t be particularly pleased.
Horse had given him everything, he was running on empty and a case of not “flogging a dead horse” for a place. Common sense but every case on its merits.
No, he could have done more to keep 3rd place. However the jockey on the third placed horse was also quite tenderly ridden inside the final 150 yds.
From a placepot punters point of view this was quite unsatisfactory. Especially, if you consider he was riding a 4yo with four consecutive 2nd places under his belt. You can be a bit more vigorous on such horse.from Cormack15
Under the rules every horse should be ridden to ‘obtain best possible placing’. That means riding them out to the line.
RIDING A HORSE IN A RACE
Subject to Rule (F)26, a Jockey must, and must be seen to:
ask their horse for timely, real and substantial efforts to achieve the best possible position; and
take all other reasonable and permissible measures throughout the Race to ensure the horse is given a full opportunity to achieve the best possible position.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.