- This topic has 49 replies, 16 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 7 months ago by
.
- Posts
I can’t blame the stewards at Clonmel for reversing it.
Did the interference affect the result? Of course not! Stewards are incompetent,inconsistent and ignorant to the rules of racing,they do racing a disservice on the whole as in this day of equality they still love to portray the "Them and Us" attitude towards Jockeys! Yesterdays performance for the cameras was a typical example of knocking Kieran Fallon down a peg or two in front of the million TV viewers!That was pure politics,had it not been Fallon then nothing would have been done,it was all about reassuring the public that Kieran wont get away with it again!
Footballers have a similar relationship with Referees! thankfully racing fans dont retort with "The referees a W*nker","the referees a w*nker"! I think as a profession so called "Weathermen" are the worst judge of their trade,Stewards in horseracing are a close second!Record all decisions for us all to see and hear. Then we will know why, and if nobody has anything to hide…..easy…or is that a really c**p idea?
I can’t blame the stewards at Clonmel for reversing it.
Did the interference affect the result? Of course not! Stewards are incompetent,inconsistent and ignorant to the rules of racing,they do racing a disservice on the whole as in this day of equality they still love to portray the "Them and Us" attitude towards Jockeys! Yesterdays preformance for the cameras was a typical example of knocking Kieran Fallon down a peg or two in front of the million TV viewers!That was pure politics,had it not been Fallon then nothing would have been done,it was all about reassuring the public that Kieran wont get away with it again!
Footballers have a similar relationship with Referees! thankfully racing fans dont retort with "The referees a W*nker","the referees a w*nker"! I think as a profession so called "Weathermen" are the worst judge of their trade,Stewards in horseracing are a close second!90% of the time stewards do a good job TAPK, they work within the rules. They know the rules and are not any of those things you accuse them of.
At Clonmel, the result is not a foregone conclusion. As I said, had the winner lost momentum by doing what the rules say he should, avoid the collision. So the second would not have lost momentum…. The result is not certain. I’d say it is 75%/25%, but the stewards may well have seen it 50/50.
I think it is a bad idea for stewards to justify decisions too much. As it is, if they believe a jockey has not tried his utmost to avoid interference or even possibly deliberately interfered; it is impossible for them to prove it. If they voiced their reasons it would cause even more controversy / ill feeling.
It was a good decision to give Fallon a ban, did not do all he could to remain straight (imo), careless. To believe they made the wrong decision is one thing; to believe they only gave a ban because it was Fallon, suggests you are the one with attitude TAPK. Just anti-stewards.
Value Is EverythingI didn’t watch the whole race live, but I saw the head-on and there was definite interference worthy of a demotion given the margin was a head. I think we have an alarming culture in Britain and Ireland of accepting interference with the "best horse won" idea.
Well done to the Irish stewards as far as I’m concerned. Inconsistent it might be, but 100% wrong it isn’t.
"Gingertipster":114ue3yz wrote:
90% of the time stewards do a good job TAPK, they work within the rules. They know the rules and are not any of those things you accuse them of.
90% of the time stewards dont have a job Ginge and when they are called their decisions are inconsistent to say the least! Everytime there is an incident none of us can say we know what the outcome will be because the stewards give us results just like todays at Clonmel! A vote of no confidence from me!
90% of their decisions are correct TAPK.
Trouble is any decision you believe they got wrong you say they’re "inconsistent". Fallon’s decision was entirely consistent. Of course any time opinion is involved there will be a certain amount of inconsistency.I would be in favour of all video evidence, from all over the country, going to one team of stewards sitting in one place.
Value Is EverythingSurely the simple deciding factor in this should have been where the interference took place?
If stewarding is to be consistent, then surely you can’t throw a horse out for that…If it had been half way up the run in and the horses momentum had been stopped when it was looking like it was gonna go past and win then fair enough. This was before they jumped the last flight though and the horse that finished runner up simply wasn’t good enough IMO and was purely and simply out battled by a better horse.
It was a joke decision!
Why should the place the interference took place make that much difference? It happened just before the final flight, with a comparitively short run-in. With both horses going for everything at the time. A loss of momentum of say a neck there, would be just as significant as half-way up the run-in.
Value Is EverythingWhy should the place the interference took place make that much difference? It happened just before the final flight, with a comparitively short run-in. With both horses going for everything at the time. A loss of momentum of say a neck there, would be just as significant as half-way up the run-in.
So High Magic impedes Big Game hunter approaching the 1st flight and has to be snatched up costing him a length! do you think the stewards would have looked into that! No,but in your argument it would have cost Big Game Hunter the race!
I didn’t watch the whole race live, but I saw the head-on and there was definite interference worthy of a demotion given the margin was a head. I think we have an alarming culture in Britain and Ireland of accepting interference with the "best horse won" idea.
Well done to the Irish stewards as far as I’m concerned. Inconsistent it might be, but 100% wrong it isn’t.
You are forgetting that the second had the entire length of the run in to peg back that head. The promoted winner simply wasn’t good enough to get his head in front on the day. Any marginal interference before the last effected the result not one jot.
Over here, the race would not have even warranted a stewards enquiry.
You are forgetting that the second had the entire length of the run in to peg back that head. The promoted winner simply wasn’t good enough to get his head in front on the day. Any marginal interference before the last effected the result not one jot.
Over here, the race would not have even warranted a stewards enquiry.
So the horse lost a head, (caused by the winner) but because he had such and such time to get back that distance the horse wasn’t good enough? That is the logic that allowed SSB to keep the July Cup – also wrong imo.
The margin was minimal. I could say the other horse wasn’t good enough to pull out more, win by 1/2 length, and put it beyond doubt?
Why should the place the interference took place make that much difference? It happened just before the final flight, with a comparitively short run-in. With both horses going for everything at the time. A loss of momentum of say a neck there, would be just as significant as half-way up the run-in.
So High Magic impedes Big Game hunter approaching the 1st flight and has to be snatched up costing him a length! do you think the stewards would have looked into that! No,but in your argument it would have cost Big Game Hunter the race!
I meant in this case TAPK. ie. Just before the last compared to on the run-in. Interferance took place when both were going for everything. It’s not as if they were lobbing along going to the first.
Value Is EverythingGingertipser wrote " Fallon’s decision was entirely consistent." My question is consistent with what? A week ago Frankie almost brought down Fallon but the stewards after an enquiry found no blame on Frankie.I just think it is who you know that decides these incidents.But that is just my opinion.Somebody once said Not only does justice have to be done it must also be seen to be done.
- Total Posts 17716
The only thing I find more shocking about their decision is the fact that a few people on here feel they made the right one!!!!
I know its a game of opinions but surely this is the single worst decision in modern day racing…. Just so clear cut
I watched Big Game Hunter and all I can add is if it was a 5 furlong sprint the decision might have been correct but after 2 miles horses sometimes lean on each other.However the jockey (Madden)did all he could to straighten up and went on to win convincingly. By the way I believe NH rules of engagement should be more lax than flat races because horse take different attitudes to jumping fences and that must be allowed for.I hope the bookies paid first past the post.
Two possible possibilities here, incompetance or corruption.
Gingertipster, all that about the jockey changing his whip hand, didn’t do enough etc is irrelevant, whether he did all he could or as little as possible to avoid interference doesn’t matter, all that matters was the result affected.
You put it at 75/25 but could understand the stewards going 50/50, even if that was the case the result should have stood because the first past the post has to have any benefit of doubt. All 50/50 decisions have to stay with the first past the post, it’s in the rules.
Maybe it’s just a case of some of stewards having backed the promoted horse.
Footballers have a similar relationship with Referees! thankfully racing fans dont retort with "The referees a W*nker","the referees a w*nker"! I think as a profession so called "Weathermen" are the worst judge of their trade,Stewards in horseracing are a close second!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.