- This topic has 28 replies, 24 voices, and was last updated 18 years, 6 months ago by
.
- Posts
Last Saturday Racing UK’s replay section showed all races from Cheltenham in full despite the two fatalities which occurred. This attracted unfavourable comment in the following day’s Post from a viewer.
Today, ATR in their re-run of yesterday’s racing from Ascot edited the coverage of the big hurdle in which Detroit City died at the second flight. They in fact showed the race but omitted the first two hurdles.
Where do people stand on this? I support the RUK decision. I record these big meetings onto DVD and I want a proper record of the whole race. I’m always sorry when a horse is killed but this is part and parcel of racing and I don’t think it’s right for ATR to indulge in this sort of censorship even with the best of motives.
If this was taken to its logical conclusion we could never, for example, see a re-run of a Cheltenham Gold Cup finish if a horse was to fall fatally at the last.
I do distinguish here between specialist racing channels and ordinary terrestrial TV channels. I would accept the BBC or C4 declining to replay a fatal incident but racing channels are catering to a specialist audience which, in my view, knows and understands the risks involved.
There is a clear difference between showing the last fence of a Gold Cup where a horse falls fatally and showing a fall at a first or second hurdle. I think ATR did the right thing.
(btw – In the event that there was a last fence fatality in a Gold Cup then I wouldn’t be keen on reviewing that too often either, despite the importance of the race).
I am with Gus on this one, the race should be shown in its entirety. It is not the role of broadcasters to act as censors and I believe the ATR stance is wholly unprofessional.
You cannot airbrush out what has happened in a race just to pander to the sensitivities of some people.
If you are watching the recording knowing what has happened in the race you can choose not to watch it.
If you are watching the race without knowing what happened then you are effectively watching it "as live" and if something nasty happens then you see in the same way as those who saw it live.
Sanitising race highlights is disingenuous and effectively sweeping what happened under the carpet.
I’m with RUK, editing it only feeds the likes of Animal Aid because it makes it look like racing are sweeping the deaths under the carpet.
I would rather watch the race in it’s entirety but it’s not as if RUK haven’t censored similar incidents that have happened at early stages of the race. When Napoleon suffered a really horrific fatal fall at Ludlow at the third, RUK showed on the replay the events after the fall.
Had the Granit Jack fall come at the first, it would have come as no surprise to me were it edited out of the replays by RUK.
I believe ATR made the right decision and have no problem in them doing so again in the future.
To watch a horse suffering for the sake of ‘completeness’ or ‘because these things happen’ seems a bit strange to me.
What a great post Gus.
Here are two views, one from a racing person (myself) and one from my girlfriend (who isn’t a racing person).
I am in agreement with you Gus, I don’t have a problem with a race being shown in it’s entirety when we know that there is a fatality – unless of course the replay shows a real sickening injury (though where do you draw the line). I also agree that watching re-runs on dedicated racing channels will normally be watched by racing folk who understand that these things happen.
But when I posed the question to my girlfriend her reaction was a resounding no,but this is a person who doesn’t like watching the races live in case a horse falls lol – she is very squeamish.
When I put the arguement to her, ‘well what if a horse fell at the last and died in a race such as the Grand National’ – should that be shown again? She agreed that races like this will be shown over and over but suggested that out of respect, the unfortunate connections should be notified.
Mike
When I put the arguement to her, ‘well what if a horse fell at the last and died in a race such as the Grand National’ – should that be shown again? She agreed that races like this will be shown over and over but suggested that out of respect, the unfortunate connections should be notified.
Had – heaven forfend – Hedgehunter not got up after his final fence fall in the National in 2004, we would have had a real litmus test case, one feels.
gc
Jeremy Grayson. Son of immigrant. Adoptive father of two. Metadata librarian. Freelance point-to-point / horse racing writer, analyst and commentator wonk. Loves music, buses, cats, the BBC Micro, ale. Advocate of CBT, PACE and therapeutic parenting. Aspergers.
Unless the incident is horrific then replays should be shown in full on all channels. It’s no good pretending that these things do not happen and I agree with Aldanit who states that editing it only feeds the likes of Animal Aid because it makes it look like racing are sweeping the deaths under the carpet.
I find the idea that Animal Aid would view the non-censorship of these events as a responsible act of behalf of the racing authorities to show racing warts and all, as highly unlikely.
I think their spin on non-censorship would go something along the lines of: racing and the people that support and enjoy racing don’t care about these events because they are happy to watch over and over again.
I was disappointed that C4 showed the demise of Willyanwoody during their transmission last Saturday.
The race had taken place before the programme went on air and the finish to the race could still have been shown with a word from the presenter about the previous events.
C4 often show replays from different angles to spare the viewer from the devastation that took place earlier, but on this occasion chose not to.
I know that it’s all part of the game etc. but I for one would rather not see a replay of a horses death.I do distinguish here between specialist racing channels and ordinary terrestrial TV channels. I would accept the BBC or C4 declining to replay a fatal incident but racing channels are catering to a specialist audience which, in my view, knows and understands the risks involved.
Agreed, and further to your words about an audience which "knows and understands the risks" I genuinely feel that all of us who love watching and bet on NH should be exposed to it ‘red in tooth and claw’. A necessary but unsavoury reminder just what price these noble beasts sometimes pay to provide us with what is, in truth, no more than entertainment.
Sanitization, in both this specfic case and in general, is unwelcome as it serves only to mask a reality that was never meant to be a 24/7 bowl of cherries.
I think ATR did the right thing. With the Detroit City fall… it was only the 2nd hurdle. Why would anyone want to watch that again. I thought ATR did the best thing.
Though if it was a significant fence, like the last then obviously they couldn’t edit it out. But i personally wouldn’t want to see a fatality again in a race. It’s very sad to see the first time without having to see it again. And if i never seen it first time then i’d be glad the channel spared me from seeing it.
Agreed Kauto Star1. And well done ATR for a considered and sensitive decision concerning a well respected and much loved horse.
OK – a question to all of you defending the decision of ATR to impose censorship.
Where should the censorship line be drawn? Who should define where the lines are drqwn?
Injured jockeys? Injured Horses? Any horse falling? Any horse losing?
Any of the above scenarios have the potential to offend someone!!!
Do you want news bulletins to show good news only?
Such censorship angers me so much, I would go as far as to say whoever made such an editorial decision should be sacked.
Maybe if RUK or ATR are showing their racing replays, which involves a horse being killed they could either put up a caption at the start of the race, so people can choose to watch it or not? They could also only show the races in full after a certain time, say 22:00, so that people who want to record the unedited version for their records can do so, whilst before this time you can only view the censored version!
In the case of Granit Jack being killed, if I hadn’t seen the race in full, I would have thought he had made a horrendous mistake that led to his demise, where in fact he did not. I’m glad that I seen the race in full, so I had a full understanding of events, as I was unable to watch the race live.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.