- This topic has 659 replies, 109 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 9 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Interesting story in yesterday’s online version of the Telegraph. Not sure what to make of it. I’m assuming there is enough distance between Mr Roy’s BHA duties and responsibilities and his personal financial interests in his private equity business.
Earlier this year the British Horseracing Authority bravely agreed to engage with The Racing Forum and respond to queries/questions/comments put to them by members of the Forum. We openly invited forum members to contribute questions and had a good, interesting and varied response which we forwarded to the BHA in late January.
The BHA have considered the questions over a period of time and have now sent me their responses which I’ve published in a series of threads (one for each question or set of questions from each member) in a new section of the forum I’ve set up specifically for this purpose.
I would like to say a very big thank you to the BHA for boldly participating in what is a groundbreaking move both for them and for us. I am very proud that they trusted both The Racing Forum and our members enough to agree to take part. I would also like to thank Paul Struthers, Media Relations Manager with the BHA, for keeping me up to date throughout the process and for his role in facilitating this unique exchange of information.
Paul has asked me to apologise on his behalf for the lengthy delay in the BHA responding.
Can I ask that, as is usual on the forum, responses and debate which take place on these threads remains of the usual standards we expect on TRF and that we treat the BHA and it’s officials with the respect they have accorded us.
Thank you
Cormack15Corm, can I make some suggestions for a future Q & A session.
From numerous posts on here, and other forums I visit, it seems to me that many of us are not happy with the TV coverage we get, both on terrestrial and the dedicated racing channels.
I know some would say that we are very lucky to have TWO dedicated racing channels and in lots of ways I would agree.
But if you are going to cover a sport, surely your coverage should be enhancing the sport you are showing.
I very rarely watch BBC or Channel 4 these days, but I do try and watch all the afternoon coverage on ATR and RUK, and I am sorry to say that it leaves a lot to be desired.
I would think that having one of our Q & A sessions with one, or all, of the companies that cover our sport, we might be able to make them aware what the racing viewer wants.
Colin
Hi Seabird
In what way do they leave a lot to be desired apart from being able to do without the awful adverts on ATR other than that you see all the races what more do you want ?Kent, I have stated my problems with the coverage several times on here.
I don’t think they need repeating again.
If you really want to know what problems I have with the coverage, pm me.
Colin
Hi Seabird
No that bothered really just intrigued to know what else is wanted on a racing channel other than pictures of the racing with a decent in running commentary ie basically what you get when you go to the races what you don’t want is to have to listen to buffoons like Mc Cririck ranting onA very short answer……which I hope won’t be too boring.
Coverage of the start to of races and some shots of the horses before the races, would be nice.
And………………….get rid of the bluffers.
Colin
I watch ATR and RUK most days.
I do not have any problem with RUK.
They attempt to debate races that they are about to show.
There is ample time to note any possible colour changes on the jockey silks. Although I do not bet ‘in running’ I like to be able to watch what horse I may have backed or laid.The obvious way is to be able to note the colours on the jockeys silks.
They normally show the betting market at least twice and mention the exchange (betfair) prices to give some sort of indication how the market is acting. Although I have betfair up and running on my PC it is still possible to miss some market movers.
Overall they have assembled a decent team of presenters keeping the NH guys such as Jonathan Neeson solely employed to give his views on NH racing and Steve Mellish and the flat experts employed the air their views on flat racing.
If I had to reduce my spending on purchases on racing I would have no hesitation in cutting out the Racing Post in order to continue my RUK subscription.
With ATR I have no problems with Sean Boyce and Jason Weaver has turned into a decent presenter.
As for some of the others such as Richard Pitman and Claude Duval, I gave up listening to their views years ago.
Richard Pitman has never seen a bad ride or a horse that might not have been trying and Claude Duval cannot see beyond the favourite when asked for his view on a race.
Personally I also do not care about the normal Monday night banter between Barry Dennis and John Mc Crirrick as to what the bookmaker may or not have won.
The main problem is of course the placing of the numerous and repetitive advertisments up to a few seconds or so before a race is due off.
This I find strange as there sometimes is not one word from the on course presenter before a race due to running advertisements up to a few seconds before a race is due to start.
With bookmakers sponsoring all or part of ATR I think that it may actually put viewers off having bets as they have no information at times from the on course presenters which goes against the general idea of sponsoring the channel.
There are hidden agenda’s of course where they never mention what may have been backed or not on the exchanges.
I would watch the B.B.C. and C4 if they were covering races also on ATR.
However if the races are on the BBC such as Aintree or Ascot I never leave RUK.Since Huntingdons meeting last Tuesday you may have noticed a starter speaker system in use at the start of National Hunt races.
As you know there has been many a farcical start in National Hunt races over the years and this has been introduced to avoid any confusion as to what is said by the starter.
Those in the stands or watching on TV previously did not know what had been said or instructed by the starter as they only had the picture.
Has everyone noticed the difference?
Hope that C4 has the bleeper button at the ready to avoid offending the genteel viewer.
I well recall some jockey yelling "Hang on Sir, my horse is having a ******* s*it" at the starter at Aintree one year in the 80’s, picked up by the BBC’s effects microphone.
Don’t quite understand the point that the OP is making. This loudspeaker system has been in use for the last couple of seasons at Cheltenham and Aintree and has now been introduced at all NH courses. It’s for the benefit of the jockeys only; not the TV viewers, or anyone else.
It’s for the benefit of the jockeys only; not the TV viewers, or anyone else.
I must be naive, when hearing the system was to be introduced on a regular basis I thought it would be used for the benefit of racegoers and television viewers as well.
After all, how many false/farcical starts have been down to lack of communication between the starter and the jockeys? few? any? who knows? I’ve not heard many complaints though from jockeys left etc that they couldn’t hear the starter as a reason.
Would have been interesting too hear what the starter said to the jockey who was vigourly trying to start his horse at Worcester a few weeks ago when the tapes went up only to be left and declared withdrawn after the race, if it happens in the future we still wont hear what’s said.
As for the foul language, only the starter has a microphone as far as I know, the BBC/C4 would be responsible for the others.This is the official press release explaining the rationale:-
The system has been introduced to enable the Starter’s instructions to be heard by all the jockeys at all times – for example in windy conditions or with big field sizes – helping ensure safe and fair starts are carried out.A different, fixed P.A system has been in place at Aintree and Cheltenham for the a number of years and the new system will be used at all other jumps courses.
Sean McDonald, Manager of starters, clerks of scales and judges for the British Horseracing Authority, said:
“The benefit of using this equipment will be felt across the sport and the new system received very positive feedback following trials in the spring.
“Even more efficient starts are better for trainers, owners and punters as well as racing generally in terms of the positive image they convey.”
Notes for Editors:
The system will be introduced at Huntingdon, the only jumps meeting scheduled on Tuesday 13th October. The introduction coincides with the conclusion of the Jump Jockeys Seminars, held the preceding day, Monday 12th October.
Cheltenham and Aintree will retain their fixed PA system while a portable system will be introduced to all other courses.
A number of kits have been purchased to allow transportation across the country, with each kit costing just over £700
The Irish Turf Club introduced a portable system at jumps starts in Ireland at the beginning of June this year.
Another BHA farce in the 2.20 at Stratford with Tancredi declared a withdrawn horse despite the rider vigoursly riding it when the tapes went up and the assistant starter furiously whipping behind it.
Since when have horses been allowed to be withdrawn retrospectively?
What if it started 20? 50? 100 lengths behind the others would it be still be declared a non runner?
The general public were also unaware of this farcical decision till well after the race despite the speaker system apparently being in action, think it would have made interesting listening.
An utter farce.It’s all well and good criticising the BHA and starting procedures. But, what is your solution to this farce Eddie?
To my mind it is a good idea.
Value Is EverythingAs I saw it Tancredi was at least 30yrds away from the rest of field (not just behind but also way to the side) when the starter let them go and had been playing up since reaching the start. It’s all there on the ATR replay.
To declare him a runner would have been a complete joke – anyway at 40/1 no harm was done – either way.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.