- This topic has 20 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 3 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
http://www.sportinglife.com/racing/news … heat-judge
I suppose if you make quick decisions as Dave did then one day you are going to make a big howler and pay the price.
Disgusting decision.
I really do feel sorry for Dave Smith and this new era of hard policy set by the BHA needs questioning in its own right.
Lets hope Dave can get back into racing commentary sometime in the near future, he was a great servant and consistant one at that.
Sorry for the outcome.
I suppose he was always one for calling them a bit sharpish, but this is a bit stiff.
Anyone remember ‘Calamity’ Jane Stickels who called two winners wrong and made a number of other errors before the HRA’s patience wore thin:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/horseracing/2337324/Calamity-Jane-loses-her-job.html
Mike
I don’t think it is too harsh at all.
It is not the first time he has called the wrong result and he has been an accident waiting to happen – time and time again calling "short-head", even "nose" finishes without calling for a photo finish.
October 17th 2011 he incorrectly called Vimerio a short-head winner without calling a photograph – on that occasion he did quickly correct it – but he didn’t seem to learn his lesson and still continued to call close decisions without reverting to the camera.
My only surprise is he has not made a major cock-up sooner.
It’s been a standing joke for some time that if Dave Smith ever called a photograph then we must be in dead-heat territory, although ironically there was a meeting earlier this year where he poured over a photograph for a good five minutes before actually calling a result – so there were times where he could do it by the book.
It’s all well and good being cavalier and wanting to call a quick result but when so much is at stake I would much rather the judge spend five minutes getting it right than one going with his gut instinct, even if his gut instinct, may well be correct 90 odd percent of the time.
I think his response, that he believes he has done nothing wrong in this instance, amply underlines the widely held belief within the sport that he has a problem with his ego.
I wonder why he always wanted to be fastest on the draw when there was nobody shooting at him?
He had known form over this behavior, didn’t he? Why were they not rattling his cage long ago. Once again all roads lead back to the BHA.
I think his response, that he believes he has done nothing wrong in this instance
Yes, I did see that part of his response and was absolutely bemused by it.
Mike
Had made mistakes before so one blunder too many, not sure how he could have seriously studied the photo properly and made the decision in the time he took.
I side with the comments praising the BHA for dismissing Dave Smith. Correct me if I am wrong, but the main part of the judge’s job does not seem particularly difficult. The judge has to look closely at the photo, then name the winner and placed horses.
I suppose some software is required for the results where the winning distance is a dead heat or matter of pixels, but I imagine even that could be done by someone with very little training.
For Dave Smith to make one mistake in this job is careless. Several is oafish.
He had known form over this behavior, didn’t he? Why were they not rattling his cage long ago. Once again all roads lead back to the BHA.
As with seemingly all such cases, it is probable that if there had been little publicity from Kempton then DS would have gone on doing things much as he had in the past – it would have been glossed over – at worst, lessons learned – extra training blah blah – and on to the next race.
He was more likely sacked for the cardinal UK corporate sin of being found out publically, plus complaints from BHA paymasters within corporate bookmaking who had extra pay-outs to make once it became public. So BHA’s "tough" action is really a weak action, in that they only do anything when forced into it – no aiming to do things the right way all of the time ie with integrity.
He was more likely sacked for the cardinal UK corporate sin of being found out publically, plus complaints from BHA paymasters within corporate bookmaking who had extra pay-outs to make once it became public. So BHA’s "tough" action is really a weak action, in that they only do anything when forced into it – no aiming to do things the right way all of the time ie with integrity.
Interesting,
So are you indicating that the media and bookmaking industry has greater power than the actual governing body over the sport?
This particular case was amended because:
a) It was a short-priced enough jolly for the number of disgruntled to reach a critical mass.
b) This became too embarrassing to ignore for a constantly harangued BHA (though not for the press, who chose the head in the sand routine rather than examining pretty irrefutable evidence).I’d be surprised if this isn’t the tip of a rather large iceberg and that many of his other puzzling calls down the years would stand up to the same sort of scrutiny.
He had known form over this behavior, didn’t he? Why were they not rattling his cage long ago. Once again all roads lead back to the BHA.
How do you know the BHA have not been, as you quaintly put it, "rattling his cage" – or are you just making presumptions?
I side with the comments praising the BHA for dismissing Dave Smith. Correct me if I am wrong, but the main part of the judge’s job does not seem particularly difficult. The judge has to look closely at the photo, then name the winner and placed horses.
I suppose some software is required for the results where the winning distance is a dead heat or matter of pixels, but I imagine even that could be done by someone with very little training.
For Dave Smith to make one mistake in this job is careless. Several is oafish.
Indeed, there’s nothing intrinsically difficult about the job: acuity of vision, a magnifying glass and in close calls the need for an imperative semi-patient double-check; the latter should be the red-lettered item 1 on the job description
Mr Smith has died by the sword he loved living by and has had a deserved comeuppance for seemingly revelling in legend-in-his-own-lunchtime notoriety
Why on earth is it clever, let alone necessary to announce a winner within a few seconds when poring over the pixels for a mere 60 or so of them would in all likelihood result in the correct call
Dave, you are a berk
Indeed, there’s nothing intrinsically difficult about the job: acuity of vision, a magnifying glass and in close calls the need for an imperative semi-patient double-check; the latter should be the red-lettered item 1 on the job description
Mr Smith has died by the sword he loved living by and has had a deserved comeuppance for seemingly revelling in legend-in-his-own-lunchtime notoriety
Why on earth is it clever, let alone necessary to announce a winner within a few seconds when poring over the pixels for a mere 60 or so of them would in all likelihood result in the correct call
Dave, you are a berk
Succinctly put Drone.If Dave Smith was a Rock Star he’d be Jim Morrison,not the greatest at his trade but one who pushed boundaries so far it caused his demise into Self destruction.
If Dave Smith was a Rock Star he’d be Jim Morrison,not the greatest at his trade but one who pushed boundaries so far it caused his demise into Self destruction.
Riders on the storm
Cancel my subscription to the resurrection
Send my credentials to the house of detention
I got some friends inside…
Indeed, there’s nothing intrinsically difficult about the job: acuity of vision, a magnifying glass and in close calls the need for an imperative semi-patient double-check; the latter should be the red-lettered item 1 on the job description
Mr Smith has died by the sword he loved living by and has had a deserved comeuppance for seemingly revelling in legend-in-his-own-lunchtime notoriety
Why on earth is it clever, let alone necessary to announce a winner within a few seconds when poring over the pixels for a mere 60 or so of them would in all likelihood result in the correct call
Dave, you are a berk
Drone,
You, like me, will undoubtedly recall days of yore when, in the event of a very close finish, the judge would call for a print.
The blackouts would appear in the photo finish booth, the red light came on, the chemicals poured and ten minutes later the white smoke would appear, even though the prints were still wet.
Now the judge has almost instant access to the RAW copy of the photograph and on his HD monitor he / she can zoom into within a pixel to decide the winner. I’ve seen the judges version of a photo finish and trust me it is very clear.
Granted their job is sometimes made difficult by the vagaries of the light, especially if the sun is low and it catches the photo finish mirror, but generally it is not rocket science – with patience.
There has been a story circulating for some time, I’m not sure how apocryphal it may be but I’ve heard it from several different sources, that Mr Smith had a thing about the exchanges – I’m not sure if he was abused by one in the past – and the reason for his quick calls is to stifle the photo-finish markets.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.