- This topic has 81 replies, 21 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 2 months ago by
.
- Posts
I made this suggestion years ago:
When the winner interferes with the second and prevents it from winning – it’s the wrong result and placings reversed.When there is a dead heat both horses are paid out to half stake.
So what about?….
If a jockey eases up prematurely and is obvious he/she should’ve won – a stewards enquirey is called. If certain the horse would’ve won – they call "wrong result"… Race result settled as paying to half stake for both winner and second. If I’d backed the winner yesterday I’d have been glad to win half. If I’d backed the second I wouldn’t be happy, but satisfied with half. Prize money for connections is not altered, winner gets full amount. Jockey gets the same penalty/punishment as now.May not be a perfect solution, but might be better than it is at the moment?
Absolutely bonkers idea.
In the Probert case you would be in effect saying that the punters of the winning horse are completely liable for the ineptitude of the jockey on the runner-up. Punishing those who backed the team who acted professionally and rewarding those who backed the team who didn’t. Barmy.
Mike
Jeez there is nothing worse than doing all your homework, finding a winner, backing it and then seeing a pilot error cost you. Been there, seen it many many times. Should the jockey get punished? Of course. Should he/she be hung, drawn and quartered? Of course not. 28 days is absolutely right and I bet he won’t be making the same mistake again anytime soon.
Completely agree with all that.
Year-long bans, lifetime bans etc, what a load of nonsense. You cannot destroy a persons working life on the basis of one mistake.
Isn’t it also fair to say that there are many, many race-losing errors of judgement going on all the time by jockeys but just not right on the line?
There’s loads more races lost in such a way yet it’s only when they involve something on the winning post that everyone gets uptight.
Mike
Absolutely bonkers idea.
In the Probert case you would be in effect saying that the punters of the winning horse are completely liable for the ineptitude of the jockey on the runner-up. Punishing those who backed the team who acted professionally and rewarding those who backed the team who didn’t. Barmy.
Mike
As said Mike, if I’d backed the "winner" I’d be quite happy to get paid out half. I certainly wouldn’t see it as "punishing" me. Be glad to get anything back on a horse obviously second best. May be I am not a typical punter.
Value Is EverythingHe has been "punished" 28 days he received, it’s not sufficient.
…in your opinion!
Congratulations!
Glad you’ve realised it’s a forum
eddie
No problem, I just disagree with a lot of your opinions!
Taking up the original point though, if David Probert has two rides a day for 28 days then that’s cost him something in excess of £6,000 in riding fees (He’s had about 120 rides this year). Admittedly a chunk of that goes in expenses but it still makes a fair dent in his earnings, significant enough that you would hope an intelligent rider would learn the lesson.
Out of interest, at what level would you set the punishment?
Regards
Rob
Should have got 3 months.
Whether you like it or not Eddie, 3 months would see jockeys going to court to overturn the decision. It needs to be
seen
as a fit and proper punishment. Might get away with a bit more than 28 days, but not much more. Make 31 days and it would be seen as "a month", so sound like a harder punishment than just 3 days different.
Value Is EverythingI think 3 months is fair, aren’t jockeys much more severely punished for such offences in Australia & Hong Kong etc? Think it might help to focus their mind a bit more.
I wouldn’t worry too much about jockeys losing income, they’ll probably re-schedule their holiday to co-incide with the suspension and carry on riding when they otherwise wouldn’t. They can do this with racing all year round.
A jockey like Probert can pick up a grand in riding fees alone at a couple of micky mouse all weather meetings.
eddie
A three month plan is possible but, but as GT says the Jockeys Association would presumably go straight to court. Remember the fuss over whip bans?
Regardless of that your arguments on length of ban are rather negated by your flippant attitude to jockeys and how they spend their time. Your suggestion that ‘Probert can pick up a grand in riding fees alone at a couple of micky mouse all weather meetings’ is blown out of the water by a tally of 123 rides since the start of January.
Jockeys get approximately £110 per ride and I would imagine around half that goes in travelling expenses, valet payments, upkeep of equipment, payments to his agent and no doubt a few other expenses that don’t immediately come to mind. That’s around £110 a day for a profession that is surely not the most secure in the working world.
Would you be very chuffed if you made a mistake at work and somebody suggested you lose 3 months salary. I suggest at best you would be dis-chuffed, at worst furious and seeking a way to get it back!
Rob
I think a month ban is about right although I can appreciate the frustration and anger of those who should have been on a winner. It is a cardinal sin to throw away a race through stupidity and people have a right to expect competence no matter how lowly a race they may be gambling their money on.
I would suggest a really stiff punishment for anyone daft enough to repeat such an offence and offer up these possibilities:-
1. Six months ban
2. Three months ban and a good hoofing in the stones from everybody who had more than £50 on the horse that should have won. Total kicks not to exceed 30.
3. Automatic gelding of the jockey responsible, with said offenders "pedigree chums" sold to Ikea to restock the meatball department.Probert, you have been warned.
Thanks for the good crack. Time for me to move on. Be lucky.
It was a howler of a mistake, hands over the mouth job and all that but it was a mistake and he has been punished for it. If he were to repeat the mistake then a harsher punishment again would be justified I am sure but he isn’t the first and won’t be the last.
David Probert has been riding superbly all winter and he has a big future ahead of him and just needs to learn from it and put this behind him
Does anyone know of any other profession where suspensions are so severe (and in some peoples eyes not severe enough). A junior doctor makes a mistake, it get recored as a clinical incidence but doesn’t lose a months pay. Should the FA investigate all penalty misses and suspend a player if he hit it 2m wide – no doubt betting money has been lost here.
Yes a fine/suspension was in order, but there should be a perspective here.
The solution is simple, jockeys just ride out to the line, it’s not rocket science.
I have no sympathy at all for any jockey who eases up and gets caught, they deserve stiff penalties, anything less and it’s an open invitation to corruption.
This fooling the handicapper is a red herring, does anyone really think Phil Smith and his colleagues are thick enough to be conned by jockeys easing up?
I think 3 months is fair, aren’t jockeys much more severely punished for such offences in Australia & Hong Kong etc? Think it might help to focus their mind a bit more.
I wouldn’t worry too much about jockeys losing income, they’ll probably re-schedule their holiday to co-incide with the suspension and carry on riding when they otherwise wouldn’t. They can do this with racing all year round.
A jockey like Probert can pick up a grand in riding fees alone at a couple of micky mouse all weather meetings.
So if you made a mistake at work and were suspended for three months without pay you would just shrug your shoulders and go on holiday?
I think not!!!
People make mistakes in every walk of life, it happens, get over it.
If a jockey makes a mistake at work connections and some punters may lose some money, so what? If a surgeon makes a mistake at work somebody could die. I think a sense of perspective is needed.
Mistakes happen all the time in sports involving betting, it’s an occupational hazard of betting – if people are not prepared to accept that risk they should not bet – simple as.
I get sick to the back teeth of listening to moaning loosing punters adopting a holier than though attitude as if they never make a mistake in their lives. He who never makes a mistake does nothing in the first place.
Probert received a 28 day ban, which is wholly appropriate.
I also wonder how many of those complaining about Probert’s ride would still have been happy to collect their winnings had they backed the winner which benefited from the mistake.
So if you made a mistake at work and were suspended for three months without pay you would just shrug your shoulders and go on holiday?
I think not!!!
People make mistakes in every walk of life, it happens, get over it.
If a jockey makes a mistake at work connections and some punters may lose some money, so what? If a surgeon makes a mistake at work somebody could die. I think a sense of perspective is needed.
Mistakes happen all the time in sports involving betting, it’s an occupational hazard of betting – if people are not prepared to accept that risk they should not bet – simple as.
I get sick to the back teeth of listening to moaning loosing punters adopting a holier than though attitude as if they never make a mistake in their lives. He who never makes a mistake does nothing in the first place.
Probert received a 28 day ban, which is wholly appropriate.
I also wonder how many of those complaining about Probert’s ride would still have been happy to collect their winnings had they backed the winner which benefited from the mistake.
You seem to be under the impression that nearly everyone is motivated by money and their opinion is clouded by how much they win or lose on a particular race.
I suspect that most commentating on the race both here and elsewhere would have had no financial interest in the race and are just passing their opinion as I am.
You think 28 days is sufficient, good. I don’t, for the reasons I’ve given previously. If it’s the correct punishment to only give them 28 days why do they get much longer bans in other countries and why don’t the jockeys take the authorities to the courts there if it’s so unjust?
You think 28 days is sufficient, good. I don’t, for the reasons I’ve given previously. If it’s the correct punishment to only give them 28 days why do they get much longer bans in other countries and why don’t the jockeys take the authorities to the courts there if it’s so unjust?
What other countries do is irrelevant ….. other countries stone people for committing adultery – is that grounds to implement the same "punishment" in this country.
I note you didn’t respond to the following point that I made
"So if you made a mistake at work and were suspended for three months without pay you would just shrug your shoulders and go on holiday?"
So would you be happy if that happened to you and if not then why is it OK for it to happen to a jockey?
To the best of my knowledge they don’t stone people in Australia.
I’ve no interest in responding to your point, it’s not relevant but if you think Probert’s "error" is comparable to a mistake from someone in an "ordinary" job, why don’t you consider a 28 day ban thoroughly draconian rather than appropriate?
I think I’m quite conservative going for 3 months, they said 6 on ATR this morning.
Probert’s comment smacks of a "lack of accountability".
Here’s a novel idea – Jockey Restitution.
Allow him to ride. Why give him a 28 day "holiday". He should be held accountable for his negligence like any other occupation.
The BHA should withhold his earnings until his restitution is satisfied. The restitution should be paid in this order: 1) owner’s %, 2) trainer’s %, 3) all punters who have be aggreived by proving a wager has been placed. All claims whould be submitted to the BHA for payment.
Moving forward, the BHA should have a regulation stipulating that all jockey negligence will be resolved in this manner. This would allow punters to retain proof of wager for the claim.
Probert’s comment smacks of a "lack of accountability".
Here’s a novel idea – Jockey Restitution.
Allow him to ride. Why give him a 28 day "holiday". He should be held accountable for his negligence like any other occupation.
The BHA should withhold his earnings until his restitution is satisfied. The restitution should be paid in this order: 1) owner’s %, 2) trainer’s %, 3) all punters who have be aggreived by proving a wager has been placed. All claims whould be submitted to the BHA for payment.
Moving forward, the BHA should have a regulation stipulating that all jockey negligence will be resolved in this manner. This would allow punters to retain proof of wager for the claim.
The idea that restitution should be made to anyone is ludicrous, even more so to punters. When you place a bet you are doing it on the full package. Part of that package is that the jockey may make a cock up. You take that into account when placing your bet. If you can’t handle that then you shouldn’t bet.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.