- This topic has 130 replies, 35 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 6 months ago by
.
- Posts
Levey got 5 days, Jac, the same as Shane Foley in July when he hit his horse twice at the start. There is no precedent in Ireland, however, in the USA in 2008 Jeremy Rose struck his mount in the head with his whip and got 6 months. That seems much more like it.
Thanks GM I bet they’ll all think twice now before striking out in anger again and agree 6 months would get the message home, but sadly it won’t happen here.
An apology wouldn’t go amiss either…Jac
Things turn out best for those who make the best of how things turn out...The issues here are that hitting a horse in it’s head like that will lead to temperament issues, it may become difficult to bridle, it might be nervous of being ridden by Russel again, horses have good memories and someone will be left sorting that out, the lad or lass caring for it.
It is different to using a whip in a race, as this is demonstrating lack of control and anger issues by the rider. The horse played up but he chose to lose his temper and punch it rather than give it a crack with the whip down the shoulder, which would have told the horse it was wrong rather than risking it being head shy.
It shows lack of professionalism by a jockey and gives potential evidence of racing being cruel and unsavoury by generally uninformed people and organisations such as Animal aid and Peta.
Chastising any animal after the event is pretty pointless no matter what form it takes. In Russell’s case the horse could just as easily associate the whack with staring at the grass after stopping at the hurdle.”Take 100 lines: I MUST NOT STARE AT GRASS!”
You condone punching a horse in the head, yet campaign against the whip.
Condone punching a horse in the head? I think you need my glasses SC. Read that quote of mine in your post there and you’ll see it says ‘completely unacceptable’ and ‘A deplorable act’
I have my own specs but condone was not the right term to use. Pretty silly to try to compare the whip with rattling a horse on the head though, with one being within the rules and one firmly against them.
Whilst not condoning one action, it is still an attempt to offer a frame of mitigation for Russell’s action. It was a comparison of desperation to me.
Thanks for the good crack. Time for me to move on. Be lucky.
This is like treading through treacle.
How can calling it ‘a deplorable act’ be viewed as offering a frame of mitigation?
My point, which I’m clearly struggling to convey, is not that I am trying to downgrade Russell’s action but illustrate what I see as the irrationality of everyone being up in arms (rightly) about events at Tramore but being happy enough to see jockeys to hit a horse multiple times with a whip (wrongly – again in my opinion).
This is like treading through treacle.
How can calling it ‘a deplorable act’ be viewed as offering a frame of mitigation?
My point, which I’m clearly struggling to convey, is not that I am trying to downgrade Russell’s action but illustrate what I see as the irrationality of everyone being up in arms (rightly) about events at Tramore but being happy enough to see jockeys to hit a horse multiple times with a whip (wrongly – again in my opinion).
Sorry Boss, I agree with Steve – on this at least.
Punching – if it was a punch – is totally different to a soft whip.Anyway, who’s “happy enough to see jockeys to hit a horse multiple times with a whip”?
The word “hit” implies severe force being used and rat-a-tat-tat use hasn’t been allowed for some time. Used correctly horse racing’s whip is safe.What is “irrational” is people wanting a soft wand of a whip to be banned, and yet quite happy to see horses running at speed straight at an immovable hard object. An object that if they don’t meet right will cause them serious harm or death.
Make no mistake, if the animal rights groups are successful in banning the whip, National Hunt racing will soon follow. Be “irrational” if it didn’t.
Value Is EverythingThis is like treading through treacle.
How can calling it ‘a deplorable act’ be viewed as offering a frame of mitigation?
My point, which I’m clearly struggling to convey, is not that I am trying to downgrade Russell’s action but illustrate what I see as the irrationality of everyone being up in arms (rightly) about events at Tramore but being happy enough to see jockeys to hit a horse multiple times with a whip (wrongly – again in my opinion).
It’s perfectly logical Corm. You are trying to to compare something that is accepted as legal and within the rules, with something that is totally illegal, and likely to bring the sport into disrepute.
In such a scenario, there is NO comparison.
If the whip were illegal, or hitting horses in the head legal, you might have a case but the two incidents are divided by the law of the land.
If that’s illogical to you, so be it.
Sometimes in life it’s not a case of struggling to get your point across. It’s simply a case that the point of view is flawed.
The punching of horses will kill the game quicker than the whip ever will.
Thanks for the good crack. Time for me to move on. Be lucky.
This from Bruce Millington on racingpost.com sums it up very well:
“As with the whip, racing people have to realise public perception matters and you must be seen to be treating horses as lovingly as we always claim they are when we defend the sport in the face of a barrage of bile after one of the Grand National runners does not make it back to its stable.
Another odd aspect to this sorry incident is that so many people refuse to pass judgement because they claim we do not have the full facts. Yes we do. The footage is clear. Russell punches the horse – the only doubt is the precise extent of the force with which his hand connected with Kings Dolly’s head.
Anyone claiming they are not sure if Russell actually connected would take a different view if someone aimed a similar blow at one of their children.
In a way Russell is unlucky. Just as he set his right arm in motion the rider of the horse that had been partially obscuring him from the camera moved aside, giving us a clear view.
But the idea that there could be another side to the story is daft. Did the horse mock Russell’s haircut seconds beforehand? Did it owe him money? No.
One organisation that has been disappointingly slow to react while everyone else has had their say is the one body that needs to get its act together – the Turf Club, which is looking into this incident at a lamentably slow tempo.
Three days after it happened, a spokesman said they would speak to Russell over the next couple of days and “hoped” to talk to Roger McGrath, who trains Kings Dolly, which is simply not good enough. This needs sorting out as soon as possible.
And Russell, such a popular, charismatic rider, should have apologised days ago and accepted whatever punishment is coming his way.
I constantly admire how jockeys control horses and how brave they are just to sit on them as they hurtle around the course at such high speeds, and I’m happy to accept that sometimes you need to be a bit tough on your mount to get them to do what they need to do.
But what happened at Tramore six days ago, and what has been said and not said since then, has amounted to a sorry episode and the sport in general, and Davy Russell in particular, needs to ensure it goes an extremely long time before it next shows off such an ugly face to the outside world.”
This from Bruce Millington on racingpost.com sums it up very well:
“As with the whip, racing people have to realise public perception matters and you must be seen to be treating horses as lovingly as we always claim they are when we defend the sport in the face of a barrage of bile after one of the Grand National runners does not make it back to its stable.
Another odd aspect to this sorry incident is that so many people refuse to pass judgement because they claim we do not have the full facts. Yes we do. The footage is clear. Russell punches the horse – the only doubt is the precise extent of the force with which his hand connected with Kings Dolly’s head.
Anyone claiming they are not sure if Russell actually connected would take a different view if someone aimed a similar blow at one of their children.
In a way Russell is unlucky. Just as he set his right arm in motion the rider of the horse that had been partially obscuring him from the camera moved aside, giving us a clear view.
But the idea that there could be another side to the story is daft. Did the horse mock Russell’s haircut seconds beforehand? Did it owe him money? No.
One organisation that has been disappointingly slow to react while everyone else has had their say is the one body that needs to get its act together – the Turf Club, which is looking into this incident at a lamentably slow tempo.
Three days after it happened, a spokesman said they would speak to Russell over the next couple of days and “hoped” to talk to Roger McGrath, who trains Kings Dolly, which is simply not good enough. This needs sorting out as soon as possible.
And Russell, such a popular, charismatic rider, should have apologised days ago and accepted whatever punishment is coming his way.
I constantly admire how jockeys control horses and how brave they are just to sit on them as they hurtle around the course at such high speeds, and I’m happy to accept that sometimes you need to be a bit tough on your mount to get them to do what they need to do.
But what happened at Tramore six days ago, and what has been said and not said since then, has amounted to a sorry episode and the sport in general, and Davy Russell in particular, needs to ensure it goes an extremely long time before it next shows off such an ugly face to the outside world.”
Thanks for posting the article GM. Just perfectly written, nothing more to say….
Received caution. An appropriate penalty for an incident which was blown out of all proportion
Yeah, great verdict for racing. Well, that’s what it deserves…..
Davy was very remorseful about hitting it and Denis Egan has absolutely no doubt he won’t do it again.
Just like the non-trying offences, once they have had a hearing for the first time, they haven’t done it again. Yes, sure….I agree totally Ex Ruby Light.
A ridiculously lenient “punishment”, which thoroughly shames racing.
Goodness only knows what message this sends out.
Part of me hopes that the national press don’t pick up on this as they will have a field day with it, and turn even more of the general public against the sport. On the other hand though it may actually be better if they do run with it, and the full glare of public scrutiny shames the authorities into dealing with such incidents more appropriately.I agree totally Ex Ruby Light.
A ridiculously lenient “punishment”, which thoroughly shames racing.
Goodness only knows what message this sends out.
Part of me hopes that the national press don’t pick up on this as they will have a field day with it, and turn even more of the general public against the sport. On the other hand though it may actually be better if they do run with it, and the full glare of public scrutiny shames the authorities into dealing with such incidents more appropriately.Only press that want to destroy a man on very little evidence, Coggy. Only those that don’t want to take any notice of a trial that had all the evidence in front of them.
As far as I am concerned those that think it was a vicious punch to the head could possibly be right, but you can not find a man guilty on “possibly”. Evidence is not enough to condemn the man. Everything that came out in the Turf Club inquirey is also perfectly possible/believable. So why not give a man the benefit of the doubt?
People on social media are too concerned about what the public might think and not enough concerned with truth, evidence and justice.Value Is Everything
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.