- This topic has 11 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 15 years ago by
.
- Posts
I note given recent events involving Gonebeyondrecall’s lack of a run in the Paddy Power Gold Cup owing to a starter who overuled the Stewards in regards to the difference between blinkers and a visor that Zebrano won the finale last night when racing without the declared eyeshield.
Surely the horse should have been withdrawn (as happened with Gonebeyondrecall) if he didn’t have the correct equipment?
Anyone know if there was a Stewards Enquiry into this and if so what the outcome of such an enquiry was?
Martin
In case there was such enquiry, I suppose Zebrano would have been disqualified but since no such thing happened, I guess its either a screw up on behalf of the Stewards, or some fishy conductance of that race.
Don’t normally post on here (just read the informative comments from you insightful lot) but I was one of the stipendiary stewards at Kempton on Saturday:
In the case of Gonebeyondrecall:
6.1 Subject to Paragraph 5.3 and 6.2*
6.1.1 if no declaration has been made under Paragraph 3 in respect of an item listed in Paragraph 3.1, the horse must not wear the item on the way to the start or during the race, and
6.1.2if it does wear the item on the way to the start, the horse may not run and will be withdrawn by the Starter.
*these paragraphs deal with special circumstances relating to tongue-straps.
In the case of Zebrano:
5.6 Where a declaration for the horse to wear any hood, blinkers, visor, eyeshield, eyecover, cheek pieces (or any combination) has been made incorrectly,
the Trainer may substitute the incorrectly declared garment but only if
5.6.1 he pays the appropriate financial penalty, and
5.6.2 there is sufficient time to weigh the Rider in accordance with the deadline specified in Rule 22.3.Andy Haynes’ representative approached us before race 2, and Zebrano ran in race 7 so obviously there was sufficient time.
- Total Posts 17716
So a trainer can declare a horse to run with (as in this case) an eyeshield and then pay for them not to wear it? Was this communicated to the BHA, the albeit miniscule Kempton crowd or any other media outlet at the time of its application?
A trainer is allowed to
substitute
an incorrectly declared garment i.e. have the horse wear something else instead. In this case Haynes switched blinkers with eyeshields for ordinary blinkers.
As far as I know an announcement was made. (Edit) – We don’t have the tannoy piped into the weighing room complex, sorry, I’m not being vague on purpose.
Im sure Buthelezi ran one day at Newmarket with Eyeshields but there was no equipement declared pre race.
- Total Posts 17716
Whether another piece of equipment is substituted or not, Marcus, trainers are still able to pay to run their horses without the specified aid(s).
Why would mistakes not be picked up prior to the day of racing, or even upon the trainer’s arrival?
If you’re still meaning headgear types, Carvills, probably "hood".
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.
- Total Posts 17716
Isn’t it just a hood, with cupped half blinkers?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.