- This topic has 8 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 8 months ago by
.
- Posts
If not why not?
It seems a frequent occurrence yet I can’t recall many, if any jockeys receiving suspensions for careless riding.
Another excellent example yesterday from Shane Gray on Weekender Offender at Haydock that arguably cost the horse the race.
Although enquiries are often called for such incidents how many times are jockeys ever punished?
Thought the rule was that all are blindfolds are to be removed prior to the stalls opening? Surely if this rule was imposed more stringently it would eliminate many of the problems of late removals. Why should the jockey regularly get off the hook when he should have removed the blindfold prior to the stalls opening?
Blindfolds are often disposed of willy nilly by jockeys once the stalls open, at times landing on other horses or jockeys, is this really acceptable? They should really tighten up on this, it’s a multi million pound industry not the sports day at the local junior school.
And that’s not even mentioning the integrity issues that can occur with such issues.
I find it a little surprised to see that jockeys are responsible for removing blindfolds in UK. It is common in US or HK to have stall handlers to help the runners in the gates. They also are responsible to remove blindfolds. Is there any particular reason not to have stall handlers to remove blindfolds?
Is there a clear signal given that the stalls are about to open or is there an F1 style random short delay once everyone is ready? Not much excuse for getting it wrong if you know when the gates are going to open, although no doubt we’d hear them all, pretty difficult to enforce if it’s random.
Having jockey or stalls handler removing them are surely both equally open to abuse if you look at it from the integrity angle.
Tracks are too mean to employ enough handlers for them to remove blindfolds and the starter does tell jockeys to remove them before opening the stalls, perhaps he should check that has occurred?
I've stumbled on the side of twelve misty mountains
I've walked and I crawled on six crooked highwaysTopically another horse cost the race by the late removal of a blindfold. Rachel Richardson on My Cherry Blossom loses several lengths and is immediately on the backfoot in a 5 furlong race at Musselburgh, only to be beaten by a fast diminishing neck.
Yet again one of the stock excuses is immediately accepted by stewards. It appears the BHA & Stewards believe that the jockey can never be at fault regards the late removal of blindfolds.
Would this sort of nonsensense be acceptable in other racing countries like Hong Kong?
In HK, it is handlers’ duty to remove blindfolds. The stewards can declare a horse as non-runner if such horse does not get a fair start.
Just 2 weeks ago, there is a horse declared as non-runner after the race (Chevalier Star).
Replay: http://racing.hkjc.com/racing/video/play.asp?type=replay-full&date=20160911&no=06&lang=eng
(A better view at the start by clicking “Patrol Replay” and Chevalier Star was at gate 11)Result and Incident Report:
http://racing.hkjc.com/racing/Info/Meeting/Results/English/Local/20160911/ST/6The Stewards considered an application lodged by Z Purton, the rider of CHEVALIER STAR to be declared a non-runner. After taking evidence from Jockey Purton, Mr J Moore, the trainer of CHEVALIER STAR, and Mr A Speechley, the Starter and after viewing the official videos, it was established that after being placed in the barriers, a blindfold was applied to CHEVALIER STAR which is customary practice as that horse has a history of barrier issues. The Stewards heard evidence that the blindfold was to be removed late in an attempt to prevent the horse from becoming fractious. The Stewards found however that as the start was effected, the blindfold was still in the process of being removed from CHEVALIER STAR and was across the eyes of that horse at the relevant time. Having regard to CHEVALIER STAR’s normal racing pattern of racing up on speed, the Stewards ruled that CHEVALIER STAR had not been afforded a fair start and accordingly that horse was declared a non-runner.
However it is rather interesting that stewards refer to the normal racing pattern of CHEVALIER STAR when declaring if he is a non-runner. Does that mean CHEVALIER STAR would be treated as a runner if he is not a frontrunner? There was no more explanation from the stewards about that.
However it is rather interesting that stewards refer to the normal racing pattern of CHEVALIER STAR when declaring if he is a non-runner. Does that mean CHEVALIER STAR would be treated as a runner if he is not a frontrunner? There was no more explanation from the stewards about that.
And what if the horse actually still won the race as nearly occurred today at Musselburgh?
Aftertiming at it’s worst from the HK stewards.The sort of a horse I would like to bet though, paid out if it manages to win but a refund if it doesn’t.
Interestingly enough a race here a few days ago a stall opened slower than the rest and stewards apparently had the racing manager of the horse Kevin Darley in about the incident. He’s supposed to have stated that the incident didn’t affect the horse has he was normally held up.
Thought it was quite bizarre, what would they have done if he’d said the exact opposite or said they were having a change of tactics?Yeats, you may refer the rule book of HKJC:
http://www.hkjc.com/english/racinginfo/rules_pdf/2016-17/r12-13.pdf
Rule 12 (19) To declare any horse which has had an unfair start to be a non-runner
provided that no horse which is declared first, second, third or fourth
place in a race shall be so declared a non-runner.In your case, the horse will remain a runner.
Yeats, you may refer the rule book of HKJC:
http://www.hkjc.com/english/racinginfo/rules_pdf/2016-17/r12-13.pdf
Rule 12 (19) To declare any horse which has had an unfair start to be a non-runner
provided that no horse which is declared first, second, third or fourth
place in a race shall be so declared a non-runner.In your case, the horse will remain a runner.
Unless they have an advantageous unfair start surely.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.