- This topic has 8 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 9 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
The BHA report from Tuesday at York shows:
The Stewards considered the apparent improvement in form of the winner, BARNEY McGREW(IRE), ridden by Phillip Makin and trained by M Dods, compared with its previous run at Goodwood on 1 August, where it finished unplaced beaten approximately fifteen and a half lengths. Having received a report that the trainer was unable to offer any explanation and in the absence of any other relevant information, they decided not to hold an enquiry. The Stewards ordered BARNEY McGREW(IRE) to be routine tested.
What makes this story odd is that Micheal Dods, interviewed at Hamilton on the evening of the Goodwood race, said that the horse failed ‘because the going was all wrong’. I not sure anyone here has an answer but I’m curious to know why this explanation seems to have disappeared in the intervening period?
Rob
What the trainer tells the public and what he tells the authorities were probably two different things Rob. If there was no official explanation given to the stewards at Goodwood then it won’t be recorded, whatever he’s said at Hamilton.
The suggestion in the enquiry is that somehow Barney McGrew wasn’t off in the Stewards Cup which seems rather bizarre. I know for a fact that he was the subject of a hefty bet from his owner to win that race. Perhaps Mr Tinkler could provide the stewards with proof of his wager?
rory
I haven’t read any suggestion that Barney McGrew was ‘not off’, nor did I suggest that in my post.
It just seemed rather odd to me that Dods should publicly put forward a perfectly logically explanation for the horse’s failure at Goodwood, only to appear stumped for a reason when called into an enquiry.
I was more musing on the matter than pointing any accusing finger.
Rob
rory
I haven’t read any suggestion that Barney McGrew was ‘not off’, nor did I suggest that in my post.
It just seemed rather odd to me that Dods should publicly put forward a perfectly logically explanation for the horse’s failure at Goodwood, only to appear stumped for a reason when called into an enquiry.
I was more musing on the matter than pointing any accusing finger.
Rob
Sorry Rob ~ I didn’t read any accusation in your post; indeed, his run at Goodwood in the mist is easily forgiven. I tend to agree with you in the main and am sure we’ve had this issue before.
I wonder just how much note or follow up is undertaken when the explanations are given.
I recall a case earlier this year, and I can’t remember the horses name off the top of my head, all I recall is it was an ex-Irish runner who was sent off favourite and came home nowhere.
The trainers explanation was the horse did not act left handed (which begs the question why the horse was entered at a left-handed course) .
However if you look back at his early Irish form he had a win and two placed efforts going left handed – that looks like acting left handed to me..
Considering Barney McGrew was only just pipped by Knot In Wood at York on his penultimate start (I was on at about 65
) off a 3 lb lower mark it is hard to make a case for an considerable improvement by the horse. Ordering a routine dope test is a waste of time and money. The explanation should either have been asked for by the Goodwood Stewards about the poor performance, or by the York Stewards on his penultimate start, when there WAS improvement!
Edit:I don’t know what I’m on about
Moi aussi.
Actually, the performance at Goodwood was an improvement also, as the horse only got beat 15.5 lengths, whilst the previous year he was beaten 19 lengths in the Stewards’ Cup.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.