- This topic has 76 replies, 24 voices, and was last updated 14 years ago by
.
- Posts
There is a huge difference between a law and a rule. Laws are made for people to abide by in society at large. Rules are made for a specific market, group or in this case sport. I know Cricket is governed by laws, but that is anomaly.
To compare public rebellion to professional incompetence is mildly amusing.
There is a huge difference between a law and a rule. Laws are made for people to abide by in society at large. Rules are made for a specific market, group or in this case sport. I know Cricket is governed by laws, but that is anomaly.
To compare public rebellion to professional incompetence is mildly amusing.
Law, rule, or whatever the wordplay, the point remains that if you disagree with something imposed on you strongly enough you have a moral obligation to stand up and be counted as being in opposition to it.
It’s not wordplay, there is a fundamental difference between a law and a rule. Rules in sport only impact on the participants, if a rider conscientiously objects to the rules he should not weigh out.
It’s not wordplay, there is a fundamental difference between a law and a rule. Rules in sport only impact on the participants, if a rider conscientiously objects to the rules he should not weigh out.
Precisely – Coleman knew the rules when he weighed out to compete in the race, in doing so he is de-facto accepting to ride under said rules . . . . . he then chose to disregard the rules and was punished.
Whether the rules are "right or wrong" (and that is a matter of individual perception) is immaterial – if a jockey is not prepared to accept the rules then he doesn’t ride – simple as.
Whether the rules are "right or wrong" (and that is a matter of individual perception) is immaterial – if a jockey is not prepared to accept the rules then he doesn’t ride – simple as.
Plenty of jockeys don’t accept the rules eg Moore, Fallon, Walsh, McCoy etc. I suppose jockeys like punters will be about 3 to 1 not in favour of the new rules, I see no reason why they shouldn’t take rides just because of that and they’re not.
You and others may think it’s acceptable to lie down and just accept whatever Roy, Stier & Co put on the table in front of you in the way of rules etc and just get on with it but thankfully many others aren’t.
- Total Posts 17716
Please give my apologies to Matron, what a silly fool youmust thnk I am. I’d realised that CarryonKatie was a man because he said so, but my picture of Matron in starch’d cap and pinafore was way off (I suppose!) I suppose i shd have not contributed to the forum until i knew a bit more about the "personalities" here, so I must apologies again.
BUT as a woman I do think you are being unfair to Aidan, who is a nice lad and wld’nt hurt a fly. You say "rules are rules" and we all shld keep to them, but that attitude wouldn’t have stopped the Pole Tax, wld it? Apologies again to those of you boys who love mrs T. but I do’nt!
You and others may think it’s acceptable to lie down and just accept whatever Roy, Stier & Co put on the table in front of you in the way of rules etc and just get on with it but thankfully many others aren’t.
Please do not presume to second guess my view – where have I said it is acceptable to lie down and accept the rule changes?
Indeed I actually made a suggestion as to what jockeys should do if they do not like the rules.
Not for the first time you are distorting reality to suit your own argument – as I said before you would make a good spin doctor
Please do not presume to second guess my view – where have I said it is acceptable to lie down and accept the rule changes?
Indeed I actually made a suggestion as to what jockeys should do if they do not like the rules.
Not for the first time you are distorting reality to suit your own argument – as I said before you would make a good spin doctor
Is your view a secret then?
How many jockeys have taken up your suggestion? Any advance on none?
I’ve some way to go to catch you up on spin doctoring.
Is your view a secret then?
Not at all – my views have been clear, unambiguous and consistent from the day the whip review was released.
Unlike many though I do not repeat my views ad-nauseum, so if you missed them first time then I apologise.
How many jockeys have taken up your suggestion? Any advance on none?
Richard Hughes?
Then again it could be the majority of jockeys are happy to ride within the rules and do ride within the rules – as has been demonstrated elsewhere.
I’ve some way to go to catch you up on spin doctoring.
I’ll treat that one with the contempt it deserves
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.