- This topic has 9 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 3 years, 6 months ago by
.
- Posts
Is there really any point racing in fog? Wincanton is a farce today and Catterick was little better earlier in the week.
I accept it is safe if the jockeys can see where they are going. But it is meant to be a spectator sport. In the race just run at Wincanton, you could barely see them crossing the finishing line.
If the crowd and the television audience cannot see, what is the point? Who is really going to have a bet? In running betting is impossible. And can the stewards really see what is going on?
I accept fog can lift but this looks set in for the afternoon. It has also caused a delay which has had a knock on effect to the other meetings. Market Rasen and Leicester both have perfect visibility but have been on split screens thanks to races no one can see on a full screen!
Anyone who says “haven’t the foggiest what’s going on” deserves to go to jail.
It’s not funny, big or clever.
I think you have to be able to see the last obstacle or furlong marker from the line and/or stands to be able to race, but as CAS says, even then it’s nit exactly a spectator sport when it’s that extreme.
I am "The Horse Racing Punter" on Facebook
https://mobile.twitter.com/Ian_Davies_
https://www.facebook.com/ThePointtoPointNHandFlatracingpunter/
It's the "Millwall FC" of Point broadcasts: "No One Likes Us - We Don't Care"Cork, it was a farce two nights ago at Wolverhampton, which is no bigger than a dog track.
If you’re talking about a sporting competition, this clearly isn’t the case, if you can’t see anything. It’s impossible to asses the form and I don’t know much about horse and jockey welfare, but if you don’t see them, you can’t get to them.
Yes, the split screen is crap too.
Racing: a sport that misses out obstacles because of low sun but says they must jump everything when you can barely see your hand in front of your face.
Pity Thommo is not there to make it a bit entertaining:
I guess unless it is a safety issue (jockeys did go out to inspect at one point and decided it was ok to continue racing) then the show must go on – can only assume that the visability was much clearer at ground level compared to the view (or lack thereof) that the cameras were broadcasting on tv.
Lets face it these days the jockeys will take every opportunity (playing the safety card) not to jump fences when its an issue with the sun, so it must have been quite obvious to them that the fences could be seen from their point of view to continue racing and not abandon the meeting.
Doesn’t help the spectators whatsoever or the commentator who had to tap dance whilst ad libing a commentary to something he couldn’t see although he was getting some sort of updates from someone somewhere out on course to say no fallers or what obstacle had been jumped in some of the races.
Maybe the course can do a discounted ticket price for a future meeting for those who went today and got nothing to see until the horses actually past the post?
Jess Stafford on RTV said some jockeys advised they could not see properly, by which they presumably meant they could not see the next obstacle. If so, they should have refused to race.
Personally I think this meeting should have been abandoned. A broad rule of thumb should be it is OK to race if you can see the last obstacle. That was not the case here.
Depends on whether that was said when the jockeys actually went out to view things and decided it was ok to continue or it was later when conditions had deteriorated further to where it was an issue – as soon as it is an issue then its a no brainer and the meeting is abandoned.
If it was the former then that is a much bigger issue as it might indicate that senior jockeys were then overruling or simply ignoring younger ones concerns……
That’s even worse than “haven’t the foggiest” – throw away the key!
I am "The Horse Racing Punter" on Facebook
https://mobile.twitter.com/Ian_Davies_
https://www.facebook.com/ThePointtoPointNHandFlatracingpunter/
It's the "Millwall FC" of Point broadcasts: "No One Likes Us - We Don't Care"For me, it’s the safety/welfare issue that makes fog a major concern. This is not so much about the ability to see an obstacle. Generally racing speed would drop right back, and there’s an ability that horse/rider will have to sense an obstacle with sufficient preparation time to be able to pop over it. Rather, the issue is that this is the only sport where participants are followed by ambulances (and by vets in cars). As most will know, driving in thick fog is often an uncanny experience – but how, pray, is someone driving alongside the track supposed to see a loose, possibly injured, horse in such conditions? How is anyone going to be able to work out where a loose horse (not exactly an unusual occurrence in NH racing) has even got to? Given the conditions that have persisted in NE England all this week, I think many stewards would be struggling to see even the finishing post let alone any further. How long is it going to take to work out that everything that left the paddock has actually returned (and then to send out search parties if it hasn’t?). Not a good look.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.