- This topic has 69 replies, 22 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 8 months ago by
.
- Posts
I have watched it. I believe the jink on the line is a consequence of Doyle having stopped riding. If he had ridden the horse out to the line, he would have won.
He doesn’t even sound convinced by his own story, so I have no idea why the stewards bought it.
He should count himself exceptionally fortunate to have got away with it.
A horse that wanders around like that near the finish at Windsor is a tired horse in my book. Any misdemeanour is minimal.
About four strides from the finish the horse was rather hard held than pushed out by Doyle. It’s minimum 21 days…
And if we talk about racing being popular or not, is there anything like a punter’s compensation fund when such things (jockey dropped his hands or a later disqualification) occur? I mean does the punter have any rights at all?
“Stewards:
Sophie Candy (Chief Steward)
Georgina Cartwright (Chair)
Cody Watkins (Steward)
Kelly O’Boyle (Assistant Steward)
Josie Brown Smith (Raceday Assistant)”5 females, most unknown and you’ve got to wonder what their credentials are to be making decisions like this with millions of pounds at stake. They seem to lack experience and at least 2 are ex clerks of the course but not quite sure why ex coc’s will make good stewards.
In any event this lot have proved themselves totally incompetent.
I’ve been less than impressed with Shaun Parker, BHA’s head of stewarding anytime I’ve seen him involved in an enquiry but what’s he going to do about this?Not as cut and dry as most instances like this where it’s undeniable a jockey has got it hopelessly wrong.
It looks a mix of the two to me, I believe Doyle is tightening his hands to keep the horse straight but I also think he thinks the race is won anyhow.
Whatever people think of the defence, he does have a point and it’s then up to those in charge to come to a conclusion. Maybe a smaller ban would suffice. I don’t believe this hocum about big names getting off lightly, I’ve seen big jockeys get multiple bans for riding offences.Credit to the “Daily Mirror” for being (as far as I can see) the only national title to pick up on the story:
“Even well-known commentators were shocked. Bet365’s Pat Cooney said, ‘No ban is simply the wrong decision by the Windsor stewards.’
Odds compiler James Knight commented: ‘Horse was green late on but still, I think Doyle was very easy on him close to the line and should have won the race – a lesser name gets banned for that ride every time.’
And Steve Tilley, a member of the Horse Race Bettors Forum, replied: ‘Twas ever thus . The lower you are in the jockey hierarchy the more likely you are to be punished and the bigger that punishment will be.'”
Would it really be so hard to have a central stewards room covering all the meetings at the same time? Maybe there’s a reason I don’t know about why they have to physically be there but if not they can chat to jockeys, trainers etc over video link for explanations.
As things are it just looks like jobs for the boys, or indeed girls.
I’ve seen an awful lot worse than that, can’t see what the fuss is about.
Something wrong with people who bet at odds on anyway!I've stumbled on the side of twelve misty mountains
I've walked and I crawled on six crooked highwaysDon’t think that any of us had a bet in the race and the price shouldn’t determine the length of a ban.
The case was marginal best and I’m pretty sure if James Doyle had been banned that any half decent legal counsel would have got the ban turned over on appeal. The horse jinked toward the line and it seemed Doyle thought he had enough in hand to play things safe. As it was, it was only the horse turning his head to the left right on the line that cost him the race.
Why do the jockeys even need to be in the enquiry? In what other sport do the officials come to a decision in consultation with the participants? In this case, Doyle clearly had a vested interest in portraying himself in the best possible light.
The stewards have all the evidence from multiple camera angles. They should make their own decision.
Of course, if a jockey disagrees then they should have the right to an appeal heard by an independent panel.
John Francome has always said jockeys should never be in stewards enquiries involving the result, because they will just tell lies for their own ends. Of course he is totally correct. The enquiries that have been televised have been laughable, each jockey in turn telling lies for their own benefit. Instead of asking the jockeys involved idiotic questions the BHA head of stewarding should be using his eyes and knowledge of the sport.
Then some of the jockeys get congratulated by Ed Chamberlin & co for arguing their case well. It’s just a bad joke. I suspect Roger Varian was fuming along with lots of punters who keep the show on the road.
I agree with the last two posters regarding jockeys’ role in Stewards’ Enquiries. At most they should be there to provide clarification where necessary and no more than that. Some televised enquiries have just been a contest to see who can talk the best game and that shouldn’t be what it’s about.
“… it was only the horse turning his head to the left right on the line that cost him the race.”
With all due respect, Rob, that’s a nonsensical argument.
If Doyle had ridden the horse out, he would have been a neck or half a length up and the colt turning his head right on the line would have been inconsequential.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.