- This topic has 12 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 10 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
If the whip rules were to be taken seriously then Cue Card should be disqualified. One jockey broke the rules whereas one jockey kept the rules. Maybe if Brennan had kept the rules then Cue Card wouldn’t have got up. But under the current system he gets rewarded for breaking the rules by winning the race by a nose. The current system is like giving a footballer a red card for a foul but not giving the a free kick to the person fouled
The idea that horse welfare is ‘silly’? This is obviously an attempt to provoke a response but we really have done the whip rules to death.
I don’t think it’s marred the race in any way at all? It was a thrilling finish, jockeys on the front two BOTH broke the whip rules and both copped a ban..no problem, serve the ban and move on…
I’ve long been a believer that if you break the rules in order to win you should be disqualified.
But that would mean Al Ferof is the winner
<p abp=”187″>I’ve long been a believer that if you break the rules in order to win you should be disqualified.
<p abp=”188″>But that would mean Al Ferof is the winner
apart from the obvious…….if they’d known they’d have been DQd they wouldn’t have broken the rules
Let me first put this question out to all, the quest of perception is often used when talking about whip but hands up anyone who’s first reaction as the two horses crossed the line wasn’t what an epic race was but those two jockeys are going to get done for excessive use of the whip?
The number of whip strokes in the rules is where the issue is – currently if you use the whip more than the permitted number of strokes (I think it is 8 for NH) it is an automatic ban. Jockeys can be overly hard (whip frequency and force) on a horse and stay within the permitted strikes and not get banned where as another can exceed the number of strikes (but at a much lesser frequency and force) but get banned.
For me the rule should be if you exceed the number quoted, the stewards should initially hold an enquiry into whether the jockey has used the whip incorrectly i.e. with undue frequency whilst not giving the horse enough time to respond and/or used it with undue force. If they find the jockey has done that in one or both of those areas then he should be banned – if they find that the jockey has not done that then no further action should be taken.
People make mention of the fact that (with everything else going on in a race) jockeys should be easily able to count the number of times they are using the whip but how happy would people be if you had two horses in a driving finish over the last only to see one of the jockeys (who is on a lazy horse that has been off the bridle for a lot longer than rival) put his whip down because he has actually been counting the number of times he has used it and has reached the limit and ends up being beaten a short head?
I’m sat here sitting on my hands for fear they take to the keyboard once again on the whip topic….
Any chance someone can just dig out the topic links because there won’t be any new arguments and it really is a pointless exercise just rehashing everything again.
Any chance someone can just dig out the topic links because there won’t be any new arguments and it really is a pointless exercise just rehashing everything again.
It’s not compulsory stilvi. There has been considerable discussion on C4, RUK and other media outlets since yesterday’s race, I’m sure they have all discussed it previously.
Maybe you should take the dog for a walk instead.The only thing that should be banned is the Whip rule itself!
It’s not even a whip (in the old sense and make) it’s a pro cushion.
The rule is a half baked,cobbled together compromise with not a shred of common sense attached to it only serving to prove that the body who introduced this rule showed only one attribute – incompetence.
Ha! Ha! Chapman ripping to bits the likes of stilvi, cormack, thewexfordman, Barton, Redvers, Stier & co on ATR at the moment over the whip issue
He is correct, this nonsense has gone on far too long. It is a farce to have a set number of “whip” strokes. Paddy Brennan had 3 of his discounted, it could have cost him the race not knowing about them during the race if he had kept to 8.
Everyone thought it was a fantastic race at the time, now what the BHA has done has left a sour taste.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.