- This topic has 28 replies, 20 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 11 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
"paulostermeyer":3hmxfo9d wrote:
What the hell was dangerous about it?
Potential Paul
On what basis was Piggott disqualified by the French stewards 30 years ago? Dangerous riding, you could say exactly the same about that Paul.
Interfering with another rider could be classed as dangerous.So what, he "borrowed" another jockey’s whip. He (and the horse) still had to go on and win the race. I’m sure the jockey on the runner-up still had his own whip. Maybe if he had used it to better effect then the churlish objection by connections would not have been necessary. Sour grapes, if you ask me.
Gambling Only Pays When You're Winning
I backed the second horse and thought we were beat, long before I heard all the nonsense about the whip incident.
If no jockey in the race had a whip, I doubt whether the result would have been any different.
One thing I didn’t like was the lack of credit given to horse and jockey who came second. It was a very game effort by them, imo; far more creditable than all the nonsense about borrowing a whip.Hello,
1.15, Cheltenham, Chase,
Approaching the second last, HOOPY’s jockey, Mr McKeown? appeared to ask King Harald’s jockey for his whip.(he had dropped his whip earlier in the race) It again appeared that the said jockey gave him the whip. Using this assistance Hoopy was driven home up the hill pipping Alexanderthegreat.
I backed HOOPY, and was very concerned at, what I saw a proper objection to the winner. I could not believe it that the result stood!!!
How can obtaining, with or without the other jockey’s consent, an article mid race, not be breaking the rules??
Without that whip it is unlikely HOOPY would of won. His error early race, he lost his whip, so tough. But to acquire an advantage later on in the race, by disadvantaging another competitor, is surely against the spirit of the sport and the actual regulations.
OK, KH was beaten, but how on earth could his jockey ride him to his best position without his whip??I am happy, I got paid out, but a very, very weird decision by the stewards…
Disgusting aftertiming.
What the hell was dangerous about it?
Potential Paul
On what basis was Piggott disqualified by the French stewards 30 years ago? Dangerous riding, you could say exactly the same about that Paul.
Interfering with another rider could be classed as dangerous.No I would say there is a big difference. In Piggot’s case he actually snatched a whip from an opponent. In this case he asked for and was passed a whip.
However how the stewards can say what he did didn’t impact the result is beyond belief. Had he not had the whip he would not have won the race.
The trouble is there is nothing specific in the rules to deal with a situation like this.
My take is if a jockey drops his whip then tough.
I thought the reactions of Francome and Walsh are wholly wrong.
It would have been interesting to see what would have happened had he "borrowed" a whip from a fellow jockey riding for the same stable – would there have been an Inquiry under the "team tactics" rule?
I thought it was quite a good idea from Hoopy’s jockey.
King Harold was going backwards, and he got the whip fairly easily and still had to go on and win the race, which he did quite well.
- Total Posts 17716
Is there not a case, in light of this, to have whips somehow attached to a rider’s hand so that they can’t actually be dropped? You obviously then have the possibility of getting it caught during a fall, but a simple ‘quick release’ mechanism (similar to that which cuts the throttle on a speedway bike when a rider falls) would surely solve that?
A brilliant idea, but it should be only the First Stage.
Second, all riders (especially over the Aintree fences) should carry mini-parachutes, so that in the event of coming down heavily at, say, Becher’s, a quick pull of the rip chord would ensure them a safe landing.
Third Stage: inflatable lilos for horses. These could be placed under the saddle with the rug and weightcloth; and again, if a jockey suspected a heavy fall to be in the offing, the "quick release" toggle would be fingered, and hey presto! – the lilo would instantly inflate to cushion the horse’s fall.
As with the "quick release" whip, these are simple but effective remedies which should serve to improve the Health and Safety aspect of our belvoed Winter Game considerably. Come on BHB: you know it makes sense!
Myself and a friend cracked up when we noticed this on the replay at Cheltenham. Our reaction then was to applaud a piece of quck thinking- I still hold that view. To suggest that the other rider gave him the whip is naive, but until there’s a rule allowing for disqualification for this offence I don’t see how the winner could lose the race, nor should he.
Did it affact the result? Undoubtedly!Had he not borrowed the whip, then he would have been at a disadvantage – against the eventual runner-up, whose jockey already had the advantage of holding a whip. So what, pray tell, is so unfair about that ?
Did no more than equal things up, I would suggest.
Gambling Only Pays When You're Winning
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.