- This topic has 105 replies, 46 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 7 months ago by
.
- Posts
No doubt Mr. Wilson will be suggesting that some of the local winning stables sent their staff in overnight armed with buckets of water.
My thoughts exactly TAPK
The stewards made a decision (the correct one imo), that’s racing. The decision has to have nothing to do with the connections and who they are. If it was Special Duty had carried Jaqueline Quest across the track would you be callin the stewards "soul destroyers and tossers"? I think not.
I only caught the ‘winning’ owner’s interview where he said something about issues with Channel 4. Can anyone explain what that was about as I don’t know anything about him.
Yes, I wondered that myself. "C4 tried to destroy me".
Huh??Like no other, this sport can take you on such a rollercoaster ride of emotions.
All the anticipation and excitement was ruthlessly snatched away in a couple of furlongs when it was inevitable that those drawn middle to high, many of whom fancied, were never going to get competitive and do themselves justice.
I’ll be honest. When a race full of promising fillies goes to an apparantly exposed 66/1 shot, it’s difficult to get excited. Unfashionable winners do me no favours!
Then that little apark in the back of the mind ignites and you remember that the man who trained the winner is none other than Henry Cecil. Disappointment turns to happiness.
Jacqueline Quest is led in the winners enclosure (my first though being ‘Bloody Hell, Isaac Hayes lives!!) and the camera focuses on a man in a wheelchair – could there be a fairytale story behind this outsiders success?
The man tells of the hardship he has endured and becomes emotional. Suddenly, this isn’t such a bad result, afterall. I’m beginning to warm to the winner and you celebrate the unpredictability and resulting joy this sport can bring.
The uplifting result is then, like the race, snatched away in a few seconds when the placings are reversed. Suddenly, Special Duty – a horse to really get excited about – is now the winner that all, bar those who have backed it, don’t want.
Then I remember another thing: ‘I’ve supported this horse since her Cheveley Park success, only to abandon her at the last minute.’ Oh, Bollox!!
It’s easy to let your heart rule your head in these circumstances and my initial reaction was that the reversal was harsh. Pasquier never had to stop riding and his mount was never snatched up at any stage. They both ran right to the line and the ‘winner’ lost the same amount of ground in the process.
Was the favourite intimidated? Perhaps. Did the ‘winner’ drifting cost her the race? Perhaps.
What it inevitably comes down to is this: When the margin of victory is so close, the stewards are left with no other choice. Tom Queally held the whip in his left hand (with the rail in his favour) on a course where immature 3YO fillies can wonder around under pressure and he contributed to his mount losing the race.
Good jockey. Bad decision. S*** happens. We’re all human.
Tom Queally made a mistake, but the stewards did not.
You would like to think that if the roles were reversed then the stewards would have made the same decision. Would they have thrown a favourite out in favour of a 66/1 shot? It certainly would have been a harder decision to make for them, in my opinion.
Oh, how it would have been nice to see a French horse disqualified on these shores under such controversial circumstances. We can all dream…
I think the best filly finished first past the post on the day, although I’m not convinced she can confirm her marginal superiority in the future.
The drama of horse racing, eh? Remind again why it is we continue to come back for more…
- Total Posts 17716
Well said Bosranic.
These are the highs and lows of sport.
Brilliant post Bosranic, just about sume it up perfectly for me.
Felt sorry for the connections of the filly which past the post first. I thought she was the deserving winner, just my opinion though.
Excellent post Bosramic agree totally, the rules are the rules and unfortunately the "winner" broke them, shame though.
My thoughts exactly TAPK
The stewards made a decision (the correct one imo), that’s racing. The decision has to have nothing to do with the connections and who they are. If it was Special Duty had carried Jaqueline Quest across the track would you be callin the stewards "soul destroyers and tossers"? I think not.
I disagree. If Special Duty had crossed the line first, she would’ve kept the race. Today we’ve seen the first ‘Manchester United’ moment in racing.
What really annoyed me today though was this:
Race finishes – photo finish
PAUSE
Photo finish result announced
HUGE YAWNING CHASM OF A GAP
Stewards Enquiry
They should’ve announced the enquiry & the result of the photo at the same time or shortly after. There was no need for that gap.
- Total Posts 17716
After a few hours break, I may have been a little over the top with my reaction but I stand by decision.
This was a complete disaster, I have been to the shops and people at the tills are talking about it, how bad racing is and what a shocking decision.
I agree that the interview with Martin didn’t help but who really thought that Special Duty was going to win.
Some one brought up consistancy, this is a major problem and I’ll make sure I go through the last 5 or 10 years of races at Newmarket this year pulling up individual cases of were there was more interferanc than today not punished, because I feel so strongly about the injustice served today given how loosely we’re delt with over the pond just look at Dar Re Mi, Inxile…
They mention interferance, I think the only contact made was the touching of both riders laces on their boots, Special Duty was hanging into Jaqueline’s Quest aswell with an ungamely headcarridge.
Mr Wilson wrote …This was a complete disaster
No, Mr Wilson. The oil spillage in America is a disaster. What you see as a complete disaster is just a minor hiccup in life’s day to day happenings.
Mr Wilson wrote …This was a complete disaster
No, Mr Wilson. The oil spillage in America is a disaster. What you see as a complete disaster is just a minor hiccup in life’s day to day happenings.
It was a disaster for racing. May have undone all the good work from RFC in the week.
Yes I know rules are rules but in this case, most people will look at the finish & see very little amiss.We only got to see the Ch4 coverage on 4+1 after we got home, although we’d heard of the change of result in the car on the way home. What I don’t understand is that there was no assumption on anyones part that the winner would lose the race for such a long time afterwards. I thought that, at first, Cecil’s horse veered away from the horse on the rails, whose jockey was doing quite a bit of whip waving. Then when the two horses came very close together there wasn’t much room for Tom Quealy to change his whip into his right hand, as there was only the width of a postage stamp between the two horses. It’s unfair to everyone; those who felt the elation of winning only to lose it and those who did eventually win the race being robbed of that elation. It’s certainly made me feel quite miserable.
Moe i watched the race on C4 and online with Betfair as i do all races.It was blatantly obvious during the race that the Cecil Filly would lose it in the Stewards room,the initial reaction on the machine was only 8/13 the winner would keep it and 2/1 the French filly would get it,so i wasn"t the only one who thought the inevitable had to happen "According to our rules" obviously!
Sorry Moehat but I think you might be mistaken in your reading of events.
Queally was running in a fairly straight line and had his whip in his right hand. When he saw the challenge he gave a little jink on the reigns which made a slight veer to the right even worse. Instead of persevering with his whip in the right hand he decided to increase the momentum of his horse onto the eventual winner by switching his whip to the left hand and thus causing an even more pronounced drift. He did nothing wrong insofar as he tried his utmost to win but by foul means rather than fair.Hello,
Once I viewed the head-on, noted the jockey’s wrong decision to change the whip,it appeared fairly obvious the result would be amnened.
What disturbed me was Francome’s comments. "They would never change the result, not even in France!" was one strange comment. He near enough staked his life on JQ keeping the race, assuring the viewing masses there would be no problem.
His incredible foresight also informed the viewers the position of the horses 50 yards after the line, even tho’ JQ barely gets the mile.He got that completely wrong didn’t he??
So what the hell is his role on CH4, his tips never win, he never critises jockeys and he has no idea what the rules are in respect of interference?? He couldn’t have been mnore wrong today, and when the result was amended by people who are in the know, John, and apply the rules before them, he continued to maintain he was right, and the stewards were wrong, droning on about inconsistencies!!
This guy is a lucky man to front a show about a sport he appears to know very little about!!regards,
doyley
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.