The home of intelligent horse racing discussion
The home of intelligent horse racing discussion

Nicholls Blunder

Home Forums Horse Racing Nicholls Blunder

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #2892
    apracing
    Participant
    • Total Posts 3104

    <br>Rather surprising that the Post has missed this story, but the Telegraph leads on an admitted adminstrative cock-up that has left Nicholls with no entries in the Ayr Gold Cup, a race he has dominated in recent seasons.

    The report says that he had 26 planned entries!

    Remarkable error at a time when entries can be made through the BHB website days or even weeks in advance of the closing date.

    This could mean that horses with a rating that normally wouldn’t get them into the big race will find it easier this year.

    AP

    #75538
    Salselon
    Member
    • Total Posts 883

    Never mind Dandy, what if you were one of the owners? :angry:

    Isn’t this the second administrative error by the Nicholls team in recent weeks? Machinist I think?

    Very unprofessional.

    #75539
    Maurice
    Participant
    • Total Posts 355

    Great news for punters, though. Trying to work out which ones had been put away for two seasons was a nightmare.

    #75540
    griff11
    Participant
    • Total Posts 116

    Without doubt an error on the part of the stable, but I would have thought somebody on the other side of the fence should have picked up on it and at least enquired on any possible entries. It’s not as though he’s an infrequent participant.

    I’m not trying to transfer or share the blame, more raising the point that all areas of racing should be working together in all aspects of the game to improve it.

    Would Cheltenham have allowed the deadlines to pass without entries from Martin Pipe, I think not.

    #75541
    Maurice
    Participant
    • Total Posts 355

    I disagree entirely, griff11. That would be blatant favouritism towards a big stable and they can’t afford to be seen to do that. That’s why it must be the sole responsbility of the trainer to ensure entries are made timeously and correctly.

    #75542
    SirHarryLewis
    Participant
    • Total Posts 1208

    Quote: from Maurice on 7:37 pm on Aug. 18, 2006[br]I disagree entirely, griff11. That would be blatant favouritism towards a big stable and they can’t afford to be seen to do that. That’s why it must be the sole responsbility of the trainer to ensure entries are made timeously and correctly.

    Ah come on…..favouritism.  Yes, officially it should remain the responsibility of a trainer but it doesnt reflect well on any such organisation that it spots such a big irregularity or suspicous administrative error and couldnt be botherd doing anything.  

    SHL

    #75543
    Maurice
    Participant
    • Total Posts 355

    Sir Harry, picture the scenario…

    You’re a small-time trainer, say ten horses, most of which are moderate. But you’ve got one 6f horse you rate about 110 and its current OR is 95, so you fancy having a bash at a big race like the Ayr Gold Cup.

    Unfortunately, you (or your secretary) cock things up and forget to enter it for the race. The you read that Dandy Nicholls got a phone call alerting him to the fact he had no entries and he manages to get 26 in just before the deadline?

    Would you be OK with that? I wouldn’t.

    #75544
    cormack15
    Keymaster
    • Total Posts 8798

    I think there may well be in ad in the Sits Vac section of the RP classifieds shortly –

    "Top trainer, specialising in sprinters, requires Racing Secretary"

    #75545
    SirHarryLewis
    Participant
    • Total Posts 1208

    Quote: from Maurice on 11:27 am on Aug. 19, 2006[br]Sir Harry, picture the scenario…

    You’re a small-time trainer, say ten horses, most of which are moderate. But you’ve got one 6f horse you rate about 110 and its current OR is 95, so you fancy having a bash at a big race like the Ayr Gold Cup.

    Unfortunately, you (or your secretary) cock things up and forget to enter it for the race. The you read that Dandy Nicholls got a phone call alerting him to the fact he had no entries and he manages to get 26 in just before the deadline?

    Would you be OK with that? I wouldn’t.<br>

    I would have no problem with that at all. Obviously its a lot harder to see if a small trainer is about to make an administrative error but just the same if that were spotted, that too should be presented.

    SHL

    #75546
    insomniac
    Participant
    • Total Posts 1453

    I agree entirely with Maurice. The authorities can’t be seen to help a larger stable when they couldn’t guarantee they could help a smaller yard in similar circumstances.<br>I seem to remember  Paul Kelleway being allowed to enter a star of his at Cheltenham after the entry deadline had passed.  I think the excuse was something along the lines that it would be bad for the sport and the racing public if one of its champions was missing merely due to an administrative oversight. But it was the wrong decision imo and set a precedent that would always cause controversy.

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.