- This topic has 49 replies, 21 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 11 months ago by
.
- Posts
I wrote an open letter to Jamie Stier.
In it, I made this pointThe new regulations have not worked. They are too easy to break, they do not give horsemen and women sufficient scope to ride well in all circumstances.
Four months on and the rules are still not working. They are still too easy to break by riding well rather than badly and offences for excessive frequency (despite swingeing penalties) remain up.
No amount of tinkering, discretion applying, or penalty tweaking will address the fundamental flaws in the new rules. They were based on opinion polling of people with no interest, no knowledge and no experience of the sport. They have no logical, moral, or practical foundation. It’s hardly surprising therefore that they have not worked.
They should be torn up and replaced with rules based on logic, welfare, good practice and experience. Rules that protect the horse and the sport. It will have to happen sooner or later so better to get on with it straight away. We have the best horses and the best horsemen and women in the world, why should we settle for such poor quality regulation?
What do you say to all of those comments then, Corm? You’re the only person I know who likes the current rules.
What do you say to all of those comments then, Corm? You’re the only person I know who likes the current rules.
I’m surprised cormack isn’t a jockey, he seems to think he is an expert on race riding, he said " Relied on whip to correct when he should have relied on his reins and the bit".
How does he know that?
What do you say to all of those comments then, Corm? You’re the only person I know who likes the current rules.
I’m surprised cormack isn’t a jockey, he seems to think he is an expert on race riding, he said " Relied on whip to correct when he should have relied on his reins and the bit".
How does he know that?
He doesnt, he guesses, you would struggle to control a veering horse with the reins and the bit, as far as im concerned thats what the whip is for, correction and "persuading"
Sorry to say this Cormack, but if you check the front page of the racingpost website… there is a poll…
Current results:
Should Nicky Mackay have been banned for his ride on Stars In Your Eyes?
Yes:15% No:85%
Thought was a nice piece of horsemanship given the circumstances personally, would have expected some leniency from the stewards.
I think the stewards made the correct decision. The only travesty here is that Mackays horse was allowed to keep the race.
We can hide behind the facts if we wish to but this is how I see it:
Nicky Mackay knowingly broke the rules and whipped his horse too many times. Whether you agree with the whip rules or not is irrelevant. The fact is the rules are in place and are the same for everyone. Its no good breaking the rules that you know exist and then complaining when you are rightly punished.
The horse was very heavily backed into 1/2 fav and at a guess I would say that connections were heavily involved in this gamble and that Mackay would have been fully aware that the connections were punting it. Would he have broken the rules had connections money not been on? I doubt it very much.
You can pretend that it was all about safety – absolute poppycock and a desperate excuse. If the horse was being whipped for safety then why on the 1st bend when the horse veered out to the right did Mackay not whip the horse? The answer is because this was not the business end of the race and with connections money being down he didnt want to ruin his chances for the end of the race.
Yes the horse was veering to the right all the way up the home straight, the jockey claims he thought he may go through the rails. Watch the race – this is a ludicrous claim and at no point was that horse going through the rails.
Lets pretend the horse was in danger of going through the rails – surely after the 5th or 6th whip Mackay should have realised the whip wasnt stopping the horse from drifting to the right and he should have tried other measures to straighten the horse up. But of course this ride was absolutely nothing to do with safety (though feel free to hide behind this incorrect theory anti whip rule people).
Master Fizz was only beaten a fraction in 2nd place. Had Mackay kept to the whip rules in the same way that the jockey on Master Fizz did then Mackay probably would not have won the race its fair to say.
So top connections have landed there gamble and got the win, no doubt Mackay will be looked after for landing the gamble.
A small trainer and relatively unknown jockey who would have loved to get a win have been robbed because of Mackays cheating (and it is cheating). When will this trainer and jockey get another winner? Who knows, they dont have them often.
Had the jockey on Master Fizz also cheated and broke the whip rule like Mackay then he could have had a winner, but the jockey on the 2nd rode an honest race and chose not to cheat.What about the poor punters who have backed Master Fizz and missed out on a 20/1 winner because Mackay decided to break the rules to land the gamble? They have been robbed as have the connections and jockey of Master Fizz because they chose not to cheat and played the sport within the rules.
All this talk of disgrace is a disgrace. Mackay isnt the victim he knowingly broke the rules to land the gamble and others lost out big time because of it.
The rules need changing I think, the horse should have been thrown out in the stewards room and the win awarded to Master Fizz.
And no I did not back Master Fizz and am not speaking through my pocket. Its irrelevant if you think the whip rules are wrong or not, the rules are in place and until a time when they are changed then all jockeys must abide to them in the fairness of the game. Hiding behind a safety issue smoke screen is laughable in this case.
I think the stewards made the correct decision. The only travesty here is that Mackays horse was allowed to keep the race.
We can hide behind the facts if we wish to but this is how I see it:
Nicky Mackay knowingly broke the rules and whipped his horse too many times. Whether you agree with the whip rules or not is irrelevant. The fact is the rules are in place and are the same for everyone. Its no good breaking the rules that you know exist and then complaining when you are rightly punished.
The horse was very heavily backed into 1/2 fav and at a guess I would say that connections were heavily involved in this gamble and that Mackay would have been fully aware that the connections were punting it. Would he have broken the rules had connections money not been on? I doubt it very much.
You can pretend that it was all about safety – absolute poppycock and a desperate excuse. If the horse was being whipped for safety then why on the 1st bend when the horse veered out to the right did Mackay not whip the horse? The answer is because this was not the business end of the race and with connections money being down he didnt want to ruin his chances for the end of the race.
Yes the horse was veering to the right all the way up the home straight, the jockey claims he thought he may go through the rails. Watch the race – this is a ludicrous claim and at no point was that horse going through the rails.
Lets pretend the horse was in danger of going through the rails – surely after the 5th or 6th whip Mackay should have realised the whip wasnt stopping the horse from drifting to the right and he should have tried other measures to straighten the horse up. But of course this ride was absolutely nothing to do with safety (though feel free to hide behind this incorrect theory anti whip rule people).
Master Fizz was only beaten a fraction in 2nd place. Had Mackay kept to the whip rules in the same way that the jockey on Master Fizz did then Mackay probably would not have won the race its fair to say.
So top connections have landed there gamble and got the win, no doubt Mackay will be looked after for landing the gamble.
A small trainer and relatively unknown jockey who would have loved to get a win have been robbed because of Mackays cheating (and it is cheating). When will this trainer and jockey get another winner? Who knows, they dont have them often.
Had the jockey on Master Fizz also cheated and broke the whip rule like Mackay then he could have had a winner, but the jockey on the 2nd rode an honest race and chose not to cheat.What about the poor punters who have backed Master Fizz and missed out on a 20/1 winner because Mackay decided to break the rules to land the gamble? They have been robbed as have the connections and jockey of Master Fizz because they chose not to cheat and played the sport within the rules.
All this talk of disgrace is a disgrace. Mackay isnt the victim he knowingly broke the rules to land the gamble and others lost out big time because of it.
The rules need changing I think, the horse should have been thrown out in the stewards room and the win awarded to Master Fizz.
And no I did not back Master Fizz and am not speaking through my pocket. Its irrelevant if you think the whip rules are wrong or not, the rules are in place and until a time when they are changed then all jockeys must abide to them in the fairness of the game. Hiding behind a safety issue smoke screen is laughable in this case.
Great another expert who has ridden over 10000 winners… You telling people what mackay was thinking.. What are the lottery numbers?
A disgraceful and disgusting decision.
That jockey should have been going home happy as larry after doing a superb job at not only getting his horse around the track but even managing to win, instead he’s going home miserable as sin after having his prize money stolen and a 10 day ban.
It was amazing he didn’t use his whip more, he never used it all when the horse first went wide and his first few hits were very light.What sort of message does this decision send out?
Please Jamie Stier go away with your stupid rules and take Paul Roy with you and if Paul Bittar isn’t prepared to do anything about injustices such as this he should go to.
Lets get people in who know what they’re doing and are good for the sport.It sends out the message that jockeys who stick to the rules and make the race a fair level playing field and the trainer and owner who have used the honest jockey miss out on a winner and prize money.
It sends out the message to jockeys – Yes go ahead and cheat and break the rules so that you can get the win. You will get a ban but we being the very rich owners that we are will pay you handsomely and you get a nice holiday as well.
Until the horse is Disqualified from a race for being whipped too many times then the rules will continue to be abused when the money is down. It is off utmost importantce to the fairness of the sport that an over whipped horse who wins the race must be disqualified. As soon as this rule is in place then it will become extremely rare for a jockey to break the rules.
My thoughts remains with the trainer, owner and Jockey of Master Fizz and all punters who backed him.
I think the stewards made the correct decision. The only travesty here is that Mackays horse was allowed to keep the race.
We can hide behind the facts if we wish to but this is how I see it:
Nicky Mackay knowingly broke the rules and whipped his horse too many times. Whether you agree with the whip rules or not is irrelevant. The fact is the rules are in place and are the same for everyone. Its no good breaking the rules that you know exist and then complaining when you are rightly punished.
The horse was very heavily backed into 1/2 fav and at a guess I would say that connections were heavily involved in this gamble and that Mackay would have been fully aware that the connections were punting it. Would he have broken the rules had connections money not been on? I doubt it very much.
You can pretend that it was all about safety – absolute poppycock and a desperate excuse. If the horse was being whipped for safety then why on the 1st bend when the horse veered out to the right did Mackay not whip the horse? The answer is because this was not the business end of the race and with connections money being down he didnt want to ruin his chances for the end of the race.
Yes the horse was veering to the right all the way up the home straight, the jockey claims he thought he may go through the rails. Watch the race – this is a ludicrous claim and at no point was that horse going through the rails.
Lets pretend the horse was in danger of going through the rails – surely after the 5th or 6th whip Mackay should have realised the whip wasnt stopping the horse from drifting to the right and he should have tried other measures to straighten the horse up. But of course this ride was absolutely nothing to do with safety (though feel free to hide behind this incorrect theory anti whip rule people).
Master Fizz was only beaten a fraction in 2nd place. Had Mackay kept to the whip rules in the same way that the jockey on Master Fizz did then Mackay probably would not have won the race its fair to say.
So top connections have landed there gamble and got the win, no doubt Mackay will be looked after for landing the gamble.
A small trainer and relatively unknown jockey who would have loved to get a win have been robbed because of Mackays cheating (and it is cheating). When will this trainer and jockey get another winner? Who knows, they dont have them often.
Had the jockey on Master Fizz also cheated and broke the whip rule like Mackay then he could have had a winner, but the jockey on the 2nd rode an honest race and chose not to cheat.What about the poor punters who have backed Master Fizz and missed out on a 20/1 winner because Mackay decided to break the rules to land the gamble? They have been robbed as have the connections and jockey of Master Fizz because they chose not to cheat and played the sport within the rules.
All this talk of disgrace is a disgrace. Mackay isnt the victim he knowingly broke the rules to land the gamble and others lost out big time because of it.
The rules need changing I think, the horse should have been thrown out in the stewards room and the win awarded to Master Fizz.
And no I did not back Master Fizz and am not speaking through my pocket. Its irrelevant if you think the whip rules are wrong or not, the rules are in place and until a time when they are changed then all jockeys must abide to them in the fairness of the game. Hiding behind a safety issue smoke screen is laughable in this case.
Great another expert who has ridden over 10000 winners… You telling people what mackay was thinking.. What are the lottery numbers?
Im not an expert and havent ridden a horse in a race. However the rules are the rules and no matter what your opinion of the rules is, its only fair that all jockeys stick to these rules. You dont need to be an ex jockey to implement the rules. Most 6 year old children would not have a problem with counting the number of times the horse is hit. If you go over the limit you get banned. We all know where we stand.
I have seen enough racing to be sure that Mackay was riding a finish and it was nothing to do with safety.
Wait until you lose a lot of money because a jockey has decided to abuse the whip rules and your horse ends up getting beaten. Then come back and see me.
I think the stewards made the correct decision. The only travesty here is that Mackays horse was allowed to keep the race.
We can hide behind the facts if we wish to but this is how I see it:
Nicky Mackay knowingly broke the rules and whipped his horse too many times. Whether you agree with the whip rules or not is irrelevant. The fact is the rules are in place and are the same for everyone. Its no good breaking the rules that you know exist and then complaining when you are rightly punished.
The horse was very heavily backed into 1/2 fav and at a guess I would say that connections were heavily involved in this gamble and that Mackay would have been fully aware that the connections were punting it. Would he have broken the rules had connections money not been on? I doubt it very much.
You can pretend that it was all about safety – absolute poppycock and a desperate excuse. If the horse was being whipped for safety then why on the 1st bend when the horse veered out to the right did Mackay not whip the horse? The answer is because this was not the business end of the race and with connections money being down he didnt want to ruin his chances for the end of the race.
Yes the horse was veering to the right all the way up the home straight, the jockey claims he thought he may go through the rails. Watch the race – this is a ludicrous claim and at no point was that horse going through the rails.
Lets pretend the horse was in danger of going through the rails – surely after the 5th or 6th whip Mackay should have realised the whip wasnt stopping the horse from drifting to the right and he should have tried other measures to straighten the horse up. But of course this ride was absolutely nothing to do with safety (though feel free to hide behind this incorrect theory anti whip rule people).
Master Fizz was only beaten a fraction in 2nd place. Had Mackay kept to the whip rules in the same way that the jockey on Master Fizz did then Mackay probably would not have won the race its fair to say.
So top connections have landed there gamble and got the win, no doubt Mackay will be looked after for landing the gamble.
A small trainer and relatively unknown jockey who would have loved to get a win have been robbed because of Mackays cheating (and it is cheating). When will this trainer and jockey get another winner? Who knows, they dont have them often.
Had the jockey on Master Fizz also cheated and broke the whip rule like Mackay then he could have had a winner, but the jockey on the 2nd rode an honest race and chose not to cheat.What about the poor punters who have backed Master Fizz and missed out on a 20/1 winner because Mackay decided to break the rules to land the gamble? They have been robbed as have the connections and jockey of Master Fizz because they chose not to cheat and played the sport within the rules.
All this talk of disgrace is a disgrace. Mackay isnt the victim he knowingly broke the rules to land the gamble and others lost out big time because of it.
The rules need changing I think, the horse should have been thrown out in the stewards room and the win awarded to Master Fizz.
And no I did not back Master Fizz and am not speaking through my pocket. Its irrelevant if you think the whip rules are wrong or not, the rules are in place and until a time when they are changed then all jockeys must abide to them in the fairness of the game. Hiding behind a safety issue smoke screen is laughable in this case.
Great another expert who has ridden over 10000 winners… You telling people what mackay was thinking.. What are the lottery numbers?
Im not an expert and havent ridden a horse in a race. However the rules are the rules and no matter what your opinion of the rules is, its only fair that all jockeys stick to these rules. You dont need to be an ex jockey to implement the rules. Most 6 year old children would not have a problem with counting the number of times the horse is hit. If you go over the limit you get banned. We all know where we stand.
I have seen enough racing to be sure that Mackay was riding a finish and it was nothing to do with safety.
Wait until you lose a lot of money because a jockey has decided to abuse the whip rules and your horse ends up getting beaten. Then come back and see me.
I have so far, and i understood why it happened, but im talking about this race in perticular, under the circumstances coming from the outside rail to the inside rail, it gets dangerous…
Opinion is opinion anyway.
Im not an expert and havent ridden a horse in a race. However the rules are the rules and no matter what your opinion of the rules is, its only fair that all jockeys stick to these rules. You dont need to be an ex jockey to implement the rules. Most 6 year old children would not have a problem with counting the number of times the horse is hit. If you go over the limit you get banned. We all know where we stand.
I have seen enough racing to be sure that Mackay was riding a finish and it was nothing to do with safety.
Wait until you lose a lot of money because a jockey has decided to abuse the whip rules and your horse ends up getting beaten. Then come back and see me.
At least a couple of vital flaws in your argument Zoso, you expect jockeys to keep to the rules but you don’t want to, you want horses disqualified.
I suppose the most relevant one in this case is how cheated you say the second horse Mister Fizz was, neatly sidestepping the fact that his jockey was also done for whip misuse
Therefore you would give the race to the 3rd horse beaten out of sight.Will the last person out of Zoso’s sport please turn out the lights.
Zoso….
I think the main point many are trying to make here are that the current rules clearly are not working. They are total nonsense….decided upon by people without a clue what it’s like to try and abide by them while riding in a race, and brought in to appease people who are clueless and really don’t have that much interest in the sport. To just sit back like you and Cormack and others in favour and say well the rules are the rules and you have to stick by them is wrong IMHO.
Why you chose to put the part about 6 year olds I can’t work out? How many 6 year olds have counted to seven or eight while travelling at 30mph plus on a half tonne racehorse in a horse race, as in this case drifting violently across a track and with their own and other peoples safety in question? When things are happening so quickly at speed and there’s so many other and more important things to worry about I could see how someone could not be up on their count…
Answer me this Zoso….if you think jockeys should just stop the moaning and stick to the rules….
How can the rule be sensible when it would be within the rules for the strongest jockey in the game to hit their horse as hard as they could seven times in a 5 furlong sprint, but for a very weak jockey to hit a horse nowhere near as hard say 13 times in a 3 mile chase and recieve a hefty ban and lose their fees?
Great another expert who has ridden over 10000 winners…
That’s an absolutely puerile comment. People are allowed different opinions to yours without attracting such remarks.
But, as it happens, I do agree with you. I thought it was an outstanding and very cool piece of race-riding in a potentially dangerous situation.
The three early smacks (light taps in all honesty) were a totally justified attempt to straighten the horse. There then followed the permitted seven strikes. The ban is patently farcical.
Mike
Jockeys, trainers, owners and punters wanted discretion. When there is a decision that could go either way sometimes it won’t go in the direction (pun not intended) you might want.
This case relies on which (if any) whip strokes should be counted as correctional. Although the horse kept on hanging to the rail all the way up the home straight. At no point did McKay stop riding or look as if he was going over the rail. Nor did he hit the rail, despite claiming to do so on ATR. In my opinion McKay knew he’d got to his limit before those last couple of strokes. Knowing he needed them to have any chance of winning. Had it been a last seconds drift, it might have been a different decision.
There were times earlier on in the race where hanging was successfully stopped by reins alone. So it can NOT easily (imo) be argued the jockey “needed” the whip for correctional use. However, McKay DID seem to use the whip solely for correctional use on the last turn (whether needing to or not). So (if my knowledge of the rules is correct) – it IS possible to take those stokes administered on the turn off his total. Therefore bringing the number of strokes down.
Had I been a steward I would NOT have given him a ban.
I do wish people wouldn’t use this argument of “how many winners have the stewards / anyone who disagrees with the jockey – ridden”. For one thing, people from Timeform, Raceform, Racing Post etc aren’t jockeys either, but they have good opinions on many aspects of jockeyship. So do most trfers. Besides, jockeys are probably biased towards other jockeys anyway. Just as football pundits are ex-footballers. Alan Shearer is criticising refs just as much now as he’s ever done. Same with some ex-jockeys I could mention… And the people who are saying these things are also quoting a survey on the Racing Post website. Where non-jockeys and non-racing-pros vote. Can’t have it both ways, is every non-jockeys opinion worth anything or not?
This is not an open and shut case, wandering horses never are. Why should a wanderer get the advantage of encouragement from the whip of however many times over the limit the jockey wants? Where as the jockey’s/connection’s rival, riding a horse of sound temperament who remains perfectly straight, has the disadvantage of no added allowance at all.
If you want stewards to be given discretion, you can not moan every time they do not do as you’d like.
One poor (if that is what it is) decision does not mean the rules are not working. Although I do believe they stil need some reworking. The old rules weren’t "working" either.
Value Is EverythingOne poor (if that is what it is) decision does not mean the rules are not working. Although I do believe they stil need some reworking. The old rules weren’t "working" either.
‘One Poor decision’? Geezus Andrew Thorntons ride on
Tatenen
was as poor a decision as is virtually every ban these numptys have dished out! Being someone who leads by example…I wouldn’t dream of asking anyone to do something i wouldn’t do myself,these Stewards are telling Jockeys how to ride,nobody needs to tell any of them,they are Professional Horseman who work in an environment where they have to have their wits about them,they need to make split second decisions in order to survive sometimes,they are Soldiers of the turf! Try telling a Serviceman not to shoot to kill if his life is threatened,he’d tell you to off and thats exactly what the Jockeys feel like telling the Fat Cats who rule over them!
Therefore you would give the race to the 3rd horse beaten out of sight.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.