- This topic has 52 replies, 21 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 4 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
If you’re referring to myself, Pinza, could you please quote where I called the Chester stewards bent.
Only to you in a subsidiary capacity,
Zarkava
. The first (pocket-talk) poster was more direct.
When you write
"Our game is so bent and the stewards really don’t help it out with stunts like these."
there’s a clear imputation that the Chester officials (in this case the Judge by the way, as the Stewards are not involved in these decisions unless they think the Judge has got it wrong) are somehow conniving at or colluding with "bent" outcomes.
Journalists have been jailed for less.
Erm, no, your ‘imputation’ is well, well wide of the mark.
I wrote ‘the stewards’, not ‘the Chester stewards’.
I also made no statement linking corruption in our sport to the stewards.
What my post meant, or intended to mean, was exactly what I originally wrote. Namely;
1) Our sport is corrupt
2) It would help a lot in the stewards would release photos of photo finishes to help transparencyI didn’t write ‘the bent/corrupt Chester stewards were all on Bradbury’, did I?
We had a number of complaints over the weekend about this incident, and I spoke to Ed Gretton (Chester’s Clerk of the Course) on Saturday AM and also to our Principal Judge. Here is his explanation of events:
The problem with the photo last night, in the 9.20pm race at Chester, was that they raced virtually in the dark and although the light of the TV images are enhanced, sadly this is not the same for photo-finish. Because we are taking 1000 frames per second to capture the result the cameras need good light in which to work, and as the light deteriorates so does the sharpness and quality of the image, that we have to work with.
As the principals crossed the line, The Judge called a photo-finish and went up to the photo-finish room to be able to view the images directly on the actual laptops that are connected to the cameras, rather than just directing the Photo-finish Operator to pass the feed down to the Judges box. The Judge took the time to view the images on both cameras, doing all that could be done to try and enhance the image to be able to determine the result. This obviously all takes time and all the time The Judge is working under pressure, to determine the result.
Our instructions are to declare a result where there is the evidence to the Judge, to be able to prove the case. This is exactly what the Judge has done on the night, and I can confirm having worked at the meeting today and reviewed the race, that I concur with the result given. However the evidence would not have shown anything conclusive to Racing UK viewers or by putting a huge image up on big screens on the course. As Principal Judge I have today produced prints that have both satisfied the wife of the Trainer of the second placed horse and the Clerk of the Course at Chester, however they need to be explained by the Judge, who has the experience of how to read these images, taking into account the angles of heads, the wearing of nosebands and other identifying features on the horses in question.
The Result was declared absolutely correctly but under very difficult circumstances. Having watched a replay of the race on TV it was very much on the nod as the horses crossed the line with the eye being drawn to the second placed horse, Shernando, as it was the faster finisher and was in front after the line, but the TV pictures are taken from an angle before the line. The Public must remember that the only cameras that are actually on the finishing line are the Photo-finish cameras and on the evidence of these the Judge was able to declare a result.
We now have the photofinish image on JPEG format. I can understand that it would not have been especially helpful on the evening but it would be a pretty stubborn person who, on the basis of the comments above and the image, still thought the wrong result was called. If anyone wants a copy of the image please do email us on info@britishhorseracing.com
Paul
I don’t want to add fuel to this raging fire, but doesn’t the nose of the runner-up look a bit flat?
I don’t want to add fuel to this raging fire, but doesn’t the nose of the runner-up look a bit flat?
Ammended result then :
Bradbury (IRE) wins by an extended fluffy noseband less part of flat nose.
What my post meant, or intended to mean, was exactly what I originally wrote. Namely;
1) Our sport is corrupt
Just because there may be one or two corrupt people within our sport, does NOT mean "our sport is corrupt". Should not tarr everyone with the same brush. To use your criteria Zark evrything, everywhere is corrupt. There are corrupt people in every proffession, well, almost every proffession. When there are so few judges in Britain, with no evidence of corruption; you could say it is one of the few proffessions which is NOT corrupt.
If our sport was as "corrupt" as many punters wish to think… Then it would not be possible for some punters to make a profit from betting by studying form, even without any inside information.
Value Is EverythingSurprise, surprise, the judge fully vindicated. The runner up would’ve needed one like Pinnochio to get a DH out of that.
The elephant in the room here is why on earth they didn’t hand over the print to the press, as requested, at the time?
As twilight phot-finish prints go, it is not bad at all, and it would have nipped all the problems in the bud.
That it took three days to come up with a print which looks conclusive does not help their case at all.
I still think the runner-up’s nose looks very flat.
Can just see Stodgie thinking to himself….
"The photo is so dark, it’s probably a fake and not the 9:20 from Chester at all".
Value Is EverythingQuite clearly airbrushed by the corrupt chester judge who is now residing in the Bahamas on the back of his big fat envelope. ha ha.
Ok, point taken. I will hold my hand up and say I was wrong but this could have been avoided.
And anybody who thinks that Horse Racing is not corrupt are probably the people who are corrupting it in the first place.
Anyway I must go now and and place a bet on Kieran Fallon to be champion jockey and Jamie Osborne to be champion trainer.
And anybody who thinks that Horse Racing is not corrupt are probably the people who are corrupting it in the first place.
Like any walk of life there are corrupt people involved in the sport. That does not make the sport corrupt.
You did have a point about the release of the photo, but your latest post is starting to resemble having a gun and a revolving chair to fire it from!
Now, if you don’t mind, I’ll go back to watching replays from today’s four centres of corruption…
Rob
I hate to be devils advocate here, I have no vested interest but did watch the race and was surprised at the result.
Having looked at the photo above, I actually agree that the nose of the runner up looks flat. If you compare it with the RUK still "on the line" (deliberate inverted commas), the runner up’s nose looks different. The tip of the runner up’s nose actually appears darker than the rest of his nose on the RUK still and I’m wondering did this cause it to be obscured on the photo?
Have a look at the replay and stills for yourselves.
I’m presuming from what has been said before that the judges had access to a much better quality still than the above.
An odd one, in my view.
I accept that the judge’s word is final, but even the jockeys thought the result was reversed too because Shernando was led into the winners enclosure, very suspicious!
I don’t want to add fuel to this raging fire, but doesn’t the nose of the runner-up look a bit flat?
Ammended result then :
Bradbury (IRE) wins by an extended fluffy noseband less part of flat nose.
I stand corrected, fluffy nosebands and brushed-out flat noses’ don’t count as a finish.
61.1 The winner and the remaining placings are to be determined according to the part of the horse’s head that is first past the winning post, but excluding the horse’s ears and tongue.
Positions are now reversed.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.