November 13, 2006 at 15:25 #439FlatSeasonLoverMember
- Total Posts 2065
Jockey eased the horse down and was collared on the line by Lambrini Mist – favourite backers couldn’t believe their luck. Okay so its nothing new but why didn’t the jockey look both ways before easing the horse down? There are two winning posts at Leicester but from what I can see he was beaten at both anyway. Do we think 28 days is correct?November 13, 2006 at 15:41 #30894seabirdParticipant
- Total Posts 2924
NaHHH!!!!! Geld the bastid!!:o
ColinNovember 13, 2006 at 15:43 #30895Racing DailyParticipant
- Total Posts 1364
Didn’t see the race, but it has to be 28 days if he lost through easing down.November 13, 2006 at 15:49 #30896SwallowCottageMember
- Total Posts 1008
I didn’t see the race Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â but this type of jockey error has to be the most annoying and does the horse racing industry no favours. Jockeys have been given 28 day bans for this in the past but it is still happening. Maybe it’s time to increase the penalty to 3 months.<br>November 13, 2006 at 16:21 #30897yeatsParticipant
- Total Posts 2923
How many times has AP been done for it?<br>Utterley pointless and must be put down to jockeys showing off, Queally did it on the flat last week but still won.<br>The penalties are just not severe enough, should be a minimum of 3 months for a first offence and if they do it again keep tripling the suspension.November 13, 2006 at 17:43 #30898davidjohnsonMember
- Total Posts 4491
Don’t have any stats on this so am not 100% sure, but over the last 6 or 7 years, I cannot recall any rider getting done for a repeat offence of easing down and losing a race they should have done. Seems like a case of learning from ones mistakes.
FSL, you should have laid off at 1.01 on betfair.:biggrin:November 13, 2006 at 18:52 #30899graysonscolumnParticipant
- Total Posts 6940
Quote: from trackside528 on 5:14 pm on Nov. 13, 2006[br]<br>Increasing the ban time (and thus depriving a young jock of his livlihood for 3 months) for what, after all, was most likely an honest, if extremely incompetent, mistake, while the likes of Emma Lavelle dont even get looked at is absolutely ridiculous in my view…
<br>Miss Lavelle can be – and has been – dealt with on another thread, but the "young jock" argument doesn’t wash here given that Henry Oliver has been a fixture in the weighing room for nigh on a decade now.
I’m no particular fan of meting out 28-day bans on riders who’ve barely had a ride in public, though. Any mileage, therefore, in a sliding scale of ban length dependent on experience / number of previous rides?
The patron saint of lower-grade fare. A gently critical friend of point-to-pointing. Kindness is a political act.November 13, 2006 at 19:15 #30900AnonymousInactive
- Total Posts 17722
I’d bet Kieren Fallon wishes it were only 28 days.;)November 13, 2006 at 22:21 #30901zilzalParticipant
- Total Posts 669
My gripe with Leicester today was the going being described as good to soft (good places) on the hurdle course when the times would appear to indicate it being the other way around. Can the ground really be good/firm on a chase course and good/soft on a hurdle? I see a similar scenario is set for Folkestone tomorrow. Best stick to Fakenham methinks….November 14, 2006 at 09:59 #30902DroneParticipant
- Total Posts 5111
Quote: from zilzal on 10:21 pm on Nov. 13, 2006[br]Can the ground really be good/firm on a chase course and good/soft on a hurdle? I see a similar scenario is set for Folkestone tomorrow.<br>
The hurdle courses at those tracks are used for flat racing during the summer, hence they are artificially watered which causes the variation.
The late season NH fixtures at Leicester are all chase affairs as they need to rest the hurdle course prior to their early kick-off on the Flat.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.