- This topic has 201 replies, 30 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 2 months ago by
.
- Posts
Sean, can you name jocks and dates and details of what they actually said please. Re, the ‘Big Picture’, RSPCA, Punters or whatever….
The interviews I’ve conducted are documented either by having been broadcast or having been written up by me. Private conversations I’ve had with trainers and jockeys are precisely that.
I have yet to speak to anyone who works in the sport who thinks that the rule changes are an improvement. I don’t say such people don’t exist but I’ve not spoken to one so far.This may be ridiculous but I notice the raceday pro-cush whip includes a microchip . What does this do ? Could some mechanism to measure speed/force of the pro-cush be introduced and hits below a certain force disregarded ?
Not ridiculous at all. An eminently sensible idea that warrants investigation and experiment
Should it prove feasible then it would surely render the strange notion that ‘whip count’ defines abuse wholly redundant
Fair enough Sean, do understand private conversations are just that, and you being on the telly need to be careful about what you say, no one would disagree with that, but am genuinely interested if jocks or trainers are interested in the ‘Big Picture’ etc…..or just their own self interest.
Pompete
Their willingness to consider the ‘big picture’ was amply demonstrated I think by them being so keen to support and be seen to support the whip review document in the first place. It was only once they realised what it was they were endorsing that most had issues i think.Trainers and jockeys are no more or less self interested than anyone else i don’t suppose. They will want to see the sport survive in the best shape it can. Their livelihoods depend on that.
I honestly don’t believe there is a resistance to any change or any restriction on what they can do. The last set of changes to whip regulation were as recent as 2009 and there was relatively little resistance to them. Similarly the move to a pro cushion stick, whilst not universally welcomed, has been adopted without undue fuss. In Ireland jockeys use the pro cushion even though they are not obliged to.
I just think that, like me, they are concerned about changes that will do harm without doing any good. No jockey wants to get a ban and none of them want to see the sport damaged either. There’s a lot of talk about ‘win at all costs’ mentality but Brian Harding stood to make about £70 if he’d won on LIvely Baron. It’s not that these guys are being pig headed. They are just finding it tough to ride well and ride within the rules which (it seems to some of us at least) just goes to show that the rules aren’t any good.
I have yet to speak to anyone who works in the sport who thinks that the rule changes are an improvement. I don’t say such people don’t exist but I’ve not spoken to one so far.
Ginger,take note! Thats the REALity of the situation and you and your like still call yourselves Real racing fans.REAL fans dont support these clowns no matter how you dilute it!Its a bit like REAL Ginger Beer Really!
The first big test fast approaches,The Paddy Power Gold Cup on Saturday,looking at the framing of the weights there’s a lot of horses sitting nicely around the 10 stone mark,the latest edition of whip rules will have exactly the same impact as those from yesterday and most significantly they will impact on
Wishfull Thinking
,(No pun intended).This fellow is arguably the most improved horse in the race but he has been handicapped accordingly,he’s a big gross beast who will improve again but because there are plenty ‘Flyweights’ running i can see a couple of those buzzing off at a clip so Richard Johnson will have to be on his guard when it comes to counting whip strikes,i believe due to conditions of the race Richard will need all of 5 after the last to keep tabs on some of those receiving in excess of 14lb.I use
Wishful Thinking
rather than the equally classy
Poquelin
as one is a battler who will pull out more for the whip,whereas the latter is much more of a bridle horse who will find little for the whip but on his day is a proper 170 chaser.Good ground will help the pro BHA brigade but there will come a time when one of these big handicaps is run on testing ground and the Cheltenham hill will see just how rigid the rulebook is then.I’ll stick my neck out and say the rules are broken in The Paddy Power though,thats how strongly i feel they are flawed!
Think you’ve picked the wrong horse Fisher.
An enthusiastic prominent racer. Although any jockey can use his entitlement too soon, it should not bother Wishful Thinking any more than others. Eight strokes should be enough even with tomorrows trip a minimum for him. Johnson went too fast for his own good in the Centenary at the Festival over a similar distance; so Wishful Thinking should have the neccessary pace. Also very genuine, so again doesn’t need the whip as much as some. Just because a horse is giving weight to inferior rivals doesn’t mean it is going to be more difficult to "keep tabs" on his rivals. Just as difficult to take on top class animals at level weights. He is of that quality. At 15/2 he’s a good bet in the Paddy Power. If I knew Wishful Thinking was certain to run in the Ryanair I’d back him for that too, might end up in the Gold Cup. Lot depends on owner/stable companion Captain Chris.To help you out Fisher…
The horse who might be least suited by the whip rules tomorrow is The Giant Bolster. Has obvious talent for his bang in form trainer. But can make mistakes and get behind. Needed plenty of stoking up to win at Cheltenham last year. 2m4f is barely enough for him and will need a lot of cajoling if cheek pieces don’t work. Connections may have made a bad decision putting a top jockey on board. A conditional or good journeyman jockey could go for everything, without any regard for the new whip rules. As has been happening recently.Value Is EverythingGinger,take note! Thats the REALity of the situation and you and your like still call yourselves Real racing fans.REAL fans dont support these clowns no matter how you dilute it!Its a bit like REAL Ginger Beer Really!
Real fans make up their own minds.
Real fans don’t need important words emphasised in capitals, they can work it out for themselves.
Not all real fans share the same opinion as you. Shock isn’t it? But, hey, that’s the way life is sometimes.
Rob
- Total Posts 102
If the quote from the post is correct then at last Muir has shown his true hand in stating that the Whip should ONLY be used for safety purpose’s.
We now know what the sport is up against now
- Total Posts 17716
Thank you for that,
Zilzal
.
Mr Muir has arisen at last – and makes very revealing reading too for anyone who doubts what Racing is up against. His "
disappointment
" is tinged with evident frustration that he’s being gradually outmanoeuvred by Racing’s internal stakeholders, as his Whip Rules are chipped away into workability.
You are right that it’s a clear statement that he wants the whip banned apart from "
safety purposes
" – which as we know, can more or less only be proved by a negative after they’ve been tried and failed to avert disaster.
This is the link
http://www.racingpost.com/news/horse-ra … hipdebate/- Total Posts 17716
Today has been a shocker on the bans front: the
Guardian
‘s
Chris Cook
has reported four for whip frequency:
Jeremiah McGrath
9 days
Tom Bellamy
2
Fergus Sweeney
2
Jimmy Quinn
2
Plus two for other whip offences:
Daniel Cremin
7 days
, for "out of contention"
Henry Oliver3
"not giving time to respond"
That makes a total of
25 days bans
in one afternoon. It would have been 30 yesterday, so that’s all the difference these latest "tweaks" have made.
I thought
McGrath
‘s ban (for his ride on
Semi Colon
) was an object lesson to show exactly how bad this rule is. His was not a "hard" ride in any way, but a sensitive winding up of the horse in rhythm from three out to get him into contention and make a race of it, even though he was slightly hampered and lost momentum two hurdles out. And without this good ride, there’d have been no close race and little to get excited about.
I ask any remaining defenders of the New Rule to explain why this was a bad ride, let alone one which needed "punishing" so drastically.
I also beg
David Muir
(should he be monitoring this thread) to tell TRF exactly how and why this ride demonstrates the need for "Cultural Change". I for one would listen to what he might have to say with interest, but I will not be holding my breath. The RSPCA man deals in generalities, and is not versed in race reading.
For me, it is appalling that a good rider like this young man (who rode Elite’s
Mr Dillon
to victory quite beautifully earlier this week) should be carpeted in this way – doubtless impacting on his confidence and ability to ride a finish this well again.
I
AGREE
with David Muir that the whip should only be used for safety purposes. I don’t think that makes me some crazed zealot either.BUT I am happy with any situation that results in –
a) No abuse of horses (evidenced by whip/weal marks and the like)
b) a general and widespread acceptance (backed by evidence) that racing is a sport which puts horse and jockey welfare FIRST beforeany
other consideration (including people’s perception of what constitutes ‘competitive’ racing)
c) racing continuing as an exciting and absorbing sportI think the current rules could achieve all those goals given time. The BHA recognise the need for jockey training in its document and that is key to me. Behavioural change requires a willingness to change and if the stick (in the form of penalties) isn’t working then perhaps we need more of the carrot, in the form of training.
Sean –
It’s a big document. Many people responded to what they thought was the ‘gist’ of it.
I can understand
some
people responding to the gist of it but surely not the PJA or their members who rely on the sport for a living. Or trainers. Or members of the racing media. Shouldn’t they have given it more than a cursory glance? If not they have no one but themselcves to blame. Everyone knew (or should have known) what a critical document it was. It was hardly slipped in under the living-room door. Everyone was on tenderhooks waiting for it since April. I’ve said before – people were asleep on the job if that was the case.
No accident either that our dedicated racing paper ran articles floating the idea of whipless racing.
What on earth does that mean? Are you saying the RP and the BHA are somehow in cohoots?
No rigour was applied by those who should have taken responsibility for protecting the sport from bad regulation.
Who are you talking about here? the BHA? What about the rigour that should have been shown by the PJA? It is not good enough to excuse the PJA (or McCoy or Dettori) on grounds of ‘people never read these type of things’.
The ‘industry’ generally accepted a) the need for a change and b) the changes set out by the BHA. They may have been misguided in doing so but they did accept it (generally) and no amount of aftertiming on their behalf changes that fact.
The BHA have changed the rules twice since their introduction. Does no one accept that as an indicator that they are listening/responding?
Finally (I’ve got my back up now!) the crass calls for widespread ‘resignations’ are absolutely ridiculous. The general concensus when the changes were introduced was favourable (I accept there were a
few
dissenting voices Pinza, I’ve acknowledged that earlier) so I don’t think there is a case for people being booted over this. Paul Struthers, as I understand his role, is in charge of
communicating
policy/strategy, not creating it. Quite why he should be called upon to leave is beyond me. The guy has had a child born in the midst of it all ffs!!!! I’m sure when he looks back in twenty years time and wonders should he have spent the first few weeks of his child’s life at their side or whether he should he have been on The Racing Forum or Twitter discussing whip bans it’ll be a no-brainer.
The only one who should leave is Roy, and that because of Betfair-gate, not this.
Pinza – after giving it a lot of consideration today, I would like to publicly ask you to retract that comment you made yesterday re- the RSPCA. It was/is completely unwarranted and not at all in keeping with the nature of this debate.
I’ll leave it to you to reflect upon whether you chose the right words/sentiment to vent your clear frustration.
- Total Posts 17716
Pinza – after giving it a lot of consideration today, I would like to publicly ask you to retract that comment you made yesterday re- the RSPCA. It was/is completely unwarranted and not at all in keeping with the nature of this debate.
I’ll leave it to you to reflect upon whether you chose the right words/sentiment to vent your clear frustration.
If my remark about the RSPCA rising to threaten racing like the
"undead"
– which I have to say was meant as no more than a colourful piece of imagery, a fugal variant on the
Whip/Count/Dracula/Stake
puns from earlier threads – has given grave offence to you or anyone else, then I am extremely happy to retract it.
I did not intend to imply that the RSPCA were actual zombies. My intention was to lighten the atmosphere, not darken it. Apologies for failing in my aim.
- Total Posts 102
Now, ho have the RSPCA approached this??
I havent heard the quote from them for the start that the Whip should only be used for safety purposes in the press before this, have we been led astray by someone along the chain or has this been the stated aim from the start and only just been "Let Out" by mistake.
Do the RSPCA want the whip banned
Do the RSPCA want the abolition of NH racing
with David Muir that the whip should only be used for safety purposes. I don’t think that makes me some crazed zealot either.- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.