- This topic has 281 replies, 32 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 2 months ago by
.
- Posts
Don’t think it’s good when you’ve got William Buick saying he’d prefer to finish 2nd than avoid a ban and miss better rides…
I know it’s obvious that’s the sort of thing that goes through their minds anyway, but to come out and openly say it like that can’t be a good thing can it???
Not what the punters will be wanting to hear in my opinion…..
Presumably they are up in arms because they feel the new rules somehow disadvantages them. But against what?
From doing their job?
How many plaudits have we heard about Dettori’s ride to win the Ces on Saturday, how many complaints have we heard about his whip use in the race yet he would receive a hefty ban and fine for that type of ride now. He did what was required to win the race, no more no less and there was absolutely nothing wrong with the ride.Your mates at Timeform will have fun re-assessing what did win and what should have won because jockey reached maximum allowance,thats how things will have to be reported to maintain accurate records.
Arguably the Timeform "plus" (i.e. a rating of "101 +"), in conjunction with racecard comments such as "better than the bare form", "not knocked about", "spared hard time", etc., already does this to a greater extent.
It shouldn’t prove too onerous for them to modify such comments to take into account maximum number of slaps reached hereinafter, as and when necessary, without losing any sense of what is meant.
gc
Jeremy Grayson. Son of immigrant. Adoptive father of two. Metadata librarian. Freelance point-to-point / horse racing writer, analyst and commentator wonk. Loves music, buses, cats, the BBC Micro, ale. Advocate of CBT, PACE and therapeutic parenting. Aspergers.
GC,my point is the likes of Timeform shouldn’t have to be adapting their comments in running to accomodate what will prove to be a vague description of events rather than an exact analysis of a race.William Buicks honest comments about basically giving up the ghost rather than trying his utmost to win confirm that results are going to be ‘questionable’ to say the least.’Would have won’ and ‘Should have won’ can be added to your list.Newcomers to racing will be more confused than ever now,one minute the BHA are preaching how they have clamped down on Non tryers,now they are basically encouraging it!
- Total Posts 17716
They can avoid any and all penalties Pinza. By sticking to the rules.
I suspect they want the penalties to remain light enough so they can ignore the rules as appropriate.
I’m glad they’re up in arms about the penalties, might stop them abusing their position of responsibility in respect of their mounts.
I sense your own frustration at the developing situation, but I’m surprised at your seemingly cavalier disregard for the professionalism of these hard-working and – in the main – scantily remunerated people,
Corm
.
They’re not servants these days, you know, and are entitled to employment rights!
My question remains: why has it taken the Jockeys Association so long to ask for talks?
They’re not servants these days, you know, and are entitled to employment rights!
Jockeys are classed as Self-employed, any schemes they contribute to are done on their discretion,they pay their own Taxes and insurances.A court of Law would laugh at any proposal by the BHA to fine a Jockey his whole earnings from a race so when the time comes and it will under these new regulations that said Jockey breaches the rules and loses say £10k from one ride,should he take the matter to the courts he will be re-imbursed the whole lot.Whys that then? Because its not a law of employment.If Jockeys were employed by the BHA,it would have to be written in their employment contracts and agreed by said Jockeys and i doubt they would agree to that little pearler!
More nonsense and illogical arguments on this issue than anything else in a long time.
Good to hear some common-sense being spoken by the jockeys interviewed today.
‘We want it to work’. Michael Hills
And from trainers –
"The BHA has done an excellent, thorough job with their Review and I welcome these changes, which will hopefully serve British Racing well.” – Sir HRA Cecil
They’re not servants these days, you know, and are entitled to employment rights!
Jockeys are classed as Self-employed, any schemes they contribute to are done on their discretion,they pay their own Taxes and insurances.A court of Law would laugh at any proposal by the BHA to fine a Jockey his whole earnings from a race so when the time comes and it will under these new regulations that said Jockey breaches the rules and loses say £10k from one ride,should he take the matter to the courts he will be re-imbursed the whole lot.Whys that then? Because its not a law of employment.If Jockeys were employed by the BHA,it would have to be written in their employment contracts and agreed by said Jockeys and i doubt they would agree to that little pearler!
a) it is not a fine
b) the withholding of the fee is now part of the rules of racing and it is a condition of the holding of a licence to ride that the jockey adheres to the rules of racing.
c) by riding in a race covered by the new rules the jockey is de facto accepting to ride under the rules, ergo there is not a court in the land which will find in the jockeys favour.
d) if a jockey does not like the rules they do not have to ride.
c) by riding in a race covered by the new rules the jockey is de facto accepting to ride under the rules, ergo there is not a court in the land which will find in the jockeys favour.
Paul,i doubt very much that a Jockey will lose sleep over the average fines bearing in mind the average prizemoney at stake,however if a jockey should win a top Group 1 race and is fined accordingly,his loss could be £25k,if the matter was taken to court a judge would assess that it is unfair and unproper to justify such a loss particularly when the defendant can prove that he/she has been fined or proof that others have been fined less than £2k for what is in effect exactly the same offence.A fine has to be seen as in balance with any other fine for the same offence.You dont get fined anymore for speeding in a Porsche than you do a Morris minor so thats where the BHA will again fall foul should this scenario ever occur,just remember its the BHA who have created these rules not a court so they are not worth the paper they are written on in court!
Paddy Power offering 6/4 no ban 1st two days. I think that is value given the profile of the new rules.
Shocking value, any chance of 4/6 there will be a ban?
Hope you didn’t have too much on cormack, always thought you were shrewder than that
I don’t know what your legal qualifications are to make such a statement but I would be pretty sure the BHA took legal advice before introducing them.
- Total Posts 17716
I don’t know what your legal qualifications are to make such a statement but I would be pretty sure the BHA took legal advice before introducing them.
Judging from the number of failed court cases and reviews they’ve indulged themselves in over the last five years, I think that’s far from certain,
Kenh
!
Or more likely, they do it on the cheap, then close their eyes and hope. I hope Hughes takes them to court straight away for his silly ban this afternoon.
More nonsense and illogical arguments on this issue than anything else in a long time.
Cormack,why dont you open a poll just to see who actually agrees with you and the BHA?
Also they are not fining the jockey. They are in effect disqualifying the jockey for breaking the rules. I’m pretty certain that in any sport if you are disqualified you would not be given any prize money.
I don’t know what your legal qualifications are to make such a statement but I would be pretty sure the BHA took legal advice before introducing them.
So did i Ken funnily enough and i can assure you if any jockey took it to court for the example i gave they
Would be re-imbursed 100%
.
More nonsense and illogical arguments on this issue than anything else in a long time.
Cormack,why dont you open a poll just to see who actually agrees with you and the BHA?
No need as I’m pretty sure the anti new rule camp would get more votes. Just because more people vote one way doesn’t mean they are right and the others haven’t got a valid opinion. After all the Tories got in power at the last election
c) by riding in a race covered by the new rules the jockey is de facto accepting to ride under the rules, ergo there is not a court in the land which will find in the jockeys favour.
Paul,i doubt very much that a Jockey will lose sleep over the average fines bearing in mind the average prizemoney at stake,however if a jockey should win a top Group 1 race and is fined accordingly,his loss could be £25k,if the matter was taken to court a judge would assess that it is unfair and unproper to justify such a loss particularly when the defendant can prove that he/she has been fined or proof that others have been fined less than £2k for what is in effect exactly the same offence.A fine has to be seen as in balance with any other fine for the same offence.You dont get fined anymore for speeding in a Porsche than you do a Morris minor so thats where the BHA will again fall foul should this scenario ever occur,just remember its the BHA who have created these rules not a court so they are not worth the paper they are written on in court!
As I said, by electing to take part in the race the jockey is implicitly accepting the rules, he cannot pick and choose, if he is prepared to accept the same penalty – i.e. loss of fees for a Class 6 race he must also accept the same relative punishment for a Group 1 contest.
A rider can easily avoid any penalty by adhering to the rules.
If a rider is not prepared to risk losing a £25k payday then he has the simple option of not taking part.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.