- This topic has 281 replies, 32 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 7 months ago by
.
- Posts
After all the Tories got in power at the last election
As did Bliar in the previous three
If a rider is not prepared to risk losing a £25k payday then he has the simple option of not taking part.
That is why he is taking part Paul,£25k earnings are few and far between and thats why there is a gaping loophole jockeys can exploit to their benefit,like i said no jockey will pursue a court case for a £2k loss but if he can prove that with evidence half a dozen other jocks have been fined £2k then a judge will say that a £25k fine or whatever else you want to call it is extreme for what is in effect the same offence!
I hope Hughes takes them to court straight away for his silly ban this afternoon.
Whereas I hope that Hughes learns to ride within the rules as must all riders.
The new rule is a breath of fresh air and might force a few to learn to ride properly.
Rob
KF – I’m well aware that I’m in a minority. As KenH points out that doesn’t make me wrong.
- Total Posts 17716
I hope Hughes takes them to court straight away for his silly ban this afternoon.
Whereas I hope that Hughes learns to ride within the rules as must all riders.
The new rule is a breath of fresh air and might force a few to learn to ride properly.
The suggestion that Hughes, one of the finest riders on the planet and in the form of his life, cannot ride "
properly
", is so ridiculous as to need no further consideration. You are stretching the word beyond any meaning it can bear, Rob.
Whereas I hope that Hughes learns to ride within the rules as must all riders.
Leopards dont change there spots overnight Rob,
try telling a Marine to holster his weapon after a night
in Afghanistan,these guys are focused and conditioned so are jockeys.Pinza
In your inimitable way you take the words to mean what suits you.
I amde no such comment about Richard Hughes. I was making a general comment about the rule, osmething I’m damned sure you know.
rob
Whereas I hope that Hughes learns to ride within the rules as must all riders.
Leopards dont change there spots overnight Rob,
try telling a Marine to holster his weapon after a night
in Afghanistan,these guys are focused and conditioned so are jockeys.Maybe, but rules change in all sports and the competiitors have to adapt. Leopards don’t change spots my thinking, jockeys have an option to.
Rob
- Total Posts 17716
Richard Hughes’s comment on his 6-day ban has already blown open a major hole in this ill-advised "Rule".
He believed his first stroke in the final furlong was given for safety purposes, but the Stewards have interpreted the rule to
include
safety strokes within the quota.
That is not how the "Rule" reads, though the wording is ambiguous. I hope he appeals the decision.
- Total Posts 17716
Pinza
In your inimitable way you take the words to mean what suits you.
I amde no such comment about Richard Hughes. I was making a general comment about the rule, osmething I’m damned sure you know.
We’re in perfect agreement! In one sentence you say that Hughes
"must learn to ride within the rules"
, and in the next breath that you hope the new rule will encourage jockeys to
"ride properly"
.
What I am getting at, is that it is illogical and unfair to link
"breaking the rule"
with
"not riding properly"
as you have, because I’m sure we’d agree that although Mr Hughes may have done the first, he certainly is not guilty of the latter.
Incidentally,
none of the jockeys
who were warned today by the Stewards for not
"riding properly"
(i.e. for using the whip incorrectly) were banned at all.
Do you think
that
is logical, Rob?
Hughsie is fuming at his ban. He corrected his horse who was drifting and they counted it as a lash and he got 5 days. Funny thing was he was asked prior to that race what he thought and he said something about not being a whip type of jockey.
This is a mess and it will get worse.
I listened to another very experienced Jockey today who said in the heat of the moment he stopped using his whip because he had hit the horse his quota as it turned out he had in fact only hit the horse 4 times.
Everyone is very aware of the new rules and they are thinking about them but in a few weeks time they’ll be forgotten about in the heat of the moment and bans will be piling up by the dozen.
They’ll need an army of men to count everyone’s whip usage in races like the Lincoln Handicap. Oh boy will that be fun if 15 horses hit the furlong mark at the same time? The rules will be thrown out the window.
It’s only a matter of time when this rule is going to be front page news and do massive harm to racing. If this rule is not quashed it could bring more adverse publicity to the game than it can handle.
The rags would love to run a front page story like "5 Jockeys banned in the same race for cruelty " which is all the fuel the animal rights people need to bring more pressure on racing.
- Total Posts 17716
It’s already happening. Watch the 4:50 at Yarmouth. It’s not clear from the video, but it looks as if the second
might
have won (at 50-1) if he’d had the full complement of strokes in the final furlong.
I was especially bemused to hear
John McCririck
and
Mike Cattermole
gassing like two old maiden aunts about
"how nice it is to see racing without all that whip flailing"
. We expect this sort of stuff from the former, but not from the latter, who lost much respect in my eyes for chiming in. What a toady.
Good job they weren’t at Salisbury.
And I fear you will be correct, once the multiple whip bans hit a particular race. RSPCA will be the first rats to leave BHA’s sinking ship when that moment happens, as it surely will.
(Assuming
Moehat
‘s wrong, and that there are enough jockeys left to
ride
in next year’s
Lincoln
!)
I am pretty certain jockeys won’t want to face two weeks + on the sidelines, potentially losing rides on decent horses for good, for anything other than a career changing winner. Jockeys will soon start showing restraint with the whip and concentrate on other ways of ensuring they give their horse best possible chance.
The only difficulty, for me, is that the penalties might not be a deterrent to an ‘all-or-nothing’ ride in the National or Cheltenham Gold Cup, exactly the type of races that do attract media attention, unlike today’s events which will have little resonance outside the incestuous world that racing inhabits.
Big question where Hughsie is conserned is did the BHA say or not say that you can use the whip in addition to the allowed number for correction purposes?
Hughsie said he thought he was allowed to use the whip for corrective purposes but the Stewards at Salisbury said you are not.
If it turns out you are then the BHA have some major explaining to do. Like why were these Stewards not aware of the rule???
Looking at the head on the horse he was riding was hanging like a pig and had he not corrected him anything could have happened.
If jockeys are not allowed to use the whip for corrective purposes are we to wait until some poor horse is brought down and killed because the jockey stuck to these uneccessary rules?
From the BHA ‘Guide to procedures and penalties 2011’ – issued to provide clarification to today’s rule and penalty changes.
"If a rider’s whip makes contact with his horse with his whip hand off the reins it will be considered as a hit regardless of how, where or with what force the whip is used"
Pretty clear.
Having just watched both Kieran Fox and Richard Hughes races in which both have recieved bans,you have to say you couldn’t have written it,2 examples a world apart and yet as blatantly obvious it was going to happen and why? Because those who see things sitting from their Ivory towers want to view the scenery in two tone,(Black and White) but the beautiful view that is racing is far more colourful than that and today one of its characters has completely ignored the new whip rule in order to do what real horseracing fans want to see…The best horse on the day winning,not only did he ensure that happened he also covered all bases for those connected to cover shall we say the required expenses that riding a winner now costs.As for Richard Hughes ban……….words fail me for once.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.