Forum Replies Created
- Posts
The defendant is faced with two alternatives:
(1) Arguing that they did not discriminate based on age OR
(2) In the event that discrimination due to age is found they must be able to "objectively justify" that.
In order to demonstrate "objective justification" the defendant must show that the discrimination was "proportionate" and contributes to a "legitimate" aim.
They can do this either using private interests of the defendant such as economic factors.
The Supreme Court has already upheld an age threshold retirement policy on the basis of public interest, which included the advancement of younger workers and the need to avoid potentially difficult capability procedures for underperforming older workers.
War Front is not a great outcross for Galileo considering his grand Sire was Northern Dancer! In horses it’s called "line-breeding", to anyone else it’s called in-breeding…
I definitely think War Command was flattered by the Coventry result. I’d like to say differently, but I simply cannot!
Don’t forget New Zealand Superstar It’s A Dundeel!
I reckon High Chaparral must be pretty popular over in OZ because his European stud fee in Pounds Sterling is around £21k, whereas his Australian stud fee is £45k
If I’m not working I pick my lad up from school which is about 5 -6 furlongs away from home. So he will say ‘can we race home?’ He’s always Snow Fairy and I’m either Canford Cliffs or Ouija Board and not only do we have to run like we are horses with a sort of skipping action which is embarrassing enough but he makes me commentate, we don’t half get some strange looks from passers by. He always wins but from the 10 lengths distance I keep, it looks to me with his arms flapping and tapping his leg with his hand he could be done for excessive use of the whip.
This reminded me of my childood, most of which I spent "cantering" around like a horse too! I went one step further and decided to build a grand national style cross country course in the garden. I gathered bits of fallen wood and branches of fir to build the brush fences. Then I dug a hole in the ground, stole the washing up basin from the kitchen and stuck it in the hole. Filled it up with water and hey presto…a water jump!!
Endless hours of fun
Can somebody please explain to me why the weight-for-age allowance is so generous? 11 pounds is a massive difference in weight for Mars compared to the rest of the field, justified by only a one year age difference. Surely this is too much?
I think the colic surgery could be a bigger factor than some people realise. Most horses would not come back from that to their previous physical peak. With a horse that has had his intestine operated on there is a much heightened risk of a recurrence, and it could prove fatal. As Freeradical already mentioned, perhaps the horse is just protecting himself.
Another thing to remember is that Montjeu’s are rarely brilliant over 10f. They generally need at least 12f to be at their best. Who knows what might happen over the longer distance next time out?
Apart from connections.
Many iffy jumpers have run in that race and the outcome is different. It was simply an unfortunate incident.
Don’t let that get in the way of a chance to criticise and whine though.
I am not criticising and whining J17, I am merely pointing out that the horse was probably not best suited for the race. And the argument that loads of iffy jumpers have gotten away with it hardly supports your case. If it were up to me NO iffy jumpers would be allowed in the race, full stop.
It’s a difficult decision whether to show greif like that BH. In my opinion not so one-sided a decision. I can understand your point of view, not everyone would want that attention. However…
Every viewer could see the grief shown by owner, trainer, jockey and particularly groom in the paddock; and sympathise. Am sure it would’ve been done differently just a decade ago. Yet, if C4 did not show that distress – then…
a) C4 would be accused of sweeping death of horses under the carpet.
b) If the only time "Joe Public" see connections is picking up the trophy, then "false" smiles may be misunderstood as uncaring. That all that matters is a winner.
Realise everyone is different BH, but if I were one of any of those connections – I would not want the public to get the wrong impression. We (racing enthusiasts) know how these unfortunate incidents effect connections; many C4 Saturday Royal Ascot viewers will not.
I also understand your point of view.
Nevertheless, in pretty much every other instance of these incidences, on Saturdays or otherwise, deaths of horses, if reported at all, are done so very briefly and rounded off with "commiserations to the connections who must be devastated." Largely to put the incident in the past but also as a respectful means of not sensationalising the incident.Furthermore, deaths on televised Saturday cards aren’t necessarily a rarity so why not interview every connection of every horse who fatally falls or breaks down? Today was an exception because it made for some bloody good television.
This was completely different to the other sad fatalities that sometimes occur in jump racing in that it was the winner of the race dramatically dying of a heart attack just after the winning post. They could hardly brush that under the carpet if they tried. The horse was not able to follow the usual pattern of being filmed in the winners enclosure, so that merited at least some explanation. I think the discussion in the studio afterwards was too far mind. I had to switch over as I found it too obvious a display of trying to set off the detractors before they had even had a chance to get going.
On a more general point, I cannot warm to Graham Cunningham. He comes across as a wee bit of a smug know-it-all when in fact he usually just states the obvious. I don’t get the impression he actually knows much about horses.
The way
Camelot
shaped at Royal Ascot makes me of the opinion that he did not show anything like his true form. For a horse to go from travelling smoothly to beaten in a few strides suggests some physical or mental issue.
The question remains, what is his true form?
As for training mistakes, I don’t know if this is one of the worst of all time, but David Pipe’s decision to run
Grands Crus
in the Pillar Chase this year strikes me as a shocking one. To run a horse with very suspect stamina – who recently recovered from some physical issues and is probably low on confidence – in a gruelling soft ground 3m 1f chase defies all sense. Grands Crus then missed the Cheltenham Festival and ran a very unhealthy-looking race at Aintree. Well played, Mr Pipe.
Grand Crus bombed in the RSA and the Paddy power. Who knows what the issue is with the horse, but the issues clearly manifested themselves before the Pillar.
This might be a controversial one, but Jonjo O’Neill’s decision to run the ill-fated
Synchronised
in the Grand National is jarring in my memory too. Sure, he was a Welsh and Midlands National winner, but the horse took home a piece of almost every fence in the Gold Cup! I have no idea why connections thought this was a suitable horse for the race.
A fluke accident cannot be construed as the greatest training mistake ever.
It wasn’t a fluke accident because anybody could see the horse didn’t have the agility or scope for the big National fences.
Totally agree that Synchronised should never have run in the GN, he was a terrible jumper and it was sadly an accident waiting to happen. He could get away with it over smaller birch fences. Poor boy paid the price.
I would say that it was a mistake not to retire Workforce after his Arc win.
I think they spend far too much time talking in the studio and not enough time with the horses. I always switch over in between races now. I preferred the old production company. The thing that really annoys me is that touchscreen video thing you get on the morning line. It think it’s supposed to be all "new age" technology, but it looks really amateur hour. Much better to just let the videos follow automatically like they used to.
