Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Some strange/odd BHA/Stewards Decisions these last few days
Marie Des Anges jockey suspended for 8 days for continuing at Uttoxeter when in second place.
Nicky Mackay suspended for a day at Lingfield for easing up when he may have got 8th place on Steventon Star.
Aidan Coleman’s retrospective ban.
Havlin’s, Kelly’s and Kirby’s whip bans.
Aussie man with 20 years experience of trotting recruited to understudy Jamie Stier.
Is there any coincidence between the timing of these events and Paul Bittars departure?
Maybe a case of Stier stamping his authority?
In the Marie Des Anges, Mackay, Coleman (retrospectively) and Kelly cases, how often and when have similar "offences" occurred in the past?
Yet we suddenly have a rush of them.Didn’t realise Pinza was undead. Could you provide a link to his cemetery please Eddie, thanks
Under the Hitler youtube video Drone.
As cormack has previously stated he is quite happy for Pinza’s views on the whip to be posted, here are his latest from the grave for those interested.
"I’m assured it’s only a matter of time before another BHA review quietly removes this ridiculous "smack count" which is making our country’s racing such a laughing stock worldwide.
Widespread retrospective countbacks, as a response to howling from social media, would gum up the works of the administration machine within weeks. When Aidan Coleman gets banned for a winning ride praised lavishly by Paul Bittar; and when Rab Havlin gets banned for a winning ride (on Peterhouse at Lingfield) which was as consumate a piece of artistry as we’ll ever see on a racetrack, breathtaking to behold; then it is quite obvious to anyone with half an analytical eye that the "smack count" must go, whether over 5 furlongs or 4 miles.
The current, cushioned – RSPCA approved! – whip is good for racing, and good for the thoroughbred breed. Misuse is so rare as to be quite obvious, visually; and is easy to tackle, provided the guidelines are discretionary. As they must be. There are too many grey-area cases for these simplistic "smack count rules" to work. We can all agree on that, surely (except for the ban-at-any-cost merchants who have to be ignored as firmly we ignore other fundamentalists.)
BHA are not so afraid of the RSPCA, now that the organisation has been widely censured (by a Parliamentary Group amongst others) as a failing organisation, a self-perpetuating team of "injury lawyers" – no more than that – less interested in good animal husbandry than in good PR and their personal fees. So BHA must and will restore the Guidelines (for that is what they are, not "Rules") to the more sensible, less Alice-in-Wonderland level of a few years back. "Discretion" is the new watchword in High Holborn."
You can’t trust anyone these days, if there was one person you would have thought would have been in favour of whip use, it would have been Adolf
I am a serious punter and would be in favour of disqualification under extreme circumstances.
At the moment a punter can see a jockey he’s backed keep
within
the rules and be beaten by one who’s clearly
ONLY
won by
breaking
them. ie Had both jockeys kept to the rules the second’s connections/punters would’ve won.
Just as when a jockey
breaking
the
interference
rules has changed the rightful result it is
demoted
… Where
breaking
the
whip
rules has clearly changed the result I believe punters would actually like placings to be
reversed
. Why should breaking the rules pay?
Where whip rules are broken and deemed
not
to effect the result – result stands.
(Applies to places as well as win)
Well Gingertipster any view is most unlikely to have 100% backing from any set of punters, there will always be exceptions like your good self.
I’ve heard enough from serious punters to know levy would be decimated and there would be no guarantee it would all return even if the decision was reversed in future.
A common fallacy put around is that this whip rule breaking only occurs in big races but it happens every day of the week in minor races. Havlin & Kirby have received ridiculous whip bans these last few days for doing what was sufficient to win the race, both rode excellent races without abusing their horses but who’s to say they wouldn’t be disqualified under any new rules, they could be disqualified at one track but not another.
If you want to support that sort of rubbish it’s up to you but I never will. The rules are rubbish and the sooner they see sense, get rid of Jamie Stier, the better.
Like others who’ve put forward disqualification you’ve failed to say whether you find it perfectly acceptable for Britain to do it unilaterally and make British racing an even bigger laughing stock.
Seems fair enough, I was hoping he’d put Bertimont up a few pounds and he’d be a handicap good thing for the Schweppes, now he’s got nothing in hand of the handicapper in the race.
Never ever thought someone would put up Dessie
How could you watch his Gold Cup and not will him to win?I suppose a recent one was Camelot in the Leger, would have preferred to seen him run against Frankel at the time, although we now know he would have got mullered.
Whether it be Prescott, Francome, Peter Thomas, Muscat, cormack, stilvi etc one thing they never say is whether they expect Britain to disqualify winners for whip offences unilaterally to the rest of the world.
Maybe they don’t care or think it is unimportant but it’s hard to believe you would propose such a thing without a thought or mention to it.
In any event, none of the above are serious big money punters, the ones British racing relies on for an income.
Levy would fall through the floor if such a stupid idea of a rule was ever introduced, I would be laughing from the sidelines with my money firmly in my pocket.Francome must have a selective memory, don’t recall him restricting himself to 2 strikes when riding horses like Observe or Owen Glin when he was getting cantered all over on by Lorna Vincent on Walnut Wonder. He was determined to say the least not to be beaten by a female jockey. And it was a different sort of impliment in those days. Great jockey but he does come out with some strange and wayward views.
As for Prescott, is he much of a judge or punter, not sure we should be taking much notice of his views. I did hear his favourite smell was the bull ring on a hot summer’s evening before the event starts. Pity he isn’t in the ring as well when it starts.
Did he expand at all on the finer points and pleasures of bull fighting, the Pamplona Bull Run and hare coursing?
My problem with it Yeats is that I feel it is wholly unecessary that we employ the whip in racing. Why would you? Tell me why it is required, other than for safety?
It presents an
appalling
image of the sport to many potential supporters and I think that situation will get worse as people become more and more attuned to the rights of animals, as has happened over the last 30 years. Attitudes have, and are continuing, to change.
People see horses being hit to make them run faster in the name of money, entertainment and kudos. Now you might argue that those people are un-winnable in as much as the type of person who hates the whip will also be the type of person that doesn’t like seeing horses raced full stop. Yes, I think there are some of those will never come round but I think a significant number will.
I think racing will face increasing pressure over the ethics of racing and jumping horses at speed and I think it should be proactive. It is very difficult to defend the ethics of racing horses against each other for entertainment or commercial gain when you are hitting them in the process, especially when you don’t actually need to.We HIT HORSES for the purpose of entertainment. At the moment it is integral facet of the sport, and doesn’t actually need to be. Factual statement and very, very hard, if not impossible, to defend IMO.
(PS: to those who say the whip has no ‘hurt’ effect and that it is the ‘crack’ noise that puts the horse into flight response to make it go faster, why not just give the jockeys some kind of small noise generator to simulate a crack (inexpensive and easy? It’ll never happen because only the very naive beliee that to be the case). It may not leave a mark, but it surely imparts some kind of discomfort. I applaud that fewer horses are being marked and more permanently hurt by the whip, and I appreciate that the ‘hurt’ from a whip is likely to be fleeting but it is still hard to defend IMO.)
cormack, why do you find it totally unacceptable to use a foam stick to encourage a horse to go forward and a bit faster, something that causes little if any pain or injury?
Yet find it totally acceptable for horses to be made to jump fences in a race, something that at times can cause considerable pain and injury, even fatally?
My opinion is that keen racing fans like ourselves make too much noise about the whip rules. The vast majority of races and jockeys abide by the whip rules. It’s not a huge issue for me and I don’t think its that big an issue for non racing fans either.
Correct but of course the biggest noise of all comes from the BHA/Stewards with their farcical whip stroke counting and bans.
A case of horse racing regularly shooting itself in the foot.
I don’t recall any posters making any noise about Coleman’s ride prior to the belated enquiry or Aspell’s ride prior to his ban.
The fact is anyone who advocates disqualification for whip offences is either clueless or not a serious punter, could be both.
Punters would stop betting on the sport in their droves.
28 wins in his career yet amassed, if that’s the correct term, a measly 78 grand.
How bad is it that a horse that has won so many races cannot even cover half his training costs throughout his career.
Many of the races have been micky mouse uncompetive events with him long odds on.
It says a lot about racing in this country.
Think those who missed out on claiming him had a lucky escape, may as well put the money down a grid.
Somebody must love Nevison at RUK
Drafted in to report market movers (badly) and produce stats from the past. His contribution is littered with errors. How much longer do subscribers have to pay for this drivel?
Anyone know if his fellow director from Bodugi, Michael Wilson (ex RUK) has been welcomed back to the fold as well?
How ironic to see Coleman’s ride actually praised by outgoing BHA Chief Execiutive Paul Bittar who described it as "a top ride".
This has all the hallmarks of Jamie Stier’s fingerprints being on it, what a disruptive influence he has been for the sport, should have been sacked after his initial whip fiasco a few years ago.
The sooner he goes the better.
I reckon jockeys will stick together as one. The funny thing is all the jockeys in the 4.00. were conditionals, I wonder if they were given "advice" by senior ones in the weighing room.
Either way, whichever officials sanctioned the hurdles to be bypassed are clearly at fault and should be sacked.
How could you watch his Gold Cup and not will him to win?