|
By:
I'm looking for a sense of proportion. Obviously, we have to take responsibility for - and take care of - these animals. They wouldn't exist without racing and - generally - live a challenging and fit life. It's a shame that sometimes it ends badly and we must do all we reasonably can to reduce the risk, but events like this are small in relation to the kinds of wasteful and avoidable loss of life (animal and human) which takes place in our world.
I remember both Srebrenica and Ruanda massacres taking place, being aware that they were happening, as they happened. There was less fuss in the press than there is about Synchronised. |
|
By:
OK, I understand. There is one more factor though - we nearly all support/watch/bet on/pay for horse racing, so we can potentially influence it, if only a little. I suspect most of us here could do absolutely nothing about the terrible (and far worse) things you mention.
|
|
By:
Strontium
I think we can agree on this. This is one area where we can help influence change. There is a good thread on the Antepost Forum exchanging ideas on how things can be improved. I was embarrassed by some of the stupid cosmetic changes that have been introduced over the last few years (e.g. changing the minimum OR rating from 110 to 120). I think we should debate these things fully. Reducing the field size would have an obvious immediate benefit. I am sure this debate will go on for a long time. If we start from the aim of improving the welfare of the horse, while keeping racing going, we may be able to help arrive at a result. |
|
By:
Rydal, I agree entirely and it's something I'm trying to do (including in the tread you mention or another on that forum) - no sensible, constructive debate can hurt here.
|