Monmore 5:54

stunned would love to see photo print

I didn’t even think a photo was needed..? I thought the result was sent through wrong..?

Is there anywhere where i can watch a replay??

here you go dancing
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQjU7qEwTo8
on the nod

slow speed settings to 0.25 youtube and pause on line personally i would say 5 was winner

Cheers Balleyregan. I just watched 2.07 monmore today and cant quite believe they called 5 the winner there either. Looks to me like the 6 got up but maybe my eyes are deceiving me

must be a dramatic angle dancing always nice to see a print if they are available cannot trust them especially after the sandown stuff that went on with the horse racing

watched this for the 1st time to today
have to say full speed I thought v close on the line
slowed down you'd be disappointed with a DH if on 5 looks to have a won a short head near side

maybe slightly more in fact

not a neck but i would be confident it won

agreed....some very dubious results yesterday and today imo.

Anyone remember the days when you could bet on the distance in the photo?
Dave Richardson at Catford and John Henwood at Wimbledon.

It was a typically ugly 180% book or thereabouts but it did used to get a bit of action.
On that Monmore race it looked a coin flip to me and the neck would have been a big price on Henwood's board I would have thought.

Lol ffs use the youtube vid and stop on 0:44 seconds, the 5 has won a neck give or take a nose. 4 absolutely nowhere near the line.

the line must be a wiggly one hopefully one of rpgtvs investigative journalists like darryl julie or errol can get there teeth into this and ask some questions?

Yes of course, silly me, the old wiggly line theory. That'll be it then.

Have watched it 10 times in slow mo.. impossible to call a dead heat. Thought my eyes were still ok.. and that confirms it. Guessing no print been offered..?

you could email the track i think there excuse would be print did not work so dead heat called.wrong though

Strange in these times.. why can’t they use technology on the muzzle.. each time the line is broken by each dog, registers a time. Would then be very few dead heats IMO…

Have stopped this on the line and 5 is a clear winner. If anything the outside is favoured in close finishes. DH a joke imvho.

Hall Green it does not favour the wide in photos in a million years.  Ask anyone that bets there its inside

Therein lies the problem. It doesn’t favour any side, as they change it regularly to suit themselves…( or certain connections). As mentioned before, no need for a d/h to be called with chips in the muzzles down to 0.01 of a second.

I’ve bet there for nearly 20 years.. never have I seen such blatant manipulation of a finish as the race in question.

Fair enough gonna. Never mind being corrected. Thought it did mesen but ain't been in years. Even so, that result has to be wrong.

It doesn’t favour the inside.. the sis still is sometimes wrong, that’s why it looks like inside at times. But the race in question , there isn’t anywhere that 4 can be given a d/h.. odd indeed.

Switch however long you have bet there the race is absolutely on the nod as they hit the line imo.  You lose all credibility when you claim the distance is a good neck pmsl.  I think you are the same guy who cried foul a few weeks back, saying it was a short hare round the last.  The hare was usual distance, the challenger simply refused. Give it a few more years and you may crack it :)

Gonna.. have you stopped the race on the line..? It isn’t even remotely close. If you can find an image where 4 is level with 5 then good luck to you. As I said, it’s nearer a neck than a d/h imho. As for the last comment, I’ll assume you are typing on your dads account….

Just had another look and cant believe 5 not the winner unless the line in the video is not the winning line .....but what other line would it be??

Switch what does dads account mean ?

Childish comment…. This used to be a decent forum, I have no need to crack anything. Was simply pointing out that the result called was wrong, which 99% agree with.