There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 86 comments are related to the topic:
this whole thing could end up with a....JOCKEYS STRIKE
this whole thing could end up with a....JOCKEYS STRIKE
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 86
|
By:
elise 10 Oct 11 20:35
onlooker, you can hit for correction, but if your hand is off the rein then it counts as a strike as per any backhand strike in a finish corrective or not a tap down the neck with hands on the reins wouldn't have counted in hughes total strikes that's my understanding and i think rh believes his corrective hit should not have counted and that he'd be ok with the stewards, i don't think he did it in with intent, he was probably just reaacting as he normally would and fell foul of the new law he had a huge W on his hand, he's obv thinking about it, to pick him up on day one for a corrective strike i thought was harsh but as he said, they called it 6 hits inside the last furlong and hung him out to dry ------------------------------- "they called it 6 hits inside the last furlong and hung him out to dry" Yes - The Hughes ban smacks (every pun intended) of the BHA et al, chomping at the bit to get a first day high profile ban handed out.  |
|
By:
i watched it back, i counted it and for me he's spot on with his drive and he's right about hitting it once before the 1f pole, but he def hits for correction in the middle of his drive up the neck and for me that is harsh to get a ban because that was sound horsemanship in the heat of a finish which protected himself and other riders from a poss accident
there's a grey area here where an experienced jockey might now hesitate a split second which will be the difference between a couple of days ban and carnage on the track i hope he appeals this one to at least seek clarification and make sure the bha are really clear about the diff between hitting for the run and hitting for safety |
|
By:
Its not so much how many times they can/can't hit the horse thats bothering the jocks its the severity of the punishment.
They wanted it like the previous rules where the punishment didn't fit the crime, basically it allowed them the luxury of breaking the rules especially in big races knowing they have a group race in the bag and a paltry two days ban to face, missing out riding at folkestone, brighton or some other gaff tracks. Now that almost failsafe luxury has been taken away, that irks them much more than the whip usage restrictions. |
|
By:
Feck are you deliberately avoiding the issue of safety or have you never tried to get a galloping horse to change direction?
Trust me,hands,heels and reigns are not enough at 30 mph mostly. |
|
By:
Trust me scotboyass. The whip is the no 1 cause of horses straying from a straight line. It's like Toyotah drivers complaining because all Toyotahs are being recalled for having defective steering because they won't be able to steer properly once they're fixed.
|
|
By:
Feck,whatever credibility you had.
YOU JUST LOST IT!!!! nap Btw I hope you are either pissed or fishing,if neither then you are on your way to join charnier and fraudboy at the trick cyclists clinic.[:o][:o][:(][;)] |
|
By:
Just wonder how they seem to deal with this in other countries, being public perception and all that.
Mind you public perception says the national is safer for racehorses, only trouble is if you google equine fatalities you find there's probably more horses died since they modified the course. I look forward to public perception when its made lawful to shoot kiddie fiddlers |