Forums
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 55 comments are related to the topic:
WOULD YOU BE IN FAVOUR OF A JOCKEYS STRIKE

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
Page 2 of 2  •  Previous | 1 | 2 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 55
By:
Masterminded
When: 13 Oct 11 10:43
STRIKE. Would actually be quite hilarious if they all did strike 5 mins before BC day began. Resignations at the BHA would follow I'm sure.
By:
Dr Gonzo
When: 13 Oct 11 10:57
"no strike, again rules are rules."

If the government made a 'rule' saying you had to give up all of your income because you did something they decided they didn't like, would you be happy to go along with that? After all, rules are rules.
By:
wildmanfromborneo
When: 13 Oct 11 11:03
Well said Dr Gonzo and the rule is a stupid rule.
By:
dod
When: 13 Oct 11 11:15
All of us in life have to abide by rules ok some of them we dont like but we have to abide by them in this context the jockeys were asked for a number and they got it so it is up to them to try to make it work i think both the BHA and the jockeys are not going to let racing be destroyed on the whip issue they will work it out somehow but not before this change  is given a chance.
By:
ph.
When: 13 Oct 11 11:15
sorry virgin,refreshed from dog walking and just full of beans. Will go and read RP on the big seat and return suitably depressed.You can't bet early races now until you've seen track and bias if any.Going forecast means nothing.
By:
Virgin
When: 13 Oct 11 11:20
Plain
By:
lil
When: 13 Oct 11 11:23
strike and it will sorted in 48 hours
By:
ph.
When: 13 Oct 11 11:32
jockey strike or punters strike? No jockeys and punters will still bet on something else.No punters and the Bookies will ensure BHA do something.
By:
robinlace1
When: 13 Oct 11 11:38
bookies would love a strike on racing. promotion time on roulette
By:
fallon,s whistle
When: 13 Oct 11 11:45
I would be in favour of a strike.Who do theses rules benefit?
The owner? The jockey? the trainer? the punter?
By:
fallon,s whistle
When: 13 Oct 11 11:45
I would be in favour of a strike.Who do theses rules benefit?
The owner? The jockey? the trainer? the punter?
By:
dod
When: 13 Oct 11 11:50
You should have gone for a treble to really get your point over fallon,s
By:
ph.
When: 13 Oct 11 11:51
or none of the above?
By:
TheBigFatBookie
When: 13 Oct 11 11:53
This could very well happen when a jock gets banned for winning a Classic.....make no mistake it's only a matter of time.
By:
ph.
When: 13 Oct 11 11:59
he would be compensated in stud fee %
By:
fallon,s whistle
When: 13 Oct 11 12:02
Dod,Seriously who do the rules benefit?.Young fox was stripped of everything the other day for winning a short head.Harry Bentley on the other hand was woeful and lives to fight another day.We are punishing triers and this has to stop,Obviously nobody wants to see horses smashed for nothing,However if your in with a chance of winning why should a jockey be forced not to win in case he/she is punished severely? I would be in favour of a strike.And I would call for a strike before the grand national.
Page 2 of 2  •  Previous | 1 | 2 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
‹ back to topics
www.betfair.com