The word honest in your name and your lack of racing knowledge has me still doubting also if you had any knowledge of horses you would not ask that last question.

They could hardly have made o bigger horlicks of racing in this century if they actually tried to

how many bans have fallon ,managan,dettori,dwyer,moore had since the new rules came in,maybe hughes isnt as white as he likes to paint himself,or just maybe the others can count to 5,i,m not monitoring it closely so dont no if any of the above have fell foul

Redcar today it was patently obvious some horses would have finished a lot closer but the jocks were scared to use the whip anymore

I think you will find the Hughes had as many fancied rides likely to be in the firing line this week as all those put together.

Do the same group that set these whip rules deal with the promotion of the Champions Day? It is such a mess it actually looks like the whip rule merchants are deliberately trying to scupper the Champions Day promotions. Anyone with any sense promoting a new racing day would be completely stupid to introduce something so obviously ill concieved at the same time.

or maybe they didnt want quealy for example whacking a punch drunk frankel on racings biggest day,if you put your brain in gear you might recall all this stems from racings last biggest day, the national,you could say champions day was the perfect time to start or would you prefer monday,beat the **** out of them lads on sat for the big bucks and we,ll start at ponty on monday

brigust, I've seen you post that before.  What's the relevance, please?

You fail to see the relevence Headmaster?

1st time poster loosely pointed out others hadn't received a ban. That is the relevence of my first sentence. Sir.

The thread is about the BHA. That is the relevence of my further sentences.

Is that clear enough for you? Sir.

More finishes means more likelihood of being involved in breaking the rules.

You are not gonna whip a horse too much at the back of the field or if you are sitting at home.

Presumably his point is that over time, others will fall foul. Seems logical enough to me.

Since the new rules jockey's rides have been as follows:

Richard Hughes: 32 rides with only 3 no. at 10/1 or bigger.

K Fallon: 12 rides with only 3 no. at 10/1 or bigger.

De Sousa: 28 rides with 13 no. at 10/1 or bigger.

W Buick: 21 rides with 6 no. at 10/1 or bigger.

You can see from the above list that 29 of Hughes's rides were well fancied and therefore would be in the firing line much more than any other jockey.

The next nearest Buick also picked up a ban.

Nope, intelligent debate would do if that's possible.

It's very easy to argue the exact opposite of what you're saying.  Hughes gets very publicly done for 6 in the final furlong on Monday...then, rather amazingly, repeats the feat on Thursday.  Surely, as he's involved in more finishes than most, he should be getting a little better at this very tricky art of counting while moving your arms?  Practice makes perfect, yes?  It appears not.  I would expect, of the Hughes, Fallon, Hanagan, Dettori, Dwyer, Moore sextet quoted, that he'd be the least likely to get found out three days after getting his collar felt.

it is ironic that it is hughes who has been the biggest culprit so far.......but i do understand where the jockeys are coming from....i think it would be much fairer on them if the rules were adjusted to a set of guidelines that the jockeys wouldn't give a to55 about breaking

It is not possible to abide by these ridiculous rules its a matter of luck.
Excellent post by Brigust yet again.