|
By:
it would be irresponsible to the horses to draw/paint or put down any artificial markers across the track.
Are you sure nothing can be done in this area? They go over a covered Wilson Avenue at Brighton Racecourse no problem which is 'artificial' so it is possible with a little thought. If you read the quotes from the complaining jockeys it appears to be not knowing the location of the furlong marker is their main problem. They seem to agree there should be limit on the number of hits they should be allowed to inflict on the horses. |
|
By:
Even if there are clearer markings at the final furlong it still doesn't help the jockeys keep track of how many slaps of the whip they have used if during earlier parts of the race they have had to give their horse a few. Say a jockey has already given 2-3 before going passed the winning post for the first time, are they really going to be keeping the remaining number in their head for the rest of the race despite having a dozen other things to concentrate on that involves race riding and riding a finish?
|
|
By:
that is true, frog, but horses jump paths, roads, shadows, lines, pieces of paper etc all the time. Anything that is unusual to the layout of the surface that they expect to see in front of them.
No one has yet come up with an explanation for why horses hang suddenly or veer across the track just yards from the winning line, though thinking of that, seems to have happened far less this year compared to the spate of incidents that were ocurring over a year ago. |
|
By:
At Epsom they cross the road at the bottom of tattenham corner, and on the 5 furlongs course they cross a road before that.
I would have thought a broken white line marked with well spaced dots would be fine. How a jockey riding at speed in the middle of the field in the Cambridgeshire is expected to judge the furlong pole accurately is amazing. But an extra strike 5 yards inside when you think you are 5 yards outside equals suspension and a possible 5k ban. |
|
By:
Cathy Gannon
Shocking we are probably the worst payed sport yet we risk are lives every day and then Bha taking away are skills it's like a factory job Ch4 Jim McGrath Final furlong marker now crucial to riders' careers. Who/what is assessing where this lies? It IS being measured to 'nth, no room for ANY error? Fran Ferris I'd love to be able to hit a horse once |
|
By:
In jump racing is it after the last fence? If thats the case have their been less problems over jumps relative to the number of rides in the last week?
|
|
By:
The run in on the hurdles course at Newton Abbot is for much of their season only 100 yds. When they re-site the last hurdle to allow the ground to recover it can be nearly 2 furlongs.
The run in from the last fence at PLumpton is about a 5th of that on the National course at Aintree. The jumping whip guidlines are far more of a joke than the flat ones. |
|
By:
that's why they will remove the "final furlong / after the last restriction" on Friday.
The max limit will be kept in place, though surely McCoy will have argued for having a higher limit for jumps and definitely for 3m+ races |
|
By:
Stop horsing around with the sport of kings
Cack-handed attempts to solve the whipping row have left the horse-racing world in disarray. By Jim White telegraph.co.uk Last Saturday could have been the day that reinvigorated British racing’s box-office appeal. In the midst of a relentless downturn, the Champions Day at Ascot offered an enticing menu to enthusiast and newcomer alike. There was Frankel, the superstar horse showing off his galloping finish. There was a bumper crowd basking in the autumn sun. There was enough prize money to resolve the eurozone debt crisis. In all, the perfect climax to the flat-racing season. Three days on, the sport should be preening itself, purring about the positive image of a robust, confident, growing business. Instead, it has behaved like a favourite falling at the first. Its workers have turned militant, a leading jockey is preparing to sue the governing body and another has walked away from the sport entirely, saying he no longer wishes to participate in an activity as hopelessly, haplessly dysfunctional as this. And all over an argument about the sport’s least marketable issue: how many times a jockey can strike a horse with a whip. It seems a simple enough question: does whipping cause an animal distress? For the casual observer, a jockey heavy-handedly whacking his horse’s hindquarters can be a disturbing sight. For those who nurture and love thoroughbreds, however, there is no such worry. Modern whips, they insist, are designed to employ sound, not pain, to cajole and steer. These days no animal is hurt in the making of a champion. You might think the British Horseracing Authority (BHA) could offer definitive guidance here. Instead, racing’s administrators appear traumatised by the issue, incapable of coherent thought, never mind action. Driven by fear of bad publicity, their very solution has threatened to bury their own sport under a drift of negativity. The BHA’s whip issue began at the Grand National. Every year millions tune in to the scramble round Aintree, including some who find racing abhorrent. And this year the likes of the charity Animal Aid, which has long had a beef about the race, were gifted a publicity godsend. Already two horses had been destroyed after falling over the course’s vertiginous jumps, when the jockey Jason Maguire was seen thrashing the winner Ballabriggs over the line. At the point of victory, Ballabriggs looked befuddled, tottering about like an over-refreshed punter in the Aintree stands. Never mind that the race vet pointed out that the hot weather had dehydrated the horse, for Animal Aid the footage painted an unequivocal picture: jockey whacks mount to point of collapse. Subsequently, the BHA received about 100 letters of complaint, to which it responded like a classic British sporting administration: it panicked. Instead of either banning or defending the practice, it fudged. Laws were introduced on how many times a horse could be struck, restricting jockeys to seven uses of the whip in a race, including a maximum of five in the last furlong. Furthermore, the BHA chose to introduce the ruling – and the draconian fines for those who broke it – without a trial period. And they did so last week, just before the season’s finale. Immediately, the jockeys pointed out it was unworkable. Who, in the harem-scarem dash for the line, can spot the post marking the start of the final furlong? Far better to have a single restriction across the whole race. Besides, even as a PR exercise it was flawed: it is the last few yards that get televised on the news, so those with a gripe against the sport would still see horses being hit frequently in the run-in. A compromise so weak-kneed as to be counter-productive, all it did was add confusion – as was proved when the French jockey Christoph Soumillon had his £50,000 winning cheque withheld on Saturday after stewards claimed he hit his horse six times in the final furlong rather than the statutory five. So furious is Soumillon, who claims the furlong marker post was obscured by an advertising hoarding, he is taking advice on suing the BHA. Instead of ameliorating the problem, the BHA’s actions have advertised it. Suddenly those who had not even considered the issue have been made aware that horses get hit during a race. It doesn’t matter how many – or how few – times they are struck, the fact they are being whacked at all will upset the delicate sensibilities of the British animal lover. As policy, it was a bit like Ed Miliband announcing that a future Labour government would restrict annual university fees to £6,000 instead of £9,000: if you are against the principle, you will not be impressed by a restriction on amounts. For those involved in the grandest of leisure pursuits, it has critically undermined morale. After threatening strike action, leading jockeys met with the governing body yesterday demanding common sense. For veteran rider Richard Hughes, however, it is too late. He announced ahead of the Champions Day that he no longer wishes to ride under these conditions. Forcing a much-loved practitioner from the saddle at the very point you should be celebrating a new chapter: as a symbol of a sport at war with itself, it tells you all you need to know |
|
By:
Check Mate for BHA?
http://boyciesblog.wordpress.com/ |
|
By:
There are 3 certainties in life, Death, Taxes and the BHA to feck up racing....Sorry make that 4, Death,taxes,BHA to feck up racing and Frankel.
|
|
By:
A section of the above from Boycies blog
Donald McCain has already expressed concern that this may be happening and I think he’s certain to be proved right. Horses that could get into contention in races won’t. Some will argue that this is fine as we’ll still have a winner but no sport can tolerate a situation where there is doubt as to whether the winner was the best. I’ve already seen jockeys give up after one or two smacks on horses with ground to make on the leaders. Some of these horses could go on to be competitive in their races if their jockeys were empowered to ask their horses for full extension and effort. The new rules will prevent this. I’ll say it now so as not to be accused of aftertiming. The new whip rules do not allow jump jockeys sufficient leeway for all types of horses in all types of races. Once jockeys and trainers realise this they too will want a crisis meeting and they too will seek changes to the rules. Many scoffed when I described the initial ‘kite flying’ by certain parties regarding the whip as ‘reckless and dangerous’. Events of this week have brought into focus how quickly a few wrong moves can propel us towards an endgame that a lack of foresight and vision failed to anticipate. That the Racing Post and colleagues like John McCrirrick have fuelled a fire which could very easily become an inferno if the wind changes is deeply regrettable. The premature introduction of ill conceived rules has painted the BHA into a corner that is now very difficult for them to exit. Stick to their guns and the sports participants and fans will be in revolt. Change their stance and the anti racing brigade will claim the BHA lacks the will to follow its own advice. All is not lost though. The BHA’s own review confirmed that the existing rules were doing an excellent job in lots of ways. Here’s a few facts. Less than one hundredth of all rides resulted in a breach of the old rules. That’s considerably less than one a meeting from all the jockeys on all the horses in all the races. Less than on fiftieth of one percent of all rides resulted in any kind of visible mark at all upon any horse. The number of serious injuries caused by the air cushioned stick under the old guidelines over the last few years? Precisely zero. How many breaches of the rules attract widespread comment? One or two a year? That’s somewhere between one five hundredth and one thousandth of one per cent of rides. As for public opinion the BHA’s own research shows that a little education goes a long way and can turn a majority of anti’s into a minority with a few simple pointers. As for worries about the impact on public opinion of the Grand National, didn’t AP McCoy win Sports Personality of the Year in a landslide after passing the line in front in that very race with his whip held in the air? There is still time to do the right thing. It’s now a hundred times harder than it was a week ago but good leadership – real leadership – is about doing what’s right. Even when it’s hard. t’s not quite a case of four more days to save the world but it is to be hoped that real change, justified change, rather than cosmetic change could occur this week. The good news is that the most important stat of all makes a u turn not just possible but justifiable. The BHA can accurately state that an arbitrary reduction in the number of strokes, even when coupled with swingeing sanctions, actually resulted in the number of breaches going up. Your move BHA. Good piece.. |
|
By:
For veteran rider Richard Hughes, however, it is too late.
Has he really handed in his license or is he just trying to get publicity? It seems strange he was at the meeting yesterday. |
|
By:
"Besides, even as a PR exercise it was flawed: it is the last few yards that get televised on the news, so those with a gripe against the sport would still see horses being hit frequently in the run-in."
Excellent point, and all it means is that jockeys will be making every strike count in that last furlong - so it won't change public perception of the whip. |
|
By:
MARCUS TOWNEND
Expecting BHA to announce appeal hearing by Christophe Soumillon into his Ascot whip ban will be heard week Thursday (Oct 27th) |
|
By:
Excellent article by Jim White there.
|
|
By:
no sport can tolerate a situation where there is doubt as to whether the winner was the best
ROFPML |
|
By:
Lewis Porteous racingpost.com
DAVID PIPE on Tuesday became the latest high-profile name to criticise the new whip rules, admitting that the stricter guidelines have wider implications than those being suffered by jockeys. Pipe also said that neither he, nor his father - multiple champion trainer Martin - were consulted prior tothe new rules being implemented and questioned the thought process behind the changes. "We [trainers] have to look at things differently now," Pipe told At The Races. He continued: "There are lost of things to consider.If you have a free going sort you have to look closer at which race to consider. It is also a factor when buying horses and the courses you race at." Asked if the BHA had approached either himself or Martin, Pipe added: "I certainly wasn't asked about my views. It doesn't appear that much thought has gone into the process. "I would have thought on a lot of the panels my father would be very useful." |
|
By:
frog2 18 Oct 11 11:34
For veteran rider Richard Hughes, however, it is too late. Has he really handed in his license or is he just trying to get publicity? It seems strange he was at the meeting yesterday. He has stopped riding and has been fined for the rides he was booked to ride but didn't take and I assume he has now stopped any more being booked but until he physically hands in his licence then he is still a licensed jockey. They were saying that's why he was still allowed inside the weighing room on Saturday and presumably why he went to the meeting with the BHA. |
|
By:
Well he should become the jockey's representative he has plenty of time on his hands,
|