Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
The Professional Jockeys Association Proposed Changes to the Whip Rules:
FLAT RACES
- Seven hits allowed at any time, but the removal of five hits to a horse inside the final furlong
- One hit (eight) over - two-day suspension
- Two hits (nine) over - four-day suspension
- Three hits over (10) - 10-day suspension
- Thereafter the level of penalty to be increased by two days for each additional hit
- In determining the number of hits, the stewards must disregard any hits down the shoulder with the whip hand still on the reins, and any hit that might be used for correction or safety
JUMPS RACES
- Eight hits allowed at any time, but the removal of five hits to a horse after the final obstacle, or after the final wings of a bumper
- One hit (nine) over - two-day suspension
- Two hits (10) over - four-day suspension
- Three hits over (11) - 10-day suspension
- Thereafter the level of penalty to be increased by two days for each additional hit
(In determining the number of hits, the stewards must disregard any hits down the shoulder with the whip hand still on the reins, and any hit that might be used for correction or safety)
FINANCIAL PENALTIES
- The penalties should be confined to riding suspensions only
- There should be no provision for forfeiture of the riding fee and the jockey's percentage of prize-money
FLAT RACES
- Seven hits allowed at any time, but the removal of five hits to a horse inside the final furlong
- One hit (eight) over - two-day suspension
- Two hits (nine) over - four-day suspension
- Three hits over (10) - 10-day suspension
- Thereafter the level of penalty to be increased by two days for each additional hit
- In determining the number of hits, the stewards must disregard any hits down the shoulder with the whip hand still on the reins, and any hit that might be used for correction or safety
JUMPS RACES
- Eight hits allowed at any time, but the removal of five hits to a horse after the final obstacle, or after the final wings of a bumper
- One hit (nine) over - two-day suspension
- Two hits (10) over - four-day suspension
- Three hits over (11) - 10-day suspension
- Thereafter the level of penalty to be increased by two days for each additional hit
(In determining the number of hits, the stewards must disregard any hits down the shoulder with the whip hand still on the reins, and any hit that might be used for correction or safety)
FINANCIAL PENALTIES
- The penalties should be confined to riding suspensions only
- There should be no provision for forfeiture of the riding fee and the jockey's percentage of prize-money
Show More
you did make that up, didn't you?
From the Sporting Life website. Seems reasonable to me, if a litte harsh.
or is their issue just pockets talking after all?
Why should they not be interested in their income? Everybody else is.
Did you hear what Ryan Moore said?
Apparently on Monday the BHA brought in a post bag saying it was full of complaints about the whip and there was another bag too.
How about a group of us go down there and call their bluff - and volunteer to check these letters of complaint out. Then I want to a see a sample of Paul Roy's handwriting
They should have asked how many bags full there were of letters in support of the whip.
Apparently on Monday the BHA brought in a post bag saying it was full of complaints about the whip and there was another bag too.
How about a group of us go down there and call their bluff - and volunteer to check these letters of complaint out. Then I want to a see a sample of Paul Roy's handwriting
They should have asked how many bags full there were of letters in support of the whip.
i think they might be in for a rude awakening come friday.
if it had anything to with betfair's army of posties, they'd have got no bags of either
What a load of shiite from the greedy little beggars.
If it's a 2k race at Folkestone we'll go easy and tough **** for owners and punters as 200 quid isn't worth the suspension.
If it's a 500k race we'll whip the bejasus out of the feckker
Small men with small brains. They are in proportion alright.
If it's a 2k race at Folkestone we'll go easy and tough **** for owners and punters as 200 quid isn't worth the suspension.
If it's a 500k race we'll whip the bejasus out of the feckker
Small men with small brains. They are in proportion alright.
jockeys.
maybe they'll relent and say seven all told and perhaps a tweaking of the financials...but much the same. strike next week or so.
maybe they'll relent and say seven all told and perhaps a tweaking of the financials...but much the same. strike next week or so.
Well I haven`t written but I e-mailed Paul Struthers. Did get a civil reply tbf.
For anyone who missed the Ryan Moore interview, it's on RUK at around 10 - 15 minutes past the hour.
Apparently on Monday the BHA brought in a post bag saying it was full of complaints about the whip and there was another bag too.
Lucky bags don't count..
Lucky bags don't count..
The BHA have lost all credibility. Anything they say now should be taken with a pinch of salt. Richard Hughes has already accused Steir of lying and AP has said he was not told about the financial penalties before the rules were brought in. And Paul Roy in his interview was far from convincing or believable.
What we, as punters, need is a BHA board that is thorough, honest and at all times has our sport at heart. This current board have proved to be none of the above and for no reason brought our sport into disrepute with the general public.
What we, as punters, need is a BHA board that is thorough, honest and at all times has our sport at heart. This current board have proved to be none of the above and for no reason brought our sport into disrepute with the general public.
salmon, I haven't backed a winner since the new whip rules came in - at this rate I'll be cancelling my subscription by the end of next week
They are no different from the chinless w4nkers in the Jockey Club. Equally as inept, equally as selfish and equally as corrupt.
They hesitate to ban jockeys suspected/proven of stepping on the wrong grass because they are no more honest than them.
They hesitate to ban jockeys suspected/proven of stepping on the wrong grass because they are no more honest than them.
The gist of the interview was: Ryan isn't happy with what the PJA are proposing - 7 strikes isn't enough, in his opinion. However, he didn't feel that with certain members of the media calling them horse beaters, they could ask for an increase in the number of strikes. He thinks it's sad the way things are going.
I got the impression the BHA has railroaded them into agreeing to the new rules by saying they've had to bring in the new rules before it is taken out of their hands.
I got the impression the BHA has railroaded them into agreeing to the new rules by saying they've had to bring in the new rules before it is taken out of their hands.
Moore calls for a return to the old whip rules
By Stuart Riley 8:16PM 19 OCT 2011
THREE-TIME champion jockey Ryan Moore became the latest jockey to speak out against the new whip rules on Wednesday evening, stating his discontent with the whole situation and calling for a return to the old rules.
Contradicting a statement released earlier in the day by PJA chief executive Kevin Darley, stating that the jockeys were in favour of reducing the number of strikes permitted under the old rules, Moore called the limit of seven "too low".
"In my view these new whip rules won't work," Moore said. "Everyone came out and said it was for the good of the sport without really thinking what it meant before everything got out of control.
"It is ruining the sport, Kevin [Darley] has been forced into finding a compromise. The fact is seven [strikes] is too low, but we couldn't go in and say we need to hit horses more because that doesn't look good, and that's supposed to be what this is allabout.
"The jockeys asked for clarity, but I'm not happy with the number [seven], it's just too low. How can seven be fine, but eight is too much, it doesn't make sense. You can't put a number on what is abuse, you could hit a horse once and it could be abuse and you could hit a horse 20 times and it wouldn't be.
By Stuart Riley 8:16PM 19 OCT 2011
THREE-TIME champion jockey Ryan Moore became the latest jockey to speak out against the new whip rules on Wednesday evening, stating his discontent with the whole situation and calling for a return to the old rules.
Contradicting a statement released earlier in the day by PJA chief executive Kevin Darley, stating that the jockeys were in favour of reducing the number of strikes permitted under the old rules, Moore called the limit of seven "too low".
"In my view these new whip rules won't work," Moore said. "Everyone came out and said it was for the good of the sport without really thinking what it meant before everything got out of control.
"It is ruining the sport, Kevin [Darley] has been forced into finding a compromise. The fact is seven [strikes] is too low, but we couldn't go in and say we need to hit horses more because that doesn't look good, and that's supposed to be what this is allabout.
"The jockeys asked for clarity, but I'm not happy with the number [seven], it's just too low. How can seven be fine, but eight is too much, it doesn't make sense. You can't put a number on what is abuse, you could hit a horse once and it could be abuse and you could hit a horse 20 times and it wouldn't be.
It does look that way.
I think a lot of top jockeys will clear off. France,the US. And Moore probably Ireland anyway. Of course he will have to ride over here but I bet he is suitably compensated for any bans/fines for winning Grp1s
I think a lot of top jockeys will clear off. France,the US. And Moore probably Ireland anyway. Of course he will have to ride over here but I bet he is suitably compensated for any bans/fines for winning Grp1s
This article, above, is in the Racing Post.
Does anyone else agree that it is written as though RM is contradicting Kevin Darley when in actual fact he understands Darley's position.
Twisting the words is the Post. Whose side are they on?
Does anyone else agree that it is written as though RM is contradicting Kevin Darley when in actual fact he understands Darley's position.
Twisting the words is the Post. Whose side are they on?
Another thing he said - apparently the BBC got more complaints about Clare Balding commenting on Liam Treadwell's teeth than they did about the Grand National deaths.
Hopefully that means Clare Balding can be whipped at least 30 times in the last furlong.
Not really B1 because they quote Moore as saying that Darley has been forced (railroaded, imo) into finding a compromise.
And to be fair to the RP, the opinions given by Dench, O'Ryan and Sweetman ("BHA descends into farce") which are athe new rules have been printed.
Darley`s problem is that it looks very like he agreed with the original proposals without properly consulting his members.
i think they said there were 8 complaints about the whip / ride to the bbc after the national
they must have meant 80,000 i'd imagine, bha wouldn't have been reacting to 8 that would be daft
they must have meant 80,000 i'd imagine, bha wouldn't have been reacting to 8 that would be daft
Yeah. Must have been 800000. The BHA wouldn`t do anything daft.
Dave Yates had a right go at Darley - I think his words were to the effect of 'Darley wasn't fit to do the job'. Which prompted Moore to contact RUK and defend him.
it's pretty clear that somewhere in the pja/bha communications there has been complacency, or partial understanding, or maybe just a fob off
only after this has hit has the reality struck
i can see where dave yates was coming from, but the change is being driven from the bha side and they clearly were not ensuring that the right info was reaching the right people so that the implications were understood
the pja look to have trusted the bha with the old work together routine which really means we are just about to shaft you
only after this has hit has the reality struck
i can see where dave yates was coming from, but the change is being driven from the bha side and they clearly were not ensuring that the right info was reaching the right people so that the implications were understood
the pja look to have trusted the bha with the old work together routine which really means we are just about to shaft you
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539