Robert Winston could be in trouble now at Musselburgh.

7 day ban for Robert Winston whipped the horse 9 times

they just counted 8 for byrne as well

thank god he stopped at 8

how on Earth was Winston giving that horse time to respond between smacks? should have been a ban under old rules too. plank.

I counted 9 for Byrne.

obviously told to win whatever....Koo a quick question, as you have been known to have a small punt on yours would you expect the jockey to win whatever the rules when yer cash is down and would you compensate the jockey for any loses if the hrose does win but incurs the wrath of the stewards

i realise you may not want to answer this

they arent even trying now , these jocks are riding like they can keep totting up bans before they all strike n have their own way.

i didnt agree with the rule change before but way the jockeys have gone about it i kinda hope they dont give in to them too easy.

Shane Byrne hit the horse 9 times. It seems you are not allowed to whip your horse after the post

BUT THIS SUMS UP THE STUPIDITY OF THE RULES....

I had a few quid each way on Cayman Fox and a bit more on Daldini to win.....both came second.

I an NOT griping as better horses won BUT - the better horse won yet the jockey gets banned for cheating - so why does the Punter get shafted by a cheat?????????

Its the rule at fault NOT the jockeys....

because they dont want to discourage the owners, who will be the majoor losers if they start DQing horses, not an owners falut necessarily is it

The Stewards held an enquiry into the use of the whip by Robert Winston, the rider of the winner, HERE NOW AND WHY (IRE), in the final two furlongs. Having heard his evidence and viewed recordings of the race, they found him in breach of Schedule (B)6 Part 2 in that he had used his whip with excessive frequency. As the offence warranted a suspension at the upper level, the Stewards suspended Winston for 7 days as follows: Wednesday 9 – Saturday 12 and Monday 14 – Wednesday 16 inclusive. Under Rule (F)118.5 the rider shall not be entitled to a percentage of any prize money.

i wouldnt compensate as im too greedy to dish out any of my money.

i hear dat hence all da claimers huh, but if it was baws to the wall time and he wnet that extra mile surely mlost owners would slip an extra summit in to make up for the fine or ban

Agree with Hushwing a lot of these jockeys are deliberately getting themselves banned to further ridicule the BHA and lay some more groundwork for the threatened strike.

This could get really dirty with both sides becoming entrenched.

part of the problem is that people think (rather contradictorally) that smacks  of this foam persuader actually make lengths difference, when in truth half of these smacks in the closing stages probably make NO difference

ok an easier won for ya, wot would you do if the horses that had received too many shots were dqed and the bookies had to change the fptp concession

Why should you dish out money Koo as an owner. You didn't break the rules.

wot about the 2nd placed owner who's horse did everything right though

Not sure if this link will work as they sometimes come out funny but if it does, scroll down to the headline saying Fallon confirmed for Caspar Netscher ride as opposed to Robert Winston and look at the photo accompanying the story.

http://sports.silobreaker.com/fallon-blast-as-whip-ruling-nears-climax-5_226...

sorry can't see the problem; there is a picture of robert winston but he doesn't lok too unhappy, just a mite reflective I'd say.

http://www.robertwinston.org.uk/

this is the robert winston of the photo

He's also 71 years old and I doubt he can do 8st 10lbs any more.

The real Rab only looks in his sixties. Guilt imo.