There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
shirley
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 58
|
By:
toss it out
|
|
By:
stands
|
|
By:
stopped in it's tracks
|
|
By:
got to be thrown out
|
|
By:
nasty interference ,
maybe wd over a length , FA will keep it |
|
By:
winner eased down. Result stands shirley
|
|
By:
only a neck down , when interfered with
|
|
By:
not a hope in hell of this getting changed
|
|
By:
Highly improbable they change the result.
|
|
By:
Highly improbable they change the result.
|
|
By:
Result probably stands but how would runner up be making up ground at the finish when he was nearly stopped to a walk half a furlong out?
|
|
By:
Matt doesn't know his arse from his elbow.
|
|
By:
In a us race, this would be well gone
|
|
By:
in the states 1.01 winner chucked
over here 1.01 winner keeps it |
|
By:
Matt talks total b0ll0cks most of the time
|
|
By:
Result stands. Jock 2 week ban. Nap.
|
|
By:
stewards have no alls over here
|
|
By:
oh, wow, can get get out of my bet now! Fantastic stuff.
|
|
By:
The result should be reversed because RA has been denied a clear winning opportunity, regardless of whether he'd have got there or not. His momentum has been severely checked and an injustice done to him by the winner.
Yet as the rules are written to ensure bookmakers rarely have to pay out on a double-result, the result will stand. DISGRACE, imo. |
|
By:
the only inquiry should be whether that useless bitch ascott is allowed to ride again,,she is absolutly shockingly bad.....
|
|
By:
taking there time though
|
|
By:
Shut up Chapman how can you say you don't think Resplendent Alpha would have won? Ok you can't be certain but it looked like he was likely to get on top to me. Shouldn't matter though, the rules should state that with sort of interference so close to home, where the winner is stopped to a virtual walk, the "winner" should be thrown out.
|
|
By:
the last time Resplendent won it made the same run ,
and finished strongly on the rail , same was about to happen |
|
By:
if winner is thrown out does beneath get a place bookies?
|
|
By:
i think the winner should be chucked but it just doesn't happen over here
i've seen worse than that not been punished because of the winning margin which seems to have to be minute for anything to happen. |
|
By:
Who thinks our rules are wrong in a case like this?
I think if you interfere like that then you should be thrown out end of - none of this 'best horse won' |
|
By:
result stands
|
|
By:
market suspended
|
|
By:
thrown out
|
|
By:
rules are wrong in this case
|
|
By:
stands as we all knew
|
|
By:
The idea that a panel of stewards should be deciding whether or not a horse would have won or not, had it not nearly been put through the rail by the winner, is fecking ludricous, imo.
|
|
By:
result stands rules stink
|
|
By:
poor show
|
|
By:
totally wrong imo.....the winner caused interferance end of story
|
|
By:
result stands rules stink
|
|
By:
they got it wrong again
|
|
By:
no one can say that R.A would definitely have won and because of that the horse that finished first keeps the race
|
|
By:
result stands
|