There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 58 comments are related to the topic:
stewards?
stewards?
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 58
|
By:
The layer at 1000-1 on Resplendent Alpha must need new pants by now......
|
|
By:
result stands
|
|
By:
You have to commit equine g.b.h. to get thrown out in the U.K.
U.S. and France that was gonner. |
|
By:
In a nutshell, the rules are WRONG because they heavily favour the offender.
This is what happens when the horse ruling authority gets into bed with the bookmakers. |
|
By:
safety out the window
|
|
By:
all the chappers knockers should go do a one
|
|
By:
Exactly, xmoneyx. The rules are encouraging jockeys to tighten others up against the rail, safe in the knowledge there's not a fecking hope in hell the result will be reversed.
|
|
By:
sigge nice for the backer. If he didnt get out IR a nice lay at 6 on the stewards
|
|
By:
i backed it but i dont feel too aggrieved,,wasn`t closing at the end..the only regret i have is why did i back that amy scott,,she is truly awful...
|
|
By:
FFS, he's a 58 rated horse, he's not going to accelerate like Dayjur once he's been badly hampered like that.
|
|
By:
Girl couldve lost balance, fell off , fractured skull
but winner keeps race .. what does she need to do , tool up to whack the fecker next time ? |
|
By:
The rules are fine as they are. The reason? It lessens the chances of inconsistencies in the enquiries. You pretty much know anything beaten over half a length isn't likely to get a race and that's fine with me when it means that principle is applied just about all the time.
The rules of racing cover the safety aspect given that jocks will nearly always get a ban for something like that. |
|
By:
horseracing
 |
|
By:
In a nutshell, the rules are WRONG because they heavily favour the offender.
correct. under the current rules, to get the verdict in an an enquiry the beaten horse must finish within a short head or nose of the winner. this means that all serious cases of intereference, where the beaten horse is absolutely crucified, the winning horse has virtually no chance of being disqualified because the beaten horse finishes too far back. as with most of the crazy thinking BHA world, this is surely the wrong way round. It should be the enormity of the bump that determines disqualification, not the eventual winning distance. |
|
By:
well it's funny cos in 2 days i've lost out both ways in the states and over here.
last night my winner in states knocked a horse on its inside on the home turn at turf paradise and scooted clear to win easily, i had it to place and it was chucked out completely over here today i have the 2nd badly hampered in a similar way and i know i will come out on the wrong end again the joys of this game  you are right marcce, one good thing is over here you can be pretty sure of the stewards outcome. |
|
By:
winning jockey --3 day ban
best to remember--punishment & race win are seperate |
|
By:
As with this and the Harry Redknapp case you new what the result would be.
|
|
By:
marcce good post. With the rules of yesteryear plenty of horses that were easily the best on the day were thrown out and as you say on top of that you never knew what was going to happen.
|
|
By:
Believe me you dont want to go back to the old rules.In my lifetime of betting I've had horses win by over 3 lenghts and thrown out just for crossing the 2nd with a faint brush,all the stewards ever needed was an excuse to change a result if it suited.
|