Hughes probably has a point not that I agree with the whinger, John Egan was wanted by the Hong Kong fraud squad and the warrant is still outstanding if he ever sets foot on HK territory again he'll be arrested, yet here was a fugitive from justice who wouldn't go back because he knew he'd face the real possibilty of jail time, yet he was granted a licence by the BHA and guess what he was up to his old tricks again in no time.

Richard Hughes has been stitching up each way/placepot and place punters for years. About time he had a taste of his own medicine. He was only back from his winter break and he almost done it again on Rightcar - 11th Feb, 1L up and easily claiming 3rd when he done his usual trick of easing up. He hung on by a cigarette paper, watch the closing stages on RP.
I am absolutely delighted he's had a taste of the unfair medicine he dishes out on a regular occurrence to punters. Then when he was geting his bans for hitting his stables gambled on horses more than the 7 permitted, he throws his toys out of his pram and hands in his licence, claiming (laughably) on an RUK interview with McNae and Willoughby, that he always rides in the interest of punters, when he had told Lydia Hislop in a previous interview that he NEVER rides for punters, owners only...

Whilst there is an element of unfairness in the 50 day ban there is an important issue at the heart of this matter and that is the fundamental concept (and i choose my words carefully) of every horse in every race being allowed to run to the best of its capabilities.In my view it should be presumed that a trainer knows his horse's capability better than the jockey and is perfectly entitled to give broad instructions as to how a horse should be ridden and in the exceptional case where there is an enquiry into the race riding of a particular horse he should be called into the enquiry along with the jockey so the stewards hear from both of them at the same time.In the great majority of cases where a jockey doesn't ride to instructions it is because the horse isn't able to, not because the jockey ignores them (Lester being an exception of course).What we need to minimise (we'll never stamp it out) is the number of races where the jockey is bribed/threatened to neither win nor place by outside parties and that is why if a jockey doesn't ride to the trainer's instructions he should be held to account.
Too easy to knock the Indian stewards in my opinion.

it should be presumed that a trainer knows his horse's capability better than the jockey and is perfectly entitled to give broad instructions as to how a horse should be ridden

posy, think you would be horrified how many trainers don't even know who the decent jockeys are let alone have any understanding about race tactics, draw biases, track preferences. Some trainers refuse to have their horses ridden from the front, some always race from the front - does that make their race tactics always correct?

Hardly any trainers can even be bothered to walk the track. Aidan O'Brien a rare exception.

Pedro that is nit-picking. He was banned for 15 racing days spread over  50 days. I'm sure these stewards you seem to hold a great deal of respect for knew very well that 50 days actually only mean't 15. And you miss my point.
My point is the Indian Authority is not a signatory to the International Agreement, their rule is not recognised over here and their punishment in India does not equate fairly when applied in the UK.
Three very good reasons why the BHA could have shown some leadership and common sense (little hope of that) and shown India that our system is the better one and they should sign up to it.

brigust, your second point I fully agree with and what clearly some on here had not read in his statement before denying Hughes right to proper appeal with legal representation

I may not have understood the 15 or 50 days correctly..... all I know is that Hughes is banned for 50 days in the UK right up to the Guineas meeting, hardly nitpicking and a major chunk out of Hughes' season

saddo,I have long got out of my bet on Hughes have switched to Moore.

I am a person who has always believed in fair play and the way that

Hughes has been treated by the BHA in this matter is nothing short of

draconian, to top it up it has acted exactly how star chambers acted

in the past where miscreants had no legal rights.

What would happen in India if 3 jockeys were all given instructions to make the running at all costs?

Any trainer issuing such naive instructions as "make the running at all costs" would be struck with an immediate ban for gross stupidity imo.

ykick if you were a regular racegoer/owner over here you'd know what I was talking about. Rancid outfit.