Tuscan Golds finishing position not improved by nearly puuting rival over the rails......JOKE

The good news for connections of the second is that according to the stewards the interference didn't affect the result so he was beaten 3 lengths and should get dropped a couple of pounds.

Chance would be a fine thing, the professional handicapper really isn't as stupid as them, and they should get him out again quickly.

^ Will probably raise it seven.

I had presumed that the stewards had a camera angle which showed the jockey on the 2nd had no right to go for the gap. To do the winning jock for careless and then say that the interference did not improve Tuscan gold's finishing position defies belief.

Completely took him out on the head-on, no dispute.

I've stated numerous times on here that these Stewards Rules are DISGRACEFUL.  You can now do anything and still keep the race.  Cannon almost put Brennan over the rails. Do u have to punch another jockey to lose a race??

^ Where would you place Tuscan Gold if Jacks Grey fell then?  Imo Tuscan Gold should be placed last whatever.

Kriskin you are correct.Why bother having Stewards in this Country as nothing gets thrown out.They are a complete joke and as for non-triers...

the way racing is run in ireland and the UK is hilarious..........you can kick a rival out of the way no probs.......you can stop horses left, right and centre, no probs..........whatever is required to fool everyone and cheat is fine.

just watched this replay and its absolutely mind boggling..the stewards cost me nearly 10k at chepstow on fri for what can only be described as absolute minimal intereference,,tonite a horse makes about 3 lengths up from the last and as its challenging its nearly put over the rails and the stewards say the winner hasnt improved its position....comical

Saw ya jobcentre  thread Stevie -is it getting that bad -dont play in running by the way

EVER SINCE THE BOOKIES STARTED PAYING ON BOTH RESULTS, F*** ALL HORSES GET CHUCKED OUT

It is a disgrace, what exactly is the point in having stewards at race meetings? Overpaid toffs who do NOTHING for the integrity of the 'sport' at all!

I remember a similar incident a few years ago where careless riding from Richard Johnson sent a jockey over the rails. He never even got a ban for that. In this occasion they have at least banned Tom Cannon, but screwed the punters, Fergal O'Brian and the horse's owner.

Why are the stewards never questioned or called out when they make ridiculous decisions and explanations like today?? Would love for Channel 4 to have something to say about it on the morning line on Saturday. I'm sure they won't though...

Total farce from the 'stewards' and the clown on ATR should have called it for what it was.

Fact remains the runner up was never in front, finished 3 lengths behind and Brennan was looking at going for a gap that wasn't there, partly due to the winner edging to the left but primarily because of the rail cutting in.  No idea why Brennan didn't either switch to the outside or go for the gap before the rail cut in, he really did cause his own downfall.  In my view there was absolutely no way the winner could have been chucked out.

Agree with the above. These days to be thrown out you have to be absolutely certain of the outcome and in this case the winner wasn't stopping. Any disgruntled punters should definitely consider why if he was going that well did Brennan not take advantage of the rather large 'gap' on the other side of the winner.

Its tricky, i was at wuss last night, because they are using the same track for both races and the ground is so awful there are rails and dolled off bits a plenty.

I half think paddy could have gone tother way if he so wished

NOW..I WAS OUT THERE LAST NIGHT IN THE MIDDLE ......IVE ALWAYS THOUGHT THAT THERE WAS ASPOT WHERE YOU COME WHERE KINGS GREY CAME AND YOU RUN OUT OF REAL ESTATE WHICH IS WHAT I BELIEVED....BUT ACCORDING TO REPORTS AND HEAD ONS THE WINNERS INTERFERED WITH THE SECOND ...IF THATS THE CASE THEN I FIND IT HARD TO BELIEVE .......BECAUSE I SAW THIS WITH ME OWN EYES .....KINGS GREY CAME AND HE WOULD HAVE BEATEN THE WINNER ....THE INTERFERENCE WAS HAS BAD AS IVE EVER SEEN HE GOT BT 3LS AND THAT WAS A HELLUVA BUMP ,,,,,IF KINGS GREY HAD ROOM TO GO THROUGH WITH HIS RUN THATS ONE OF THE WORST CASES OF NOT GETTING THE RACE ICVE EVER SEEN HE WAS A HALF-NECK BEHIND STILL COMING THROUGH WHEN HE DID HIM

IVANA HAS COME UP WITH THE POSSSIBLE EXPLANATION ........WHAT YA DONT REALISE IS THIS ,,,,THERES A PART UP THEM RAILS THAT RUNS OUT OF ROOM .....I SAID IF HE HAD RIGHT OF WAY THEN ITS A DIGRACE HIM KEEEPING IT ................BUT IVE MY DOUBTS

The whole stewarding system needs completely overhauling. We need a group of professional stewards who travel the country and do the job day after day.

Of course, the toffs will never let it happen.

YOURE ALL....(its a jerk reation ,I don't blame ya)JUMOING TO CONCLUSUIONS ......ON WHAT I KNOW AND SEEN I THINK STEWARDS GOT IT RIGHT ,LIKE I SAID F HE HAD ROOM HES GOTTA A GO ....BUT IM NOT CONVINCED

GONZO ITS THE SAME AS THE ....F.A.....WHO ?? WHO?? APPOINTS THEM .....WE SCREW UP AT WORK WERE ANSWERABLE WE GET REPRIMANDED AND THE TIN TAC ....THEY SCREW UP WHAT HAPPENS ,THERE IN CHARGE ......AS FOR TV ANALYSTISTS THEY OUGHT TO BE SHOT ,PUT IN A DAY CENTER FOR BABYS ,ALLTHEY WANNA DO IS TALK GOO-GOO

SAYING THAT I DONT MIND LYDIA AND STEVE

I thought the winner kept a fairly straight line after the last and it was the responsibilty of the second to get in front and back on the track before the elbow.  I dont think it was the responsibility of the winning jockey to move over to let the second up his inside. It was just tough race riding.

But the stewards have said the winner made a manoeuvre to block the second. Once they have come to that conclusion they must alter the places.

If I was the winning jockey I would appeal the ban since it was based upon a manoeuvre that never happened. If I was the second I would appeal since the stewards view that the interference did not improve the placing of the winner was nonsense.

MUPPET .......IF THE STEWARDS BELIEVED THAT ......THEN I CANT BELIEVE HES KEPT IT .....THAT WAS A SERIOUS BIT OF INTERFERENCE ....BUT I KNOW THAT RUN IN .......AND I THINK THERES A POSSSIBLITY THE STEWARDS COULD BE WRONG

With the proviso that I haven't seen the head-on replay, I can't see that the winner keeps a straight line after the last. Looks to me like he briefly headed towards the stands, before lugging back over right in front of the runner-up

I was at worcester last night too and can see both sides of the argument. That said the real issue is surely the inconsistency of the outcome

a) Cannon banned for careless
b) winner did not improve its position

Whilst not necessarily mutually exclusive, in this case I cant see how  a) and b) can be compatible

Replays on now ....

Paddy had no right to that ground - should have nipped through before they both got to the rail or committed around the outside ....

Stewards harsh for 6 days