There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 142 comments are related to the topic:
Chucked out?
Chucked out?
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 142
|
By:
gaining at the line
 |
|
By:
The runner-up had his ground taken and was definitely affected by the winner. Swop the jockeys, swopt the result in the Room
|
|
By:
its a consistent decision, tears or not
|
|
By:
to be fair
we all knew they would not kick it out it very rarely happens..... carrot- he had to snatch the runner up yet only got beat a short head and was gaining at the line . i do think the winner is a better horse but the fact it won by a head does have to be taken into account...... |
|
By:
was NOT gaining at the line. Winner responded. You're seeing what you want to see.
|
|
By:
amazing how many so boys in blue horses run so green.......
|
|
By:
If the winner had gone through his antics, and the runner-up had been on his outside, the runner-up would have won. The 'best horse in the race' is irrelevant in a Nose or SH.
|
|
By:
 |
|
By:
rewired it was a short head a big difference given he had to snatch up his mount and switch
|
|
By:
for them to change one, they need to be 100% sure the second would have won. in this case imo you cant say that, of course many will disagree but under the present rules it seems to be how they come up with their decision
|
|
By:
for them to change one, they need to be 100% sure the second would have won. in this case imo you cant say that, of course many will disagree but under the present rules it seems to be how they come up with their decision
This is incorrect if a Nse or SH, unless the rules have changed. |
|
By:
why?
|
|
By:
what was the price of winner to keep race
|
|
By:
Last price was 1.6 I believe but it was around 1.3-1.4 for the most part of the inquiry.
|
|
By:
Race 1 - 12:50pm THE BETFRED HANDICAP STAKES (CLASS 2)
Stewards held an enquiry under Rule (B)11.6 into possible interference inside the final furlong. Having heard their evidence and viewed recordings of the race they found that the winner, TRYSTER (IRE), ridden by Adam Kirby, had interfered with GAELIC SILVER (FR), placed second, ridden by Hector Crouch by ducking left very suddenly just inside the furlong pole. They found the interference was accidental and had not improved TRYSER (IRE)’s placing. They ordered the placings to remain unaltered as at the time of the interference the winner was going quickly past the second when challenging and then rallied on the run to the line and appeared to be holding GAELIC SILVER (FR). |
|
By:
And Im the well-named 'idiot' and 'troll'.
 |
|
By:
did Kirby write that
|
|
By:
Was what appeared to happen imo. |
|
By:
Used to be an unwritten rule, cause any interference and only win by a short head or nose then you go. Annoying if this lot today have decided to rewrite it.
|
|
By:
As I've said for similar decisions, may as well play dodgems and just barge your rivals out of the way these days.
|
|
By:
biggest load of b0llocks i've ever heard, the interference cost
the 2nd what it got beat, thats all that matters |
|
By:
On reflection the horse was never going to thrown out....
It would have been disqualified before the "Bald Knocker" could force another pie into himself... The "double result" guarantee ensures that in this jurisdiction alone the result will always stand because the alleged "Bookmakers" rule.... Cannot have the Levy affected... |
|
By:
how can they be sure the 2nd wasn't about to unleash a burst of pace
when it was interfered with, ....dare say there was plenty of thick brown envelopes being passed about |
|
By:
You are right, R-R, and you can't start bringing subjective concepts into it like claiming the winner was idling etc because you can't accurately ascertain how much extra momentum the second lost or energy it used up.
As you say, it's all about whether the interference cost the second more than the distance it was beat. It was beat about 5 inches and was "badly hampered" according to the person paid to produce the in running comments for the Racing Post. Not only was it the subject of significant physical contact, but it also had to switch paths to avoid the winner, going from the rail to the outside. If I was Gary Moore, I'd be appealing it because it's a big pot for a relatively fairly old horse to win - hopefully any case they do put forward is a bit more forceful than the one Hector Crouch put across to Champman immediately post-race. Ironically, it would have been better for the winner to nearly bring the second down and beat it a length - that's how absurd the rules are. |
|
By:
Feck me Sergeant you should be reduced to the ranks....
|
|
By:
Feck me Sergeant you should be reduced to the ranks....
Being a sergeant, he would already belong to the ranks.  |
|
By:
Disqualify anything and the bookmakers' double result offer means they have to pay out twice, and as the BHA get a slice of their profits that means less money for racing.
It would be hugely naïve to think that this hasn't been made very, very clear to racecourse stewards by the bookmakers and the BHA. A jockey is going to get very seriously injured at some point, as riders are now steering into closing rivals, but hey, we can't have the bookmakers and their worthless industry glove puppets getting any less gravy, can we... |
|
By:
Point taken...
It is a long time since I was in Uniform....  |
|
By:
The placings should have been reversed, imo
What would be fair and just in such instances, would be to firstly deal with the facts and if possible let the facts decide. The facts: 1. GS was impeded / badly hampered by Tryster and his momentum checked, however briefly. 2. GS's ground was taken by Tryster, forcing his jockey to switch 3. GS lost a short head on the bob, when running on. Opinion / conjecture: 1."Tryster was the best horse because despite his antics, he has rallied to regain the lead close home". 2 points about this: i) Should horses get away with it when hanging all over the shop and the carnage that could have caused? ii) Gaelic Silver chased the pace whereas Tryster had sat off it, so unless we have the sectionals to prove otherwise, maybe GS had been at a disadvantage and did well in the circumstances to finish as close as he did. With the rules so heavily weighted in the offender's favour, the British interference rules have ceased to fair and just. Dealing with just the facts, and the distance he was beaten, Gaelic Silver should been given the race in the stewards' room. |
|
By:
george totally agree , i think the course knew they fcked up with that kink in the rail and to throw tryster out would have caused those connections to blame the course, not what they wanted on day one imo.
 |
|
By:
If the second had been ridden by a Jockey instead of a 7lb Cleimer the result would have almost certainly been reversed,imo.
Still a shocking decision. |
|
By:
The other point I'd make, would Crouch and Kirby have given their evidence when both were present in the stewards' room?
If so, how intimidating must it be for an inexperienced jockey up against a senior jockey in such circumstances? |
|
By:
Yes,both Jockeys would have been present together.
|
|
By:
I wasn't sure if one waited outside while the other gave his evidence.
In that case, with Kirby stood next to him, I bet Crouch was as timid as a church mouse. |
|
By:
Both Jockeys are interviewed and invited to give their explanation.
Stewards then ask any further questions. Jockeys are asked to leave. Stewards deliberate and make their decision. Finally,the get it wrong  Sorry but I could not help but post the last bit |
|
By:
Thought this was an old pair of trainers fred.
|
|
By:
The crucial point is that Gaelic got to the front, but got re-passed, so the stewards cannot be certain (nor can anyone else, imo) that he would have won without interference. If he hadn't have been intered with, there's enough there to suggest that he'd have still been beaten - the likelihood is he'd have got to the front a bit earlier, and still been re-passed, and beaten - can't be certain of course - but you don't HAVE to be certain to leave the result alone.
|
|
By:
Another important point is,Jockeys are at all times referred to by their surnames
|
|
By:
,,,if he'd have been gaing all the way to the line, he'd have got it, no question - but he had his chance, took it, and blew it.
|
|
By:
*gaining.
|