Forums
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
factmachine
12 Sep 15 20:47
Joined:
Date Joined: 02 Nov 05
| Topic/replies: 4,783 | Blogger: factmachine's blog
SHOCK,THE FAV GETS AWARDED THE RACE,UTTER DISGRACE BUT NO SURPRISE.WILL BE REVERSED ON APPEAL.
Pause Switch to Standard View DONCASTER STEWARDS UTTER DISGRACE
Show More
Loading...
Report GEORGE.B September 12, 2015 10:21 PM BST
As I said, I was speaking in general terms - and that is there should never be anything in the rules that should suggest to jockeys that as long as "they're on the best horse", any interference will be excused.

Imo, we need to get out of the situation we're in now, whereby jockeys are walking back to the weighing room, and trying to justify the interference they just caused by saying to the interviewer: "I was on the best horse".
Report duffyg September 12, 2015 10:21 PM BST
WHY?
Report GEORGE.B September 12, 2015 10:24 PM BST
Because you're then saying to jockeys, as is the situation currently 99.9% of the time, that so long as you win by more than a nose, pretty much anything goes - and that is compromising safety, encouraging gamesmanship, and weighing the rules too heavily in the favour of the OFFENDER!
Report factmachine September 12, 2015 10:25 PM BST
HAD THE BETTING ON THE TWO HORSES BEEN REVERSED AND THE FAV HAD FINISHED FIRST PAST THE POST,THE RESULT WOULD HAVE STOOD,FACT!
Report duffyg September 12, 2015 10:27 PM BST
bONDI BEACH WAS PENNING SIMPLE VERSE IN A FURLONG OUT,HE WAS FAIR GAME TO ME,INTERFERENCE IS NOT JUST 100 YARDS IN
Report oneyallbeenwaiting4 September 12, 2015 10:27 PM BST
The game is fast becoming the equivalent of La Liga, jockeys diving trying to get others booked. Half ton machines and we are trying to turn it inot a non contact sport.

Bondi Beach got beat up by a girl today.
Report duffyg September 12, 2015 10:28 PM BST
Sos about cap locks
Report factmachine September 12, 2015 10:29 PM BST
IT HAS GOT THAT BAD THAT EVEN THIS SITE WITHHOLD PAYMENT UNTIL THE WEIGH IN IF THE FAV IS BEATEN LESS THAN HALF A LENGTH,THE STEWARDS ARE A DISGRACE!
Report lewisham ranger September 12, 2015 10:29 PM BST
Offender and victim are words that don't really apply in this case though are they? I mean they are both guilty of barging the other. Bondi Beach was trying to keep the filly in, a legitimate riding tactic, but she got out and he wasn't strong enough to keep her in.

Then when she got out he still had a chance to go past her but couldn't, what you could do was hit Andrea with a ban, but don't reverse the decision for god's sake.

The more I think about this disgrace of a decision the more it disgusts me. And not pocket talking, I backed Storm the stars so it matters little to me which of them won.

But this is a classic, not a seller at Market Rasen. The stewards had to be completely certain that the "interference" affected the result. The result will stand forever in the history books, and Simple Verse's name should be in there, not Bondi Beach.
Report duffyg September 12, 2015 10:31 PM BST
Well said Lewisham
Report GEORGE.B September 12, 2015 10:33 PM BST
Surely there's a good chance they will get it on appeal?
Report duffyg September 12, 2015 10:36 PM BST
Should I appeal to betfair then?
Report noidea September 12, 2015 10:44 PM BST
duffyg, no point in appealing. However what you should do when you back a horse on Betfair is leave a 1.01 lay. (Apologies if you lost your money in running.)
Report duffyg September 12, 2015 10:47 PM BST
Good point but betfair pay on official result so when simple verses connections get their appeal(and they will) will I get paid?
Report factmachine September 12, 2015 10:49 PM BST
CryCryCryCry
Report GEORGE.B September 12, 2015 10:54 PM BST
I don't think the BHA want results being reversed as it costs them money as it hits the bookmaker profits, who obviously pay out on both results, so I think there is a chance the BHA will reinstate the filly to teach the Donny stewards what they're meant to be doing, imo!

Shahdaroba and Islesman being 2 examples of horses who were reinstated on appeal, when the stewards had arguably been correct to disqualify them in the first place.
Report jimeen September 12, 2015 10:55 PM BST
Simple Verse deserved to lose the race for one reason only, the complete ineptness of the rider in the stewards room. He completely shamed himself in the room and the case he put forward would not have been dissimilar to a 2yo child.
You just knew it was up for grabs after both jockeys spoke, O Donoghue excelled and Atzeni showed himself to have the brain of an ant.
Report ACE JACK DOUBLE SUITED September 12, 2015 10:58 PM BST
Lewisham ranger the result was a 100% the right decision. The jockey is a complete cabbage...look at the ride he gave battersea the day before...he got himself in a similar position and made a balls of it to
Report ACE JACK DOUBLE SUITED September 12, 2015 10:58 PM BST
Lewisham ranger the result was a 100% the right decision. The jockey is a complete cabbage...look at the ride he gave battersea the day before...he got himself in a similar position and made a balls of it to
Report factmachine September 12, 2015 10:59 PM BST
JIMEEN THE ONLY PEOPLE THAT "SHAMED THEMSELFS" WERE THE STEWARDS THEMSELFS,UTTER DISGRACE!
Report noidea September 12, 2015 11:01 PM BST
If this had been a minor race at Lingfield the view would have been :- "A bit harsh, but I can see why they've done it". Apart from connections, and people not savvy enough to get paid first past the post.
Report jimeen September 12, 2015 11:03 PM BST
Atzeni gave them every chance to throw it out and they did. If O Donoghue rode the original winner, then he wouldnt have lost it in the room.
If they are going to appeal they would be best advised to get a sick note for Andrea.
Report factmachine September 12, 2015 11:04 PM BST
IF THE HORSE THAT FINISHED SECOND BEEN A 33/1 SHOT,THE RESULT WOULD HAVE STOOD,FACT!Angry
Report duffyg September 12, 2015 11:07 PM BST
The best horse lost because of the jockeys eloquence? Come on
Report ACE JACK DOUBLE SUITED September 12, 2015 11:07 PM BST
If my auntie had balls she'd be my uncle
Report winsamsoon September 12, 2015 11:12 PM BST
Not a hope in hell of winning an appeal, Atzeni got stuck on the rail, then tried to barge his way out.
No need for him to be there, he had 1m2f to get of it. He deserved to lose the race for being a stupid dope alone and the owners deserved to lose it for hiring him.
Report big aitch September 13, 2015 12:05 AM BST
The Steward said they listened to what the jockies had to say, then saw film of the incidents, and decided to reverse the placings. He also said that the jockies wouldn't admit if they were in the wrong, so it is really a pointless exercise interviewing them in the first place.

All the evidence they need is recorded.
Report ima_mazed66 September 13, 2015 2:30 AM BST
factmachine     12 Sep 15 23:04 
IF THE HORSE THAT FINISHED SECOND BEEN A 33/1 SHOT,THE RESULT WOULD HAVE STOOD,FACT!


Why, so the stewards could do favourite backers a turn out of the goodness of their own hearts?

I love the way too people are saying the best horse won and are completely ignoring that if "the best horse" couldn't get off the rail without barging its way out then it wouldn't have won. That's almost as amusing as those saying the filly "got out" as if by some chance a massive gap suddenly opened up and the jockey couldn't believe his luck and so took the opening presented to him.

The jockey made his own gap.
Report liberator of the oppressed September 13, 2015 7:12 AM BST
As I mentioned in an earlier thread the geezer in charge who yesterday was on the telly trying to justify the decision should do the right thing and resign if this is turned over on appeal. What was more interesting is I don't think was a unanimous decision by the beaks. What does that say?
Report liberator of the oppressed September 13, 2015 7:15 AM BST
On a separate matter do any of them ever resign when they make a truly monster gaff? What do they do for their dosh - assuming they are remunerated? How much do you get paid. Giz a job I can do that.
Report liberator of the oppressed September 13, 2015 7:19 AM BST
Finally should the Stewards have interpreters? Not as mad a suggestion as you think. Anybody else would. About fair play and gathering the evidence and not disadvantaging or discrminating.
Report motor roller September 13, 2015 8:37 AM BST
I was at Doncaster will post a full review later but I backed "the winner" at 1.17 during the enquiry for £2000 on here that's how sure I was the result should stand (and I don't play at that level or on those type of markets normally) that's how sure I was the result would stand!

I think from speaking to s pro punter later it was in the stewards room where the jockey lost came across as a rabbit in headlights that sealed the fate. A more accomplished performance of confidence he bumped me I bumped him we both kept riding etc would have seen the result stand.

I then after a couple of bottles of very good St Emillion got stuck into golden horn pre and post race which thankfully went my way plus bronze angel which turned a horror day into £366+

Report lewisham ranger September 13, 2015 8:49 AM BST
Why bother to interview the jockeys anyway, it's not a criminal trial

the stewards can see very well just from the video what happened in the race
Report dave1357 September 13, 2015 8:55 AM BST
Why bother to interview the jockeys anyway

They issue bans to jockeys (preventing them from working), the procedures would be deemed unfair without listening to the jockey's point of view.
Report lewisham ranger September 13, 2015 9:11 AM BST
But that part should be to ascertain if the jockey is guilty of careless riding or not

As far as changing or keeping the result is concerned, they should be entirely dependent on the video, what the jockey's say should be irrelevant

Plenty on her praising the jockey on Bondi Beach, and slagging off Andrea for not speaking his corner, but for me the result of a classic horse race should not be dependent on which jockey gives a better case at the hearing, if that is the case then it's just plain wrong
Report xmoneyx September 13, 2015 9:41 AM BST
steward--said prize of race never taken into account

shouldn't it be?
Report BornToWin September 13, 2015 9:53 AM BST
Getting boxed in in a 1m6f 7 runner race, then barging your way out is fair is it? The first bump was significant and as Colm said it cost him half a length. He is coming back at the filly all the way to the line after getting another bump, then beaten less than a head.

I feel as soon as Atzeni decided to barge his way out he was opening himself to this possibility. He may well have been on the best horse, but due to his riding decisions he got it in a poor position. Thats racing.
Report EVILROYSLADE September 13, 2015 10:42 AM BST
I have to agree with Lewisham. Evidence is right their in front of the stewards! They can see what has happened, in slow motion and different angles. No jockey is going to go into an enquiry situation and do anything other than try to come out on top. If a steward needs to hear tales of mystery and imagination to come to a conclusion they are in the wrong job.
Report EVILROYSLADE September 13, 2015 10:44 AM BST
"THERE".
Report mmmalushka September 13, 2015 11:25 AM BST
I have'nt seen the race but I would say the stewards have made the correct decision,in all cases where the FAV is involved in a stewards inquiry the FAV should always keep the race or be promoted to first place.
Report xmoneyx September 13, 2015 11:29 AM BST
Sunday forum

Matt ---simple verse --should of kept
Weaver -right decision
a down  - simple verse--hard done by--won't win appeal
Report Cider September 13, 2015 11:37 AM BST
Out of that bunch, only MC understands the UK rules as they stand, it seems.
Report kincsem September 13, 2015 11:41 AM BST
I watched the race for the first time today.  Simple Verse was interfered with.
I'm glad they are appealing the decision.
Report Hound-Dog-2 September 13, 2015 11:57 AM BST
" I don't think it was a unanimous decision by the beaks. What does that say?"

In the TV interview afterwards he said we never reveal if it was a unanimous decision or not. And yesterday I certainly don't think it was. I reckon Simple Verse should have kept it. Andrea is a brilliant jockey but agree with some comments on here that he did not argue his case very well, but positively 100% agree with this comment, "the result of a classic horse race should not be dependent on which jockey gives a better case at the hearing."
Report hornshoe1 September 13, 2015 1:50 PM BST
crumbs its ding dong close, but my notion is it's going to be rev'd @ appeal...we'll see
Report basilbrush September 13, 2015 2:22 PM BST
Atzeni was very poor in  the stewards room, he was almost welcoming them to reverse the result.
Report basilbrush September 13, 2015 2:23 PM BST
Atzeni was also poor in the saddle, should never have got himself boxed in.
Report xmoneyx September 13, 2015 2:24 PM BST
stewards split

new rule has to be unanimous to change resultCool
Report factmachine September 13, 2015 2:30 PM BST
ANOTHER ONE IN IRELAND TODAY,BET YOU CANT GUESS WHO GOT THE RACE,FAV FAV FAV FAV FAV FAV FAV Cry
Report factmachine September 13, 2015 2:31 PM BST
UTTER JOKE,TOTALLY CORRUPT!
Report never give up September 13, 2015 2:32 PM BST
dry your eyes smaller than the machine LaughLaughLaughLaughLaughLaughLaughLaughLaughLaughLaughLaughLaughLaughLaughLaughLaugh
Report factmachine September 13, 2015 2:36 PM BST
BIGMO GOT U SUSSEDLaughLaughLaughLaugh LITTLE MANHappy
Report never give up September 13, 2015 2:37 PM BST
CryCryCryCrySadSadSadSadSad

get a new box of tissues hulk said LaughLaughLaughLaughLaughLaughLaughLaughLaughLaughLaughLaughLaughLaughLaughLaughLaughLaughLaughLaugh
Report factmachine September 13, 2015 2:40 PM BST
OKLove
Report over the rainbow September 13, 2015 6:07 PM BST
When the Head Steward came on TV to justify his decision he made no mention of BB leaning into the Filly. It seemed very one sided into what SHE'D done. Hope she gets it on appeal and I would think most people feel the same. Also Colm in his interview was going on about steady pace, weight allowance etc she got but I thought she never 100% relaxed in the race and probably also used energy by not doing so. BB just didn't have the balls to pass her end of.
Report posy September 13, 2015 6:35 PM BST
can't understand what the weight allowance has got to do with it...
Report over the rainbow September 13, 2015 7:00 PM BST
Nor I but this was one of Colms excuses in his interview for the filly having a better turn of foot over the distance!! Make a great salesman or politician when he retires!!
Report Millerracing67 September 13, 2015 7:10 PM BST
Think both sets of stewards call it right yesterday (UK & IRE) imo.
Report NorwichRob September 13, 2015 8:01 PM BST
Both got it wrong for me - Golden Horn should've been demoted behind Free Eagle, & Simple Verse should've kept the race.
Report NorwichRob September 13, 2015 8:01 PM BST
Both got it wrong for me - Golden Horn should've been demoted behind Free Eagle, & Simple Verse should've kept the race.
Report factmachine September 13, 2015 8:04 PM BST
IT WAS JUST A COINCIDENCE THEY WERE BOTH FAVSCry
Report NorwichRob September 13, 2015 8:15 PM BST
Simple Verse will get the race but punters skint..that's the game...Golden Horn maybe Golden Balls...
Report asparagus September 13, 2015 11:11 PM BST
Over the rainbow makes a very important point. The stewards seemed to completely ignore that after the initial bump it was Bondi Beach who was leaning into Simple Verse for an extended period. Simple Verse then lightly bumped Bondi Beach. At no time in the last 2 furlongs did Bondi Beach look like getting past Simple Verse. She was undoubtedly still holding him at the line. If the original bump is considered dangerous riding or that alone cost Bondi Beach the race you could argue for a disqualification. Neither of those things seemed the case for me. It was simply a very bad decision under the rules. Quite possibly Atzeni was too 'nice' in the stewards but this should have no effect.
Report KeenLeader September 13, 2015 11:39 PM BST
I agree Asparagus to my mind the best horse past the post first. As I saw it the first incident had little effect on the outcome and the second was six and two threes. Obviously the stewards saw it different and given the margin of defeat overruled it. That is fair enough even though I dont agree with it but I would hate to think that ODonogues assertive and persuasive argument swayed the stewards. To my mind jockeys should be there to answer questions not put forward cases.
Report KeenLeader September 13, 2015 11:39 PM BST
I agree Asparagus to my mind the best horse past the post first. As I saw it the first incident had little effect on the outcome and the second was six and two threes. Obviously the stewards saw it different and given the margin of defeat overruled it. That is fair enough even though I dont agree with it but I would hate to think that ODonogues assertive and persuasive argument swayed the stewards. To my mind jockeys should be there to answer questions not put forward cases.
Report ima_mazed66 September 13, 2015 11:58 PM BST
If you're upsides another horse on your inner and that horse barges you out of the way to get a clear run, and in the process of doing so you go from upsides to one length down but still manage to reduce that new one length deficit to only a head at the line, can you not see how meaningless it is to say "oh but the 2nd never looked like passing" when without the bump and losing the extra one length then it probably would have passed?

I'm a bit bewildered as to the relevance of favourites getting or keeping races via the stewards too and what's supposed to be going on here, they are doing punters a good turn or something so as to punish the big bad bookies? We all love a conspiracy theory but if they were actually throwing favourites out then it might make a bit more sense.
Report bigmart September 14, 2015 12:04 AM BST
when the winning jockey was being interviewed straight after the race ,sitting on the horse ,
he looked up at the big screen replay ,and his face almost turned white Scared he new he had lost the race ,
by the worried expression on his face ! it maybe ungentlemanly conduct keeping a horse penned in ,but the winning jockey breached the rules end of chapter !
Report Markyacard September 14, 2015 3:54 AM BST
The inconsistency is the only part of the decision to reverse the result which annoyed me.
At the time my thought was 'this could get thrown out' but when does that ever actually happen?
I would imagine my lay of Bondi Beach was one of the last matched on here before the final suspension at 16.07 on Saturday for a score at 3.7 after the stewards had made their decision.
I'd like to think the shrewdie who got that had just woken from a coma bearing in mind the price never went below 5.0 for the entirety of the betting in the aftermath of the race. But we all know that isn't as probable as some toff or connection to those that knew the decision spiking the price down just as the market finally suspended.
 
In summary i would say these two things to those that lost money on Saturday due to the stewards.
Either... 1) Give betting a knock on the head when in the lap of the gods aka the stewards.

2)Have a look at all Bondi Beach's previous races and if you're patient enough when probably 95% of it's offspring are turning out in low grade races at the likes of Fakenham and other such gaffs in 2020 onwards remember yesterdays decision and make money from it as i suspect B Beach is a NH stallion in the mould of Scorpion.
Report asparagus September 14, 2015 9:47 AM BST
Ima Mazed, you may need to go back and look at the race again. If what you said was true about a horse being level with another and coming out of the bump a length ahead before going on to win a race by a head then of course you have a case for disqualification. That simply wasn't the case. I've watched it 20 times+ and Simple Verse was already ahead of Bondi beach before the bump and doesn't come out of the bump any real distance further ahead. Certainly a matter of inches and not more than the head Simple Verse won by. In addition Atzeni is clearly not all out in the final few strides and the winning distance of a head could almost certainly have been a tiny bit more.

There is no doubt that under our rules as they stand it was a terrible decision. The stewards clearly looked to have been influenced by the more persuasive jockey.
Report sean rua September 14, 2015 10:21 AM BST
A very unsatisfactory affair, imo.

Two good jockeys: one filly stronger and faster than a colt.

Sadly, I think that the pilots must be interviewed. When there's an accident, drivers are asked for their versions of what went wrong, eg. the Glasgow bin-lorry driver ( yes, a much more serious event).
We have to hear if they say something went wrong, etc.

On the other hand, action speaks louder than words.
The head-on video I saw showed BB with his head in and his ar se sticking out as he leaned on.
The filly made contact with her ar se. I'd say the filly had her head in front at this stage.
But roolz is rules, I guess, though I prefer to see barging allowed in such cases. In NH we see it all the time, even when animals jump across in front of another. McCoy was great at it.
I doubt much will be done to prevent a repetition.
Report ima_mazed66 September 15, 2015 1:05 AM BST
I'm sorry asparagus but I stand by my version of events regarding how the race panned out.

At both the 4f and 3f poles Bondi Beach is ahead of Simple Verse and just before the 2f pole the 4 horses involved at the end are in two pairs, with SV on the rail in 4th tracking Fields Of Athenry and BB in 3rd tracking Storm The Stars, with both of those last named runners one off the rail. After the bumping match BB and SV go from around level to BB around a length down or at least three-quarters of a length anyway, as it's hard to tell exactly from the camera angle.

It was this bump that effectively opened up the gap by knocking BB to the side and getting him unbalanced that made the opening for SV to go through. I don't really agree either that Atzeni wasn't all out on the filly and maybe inside the final 2f he felt he would take the leader and also hold off BB, yet in the end around the half a furlong pole he had to get serious with her and go for the whip and even bumped BB again, which made him (Atzeni) pull his whip through to try to correct her after she shifted right late on.

I'm also not as convinced as some that the stewards based their decision on how effective each jockey spoke in the enquiry and even if some feel O'Donoghue was better, it doesn't necessarily follow that that was the reason for their decision anyway. 

Whether the appeal is successful or not if the decision on the day can be deemed wrong based on the current rules, either way I still feel the correct decision was made based on how things should be.
Report guardamar September 15, 2015 4:21 AM BST
I been going  racing  before most of the current racing  pundits. i.e.Morning  line,were born,
Sadly that doesn't make me  any  richer financially,experience doesnt count   in racing.
With only  the benifit of  that experience i can say this.Over the last few years i have seen   horses keep   race after race  when 20 years ago they  would  have been  without  doubt  disqualified. We have been  brainwashed by  the  pundits that the  horse that  wins,  will  not be  thrown out,under  almost any circumstances,to my way of understanding ,it  has too be pretty bad to get  yourself  disqualified racing  in the U.K.  today. Sadly last Saturday at Town Moor the  goalposts were moved.A worthy winner was greeted by 'Objection Sustained'   Even  if the appeal is sucessful and  the filly gets the  race the damage  has been  done.
That memory for Ralph Beckett ,Andrea  Atzeni, The Owner, and all their stable staff will have been tarnished for ever.
Report asparagus September 15, 2015 9:06 AM BST
Ima Amazed, you may think that the correct was made based on how things should be. I would probably agree with that. Personally, I think the rules should be in all cases that the horse who gets interfered with gets the benefit of any doubt. Ie if its a 50/50 decision the interferer gets disqulaified. However, that's not how our rules currently stand. My understanding of the hundreds (if not thousands) of stewards enquiries i've seen before is that unless the stewards are very confident the placings have been affected the result stands. That's why to me this decision was a very very poor one.
I'm not sure either whether Atzeni should be allowed to bump his way out of a gap but as our rules stand that in itself isn't enough to cause a disqualification unless its deemed as dangerous riding. In this case compared to the precedent of so many others i don't think it could be considered dangerous. Peslier at Goodwood was one to me that could have been considered dangerous and disqualified as he almost knocked horses over to get out of a gap.
Report factmachine September 15, 2015 6:26 PM BST
I WONDER HOW THEY WOULD BET ON THE RESULT BEING REVERSED????? KNOWING FULL WELL THAT THE DAMAGE TO THE LITTLE CREDIBILITY THE SPORT HAS LEFT WILL EVAPORATE ON A AMENDED RESULT AND PROVE BEYOND DOUBT THAT THE STEWARDS CAN NOT BE TRUSTED TO DO THE JOB!
Report acey deucy September 15, 2015 8:53 PM BST
Cant see this result being changed now not in a Million years......And i do think the it was the right decision by the stewards.These Big Races are getting rougher and it's time it was stamped out
Report bookaknowledge September 15, 2015 11:04 PM BST
Right decision imo - Appeal has next to no hope!
Report never give up September 15, 2015 11:33 PM BST
moanmachine still crying....get over it
Report ima_mazed66 September 16, 2015 3:52 AM BST
I'm arguing more though that it was the correct decision in general or morally more so than whether it was correct based on the current rules asparagus because I don't think the current rules are logical, so I think we are in agreement more than not so.

I understand why the old rules were changed but now think it's gone too far the other way and jockeys have free rein to break the rules, as in ride dangerously or recklessly just as long as they still win and are willing to do so and take their chance with the stewards when knowing more often than not they will keep the race regardless, even if it means getting a ban. Ask Atzeni would he have been happy to take his jockey share of the almost £400k prize money for winning the Leger but also take a ban and I'm sure he would have settled for that.

The current rules almost encourage poor riding and yet if a jockey does get a ban then that is the stewards admitting he has done wrong but he is still rewarded for doing wrong by being allowed to keep the race. That's like a footballer already on a yellow card using his hand to score a goal and the referee gives him a second yellow and sends him off for breaking the rules but lets the goal stand anyway.
Report roggrain September 16, 2015 9:31 AM BST
You are right about jockeys regularly breaking the rules,ima.

I just watched 15 international top flight races, 5 from Longchamp, 5 from Canada and 5 from Australia.

As far as I could tell there was only one piece of (minor) interference that took place in the last two furlongs of all those races.

The Australian races were particularly bunched,close finishes, but every horse ran straight. Not one rider barged his way out or allowed

his horse to drift across the course from one side to the other,something which in 40 years of watching American racing I have never seen

apart from Frankie's ride in the Breeder's Cup one year. (Forget the horse's name).

It's not that our jockeys are incapable of correcting a horse that drifts out,it's that they know the chances are they will keep the race.

Atzeni would have got 21 days at least in Australia, but then again he wouldn't have done what he did in the St Leger because he would know

that he would lose the race and get a hefty suspension.
Report sean rua September 16, 2015 9:41 AM BST
Well, yes, from a punter's point of view, this allowing the result to stand while giving the jockey even a huge ban is what sickens many of us, imo.
In this case, I had no bet, but thought the first over the line was the winner and would stay the winner, despite all the bumping and barging.
I was wrong about that, and, as has been said, we have got a bit complacent about these things just being allowed. A bit like bikes on the footpath; driving through amber and red lights; parking any place, etc.

Now that there has been a tightening up on enforcement, I cannot see the authorities reversing this one. I'd guess there'll be plenty of diplomatic telephone calls to the Qataris, though.


\|

That's my imagined bird's eye view of the "lines" of the two runners.
Which one isn't going straight?

I still believe in barging to get out or through.
Report sean rua September 16, 2015 9:43 AM BST
\|

heads are this end.
Report posy September 16, 2015 9:56 AM BST
would be sensible to hear the appeal promptly...can't see it being in anyone's interest to delay the hearing until next month.
Report TheAnorak September 16, 2015 10:11 AM BST
To get an idea of just how much the interpretation of the rules has changed, have a look at this race from 15 years ago, in which the first past the post was disqualified for an incident more than 3F from the finish.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsMWukLyQqM

The interference, which was adjudged serious irresponsible riding, occurs at about 2m 33s into the video.
Report Chazzyb September 16, 2015 10:21 AM BST
election    Odds    Stake(£)    Bid type    Placed    Profit/loss(£)
Bondi Beach    *    5.05    220.20    Back         891.29
Storm The Stars    3.30    100.00    Back    12-Sep-15 15:40    -100.00
*Average odds: On  Off    Back subtotal:    791.29
Lay subtotal:    0.00
Market subtotal:    791.29
Commission @ 4%:    31.65
Net Market Total:    759.64

Fully appreciate Bondi Beach was leaning in but that's not an offence. Filly gives her two hefty bumps undoubtedly causing Bondi Beach to lose more ground than was beaten by. Final margin a head. WHERE'S THE CONFUSION?? Correct decision and no chance of being reversed IMO.
Report posy September 16, 2015 10:36 AM BST
anorak.....disqualification seems a tad harsh ! in fact a ridiculous decision which certainly should have been appealed.
Report timtin September 16, 2015 10:40 AM BST
The promoted winner interfered with the filly and was leaning towards her and STS who was on the rail. This is a contact sport and the tracks aren't dead flat like in US or AUS so of course there's going to be alot more horses that won't keep the idiotic straight line. If the favourite had just kept his line in the last 1-2f and hadn't veered into the filly then the filly wouldn't had been forced to make room so that she woulnd't kill the horse on the rail STS. The head-on is quite revealing but the stewards were fooled on the day by the favourite jockey. I'm sure this atrocious decision will be reversed.
Report TheAnorak September 16, 2015 10:57 AM BST
Posy,

Connections were furious on the day, but eventually decided not to appeal and I've no idea why, although the way the sport was run back then, appeals were rarely successful. Nowadays, I doubt if that incident would even result in a stewards enquiry, although maybe they would have a word with the jockey and give him a two day ban.

The bloke in charge of the discplinary system actually wrote a letter to the Post defending the disqualification and claiming that their decision not to appeal proved the stewards were right.
Report ima_mazed66 September 17, 2015 12:05 AM BST
I still feel the disqualification from 15 years ago was right too because the winner is trapped on the inside once again and whilst that helps with saving ground, you still need to sit and suffer and hope a gap comes, yet if you do that then you are running out of time to get out, get balanced and then ride a finish.

If the jockey on the FPTP in that video felt he could sit still for another 2f and get out when a gap appeared and still win then surely he would have done that. The fact that he forced his way out and only won by half a length having got out around 3f from home whilst the 2nd went wide and always had a clear run, suggests the jockey on the FPTP knew he couldn't afford to sit and wait.

The FPTP had 3 runners ahead of him (including another in similar colours who did have to sit and wait) and plenty to his outer and so wouldn't have been best positioned to take any gap first even if he did sit and wait and that's the very reason he forced his way out and knocked other runners backwards and out of the race. Look what happens to the one in the nose band to his right and the other one in the two shades of blue colours two runners to his right.
Report sean rua September 17, 2015 10:10 AM BST
Interesting footage, Alan! Thank you.

Back to recent events, and getting into "what if" and "if only",
how would things have ended

a) if there were a "cut-away" in the rail, as at Chester or Newmarket?

b)if the Haggas horse had been able to motor on a bit further, instead of coming back and completing the block?

Happy

I'm now convinced that there should be a rule change: if 'tis fine to lean on another with the front of a horse, but not allowed to bump with the hind-quarters, then 'tis not very fair, imo.
The main danger of horses coming together in close proximity is clipping heels. This is the one that brings them down and does damage to horse and rider.
Barging would only harm the pockets of those who backed the blocking animals.

Let's have barging! Grin
Report jon b September 17, 2015 11:15 AM BST
Sounds good Sean ,, BB jock knew how well SV was travelling and knew he was the one to beat so tried to block him in , SV didnt gain ground with the bump on barge but opened the door to be able to run into space ,,,, barging ,,why not and as lng as know horses are hurt first one across to line keeps it ,,,,simple  ,,,, anyway that BB was never ever gonna go past SV with no barging bumping or leaning in ,,SV wins that by over a length with a clear run ..    Secret Guesture disq was worse for the stable ,, what a brutal few weeks for one of the smaller stables (in comparison ) breaking into the big time
Report sean rua September 17, 2015 8:51 PM BST
Sadly, jon, one lesson I learned in life was that those who barge in DO prosper. Anybody in and around jockeys or even showjumping eventer gals knows that the fkrs always get in before ye if there's a queue!
They get between your legs or any which way to get in front; and they don't hang about long enough to pick up the tab and pay the bill. Laugh

This sort of behaviour even applies to those in some supposedly non-contact sports like basketball or soccer. There is all manner of jostling and wrestling that's surely not in the rulebooks.

Natural racing is what greyhounds do. 'Tis the excitement of the chase and the will to be first.
I agree that seeing one knocked ar se over bolli x isn't particularly pleasant, but neither would be racing with a total "after you, madam" approach.

Just my opinion.
There is no way the rulebook will ever be written to suit what I like, so I guess 'tis time to say "end of.."
( I hate that expression. Cry)
Report ima_mazed66 September 17, 2015 9:49 PM BST
Of course SV gained ground with the bump, as the two horses where side by side before it and BB ended up a length down after it.

Even if after the bump they were still on level terms though, SV gained an advantage via the bump by escaping from the pocket she was in when trapped on the rail, Even Frankel wouldn't win if he was on the rail and blocked in by those up ahead and with a horse to his outer that was holding it's line and keeping him in.

How many times have you seen an unlucky loser when a horse is stuck on the rail and something else gets first run on it after the unlucky horse had to sit and suffer or take pull and go around other runners to get a run? Then when it's flying at the finish but the line comes to soon, that's the very reason it gets considered unlucky.
Report xmoneyx September 19, 2015 10:02 AM BST
Matt Chapman-The Sun




http://favourite.thesun.co.uk/article/6646451
Report timtin September 23, 2015 6:57 PM BST
Booom Matt!!
Report TripleB September 23, 2015 7:47 PM BST
anyone know how do i get my money back/winnings if it was a bet on the exchanges?
Report sparrow September 23, 2015 7:51 PM BST
Just contact your friendly layer.
Report dunlaying September 23, 2015 8:25 PM BST
As Derek says, money talks.
Report dave1357 September 23, 2015 8:57 PM BST
don't know if you're being ironic TripleB but Betfair markets are settled on the result on the day.
Report factmachine September 24, 2015 2:28 PM BST
SHOCK! CORRUPT STEWARDS FOUND OUT AGAIN,WHAT ACTION WILL BE TAKEN AGAINST THEM,NONESad
Report ima_mazed66 September 24, 2015 5:59 PM BST
So what happens when money talks and both horse's connections have money?
Post Your Reply
<CTRL+Enter> to submit
Please login to post a reply.

Wonder

Instance ID: 13539
www.betfair.com