|
By:
Gone
|
|
By:
Reversed
|
|
By:
This "sport" stinks
|
|
By:
2nd won it..
|
|
By:
Car Crash for jamesdean
|
|
By:
Chucked.....................Like I said whether it would have gone past means nothing
|
|
By:
the free money just got pretty expensive
|
|
By:
stewards cleaned up just before the decision
|
|
By:
Not your proudest moment jamesdean.
Let's hope no impressible types didn't wade in. |
|
By:
think i can count on one hand the number of times i've backed a reversal and got it in the stewards
|
|
By:
only surprise is why gayebury was so short in the betting
|
|
By:
always have another wee look before declaring an opinion young man, come on now.
|
|
By:
All this easy money
![]() |
|
By:
shocking decision ,well it nrmally does if the hose had chance to go past and dosnt he never gets it .swap trainers and the result would of stood
|
|
By:
*impressionable
|
|
By:
home ref methinks
|
|
By:
1st time out horses on heavy ground dont go for minor interference
|
|
By:
they'll get that back on appeal - the interference clearly did not affect the placings - runner up was always being held and was making no impression at the line
|
|
By:
yep
|
|
By:
no chance of that happening imo
|
|
By:
Jockey forgot his mum owned the runner up, stewards to the rescue
![]() |
|
By:
Well done Dan, a shrewd observation!
|
|
By:
Of course it wasn't a shocking decision. Could easily see it had every chance of going
|
|
By:
Would have won if allowed to run in a straight line. In my view the interference clearly affected the result.
|
|
By:
Corrupt sport through and through
|
|
By:
Right result for once.
|
|
By:
normally u can cut a horse up make it stop to a standstill and still keep the race ,the 2nd never stopped riding
|
|
By:
Stewards going home in a big limo
|
|
By:
not so easy to go past when you are persistently being pushed sideways, so i dont agree with the 'wouldnt go past' argument...was a toss-up for me
|
|
By:
Give it up - hellohello - That is three, insubstantiated, nonsense posts you have made.
|
|
By:
The name Williams is a big clue...there, that's 4
|
|
By:
i felt that was the right call myself
|
|
By:
It doesn't matter whether it would or wouldn't go past. You could have the biggest dog in racing finish 2nd,if it was badly enough interfered with and the rules of racing were broken it should get the race
|
|
By:
that happened a few weeks ago trd, even the comms said something like 2nd doesn't like to go past but it got it in the stewards, can't rem the race though
|
|
By:
the winner was 9's in the photo,some bad bad judges on here,LV showed the head on straight away which is unusual for them,sour grapes,correct call
|
|
By:
Gayebury's jockey rode as though he thought he had to get back on the hurdles track, he deserved to lose it.
Wonder what he said in the stewards. |
|
By:
elise That is the rule. The stewards cannot bring a horses tendency to go past or not into the equation when deciding to chuck a horse or not
|
|
By:
yes i know, just saying it was called on tv a few weeks ago in another example and got it in the stewards
|
|
By:
The Stewards held an enquiry under Rule (B)11.6 into two possible instances of interference from half way up the home straight. Having heard their evidence and viewed recordings of the race they found that in the first instance, approximately a furlong out, the winner, GAYEBURY, ridden by James Davies, had interfered with PRIME VENTURE (IRE), placed second, ridden by Conor Ring. They found that the interference was accidental, as the rider had made every effort to keep his mount straight.
In the second incident, inside the final half furlong, the Stewards found that GAYEBURY had interfered with PRIME VENTURE (IRE), and that the interference had improved GAYEBURY’s placing. They placed PRIME VENTURE (IRE) first and GAYEBURY second. The Stewards found Davies in breach of Rule (B)54.1 and guilty of careless riding, in that he had manoeuvred his horse right-handed carrying PRIME VENTURE (IRE) off its intended line for several strides, causing PRIME VENTURE (IRE) to lose ground and momentum and to be beaten by a short head. They suspended Davies for 2 days as follows: Monday 28 and Wednesday 30 December 2015. |
|
By:
A lot of pocket talking nonsense.
Was clear the decision could have gone either way so can't understand the shock expressed by some on here. |