Whip rules thread removed?

Yes, why?

I hope it wasn't cos I mentioned a certain stalwart of the c4 team. Nothing defamatory, I just typed what he said live on air.

Couldn't see anything wrong with the thread at all....was a good debate

Alas it probably was Headmaster. Which presenter was it you quoted?

Headmaster, you posted:
Why do people keep assuming DQing would have absolutely no effect on jockey behaviour?

Who assumes that, as obviously it would, although it would mean jockeys having to learn to count up to 8!

However I think it would affect turnover with punters shatting themselves in case the jockey goes one over the limit!

I think there maybe some automatic triggers.

You cannot mention a certain trainer, by name, who has won a race at Chelmsford today.

Not sure if I can speak his name PP but two of his favourite sayings are "he's almost old enough to vote" and "stays longer than the mother-in-law".

Apologies if it was me....crazy scenes if so

Freedom of speech isn't allowed on here!

If someone finds a thread offensive in any way they can ask to have it removed.

It happens a lot on the politics forum.
It doesn't pay to get too involved.

And as regards researching your information, well what's the point if it all gets taken down?

I know who you mean then Headmaster and every chance it's a "referred name".

BF moderators being over zealous again

They have time on their hands at the moment with notsosmart absent from the forum

As the original op, I'm absolutely astonished

I cant see how it caused any offence to anyone

Presume the BHA didn't like it discussed

Blimey.  Once again, apologies if I got a good thread taken down, first time for me hope it will be the last.

To repeat, the presenter said live on C4 if we'd be happy for Al Ferof to have been awarded the King George?  I merely disagreed with this suggestion as I'm assuming DQing would have an effect on jockey behaviour and the most likely result yesterday woul have been a Vautour win.  The Al Ferof scaremongering is a red herring.

dont think it was that Headmaster but someones' obviously felt threatened

Try explaining the whip rule to a non-racing sportsperson,and how the rule is regularly broken,and the result is unaffected.Then tell them that the offending jockeys get a "holiday",and they will look at you with astonishment,and ask why the result is still unaffected.Good to hear outsiders reactions.

^ Nonsense - and why, is it, "Goodo hear outsiders reactions?"

Nobody asks me for my views on 'gouging' in Rugby Union - or ANY other sport... that I am entirely UNINTERESTED in.

If they are NOT interested in Racing - Then it does NOT affect THEM.

I hear a lot of cross-sport analogies from people defending the current state of play so here's my go.

Arsenal are playing Man Utd and it's nil nil with 90 mins on the clock.  Walcott picks the ball up and chucks it into the back of United's net.  'Goal' stands, Arsenal win one nil but Theo gets a 4K fine and is banned for the next 11 games.

Does anyone think that's satisfactory?

How long will Brennan get if he does it again in the GC? Gives the advantage to anyone else in a close finish.

The point, I think, to unbiased's post is not that we're trying to open up the sport to new people onlooker...but that sometimes we can be too close to it and others, without the baggage, might raise an eyebrow once we explain where we are.

Apols if that's not correct, unbiased.

Walcott picks the ball up and chucks it into the back of United's net

it would be a disallowed goal as he hand balled it first.

Try reading,I said "sportsperson,which means that  although they may never read the Racing Post,but still have knowledge about various sports,like many of us
Meanwhile try asking.

Er...hello pablo.  It would be disallowed you're right, that's the point.  In racing parlance the goal, and therefore the win, would be disqualified.  On Boxing Day Brennan's 'goal' was not disallowed.

Headmaster,I was merely pointing out the absurdity of the "rule",and most people that aren't involved would think the same.
Win at all costs,don't worry about the fine.Even more important on the flat,with inflated stud fees involved.

Why would Walcott do that?

Absolutely I'm with you.  I can only see one deterrent working on the big stage...or even the small one when the money's down.

To my mind we're verging on no-brainer territory here.  We absolutely have to have the threat of chucking them out to keep jockeys within the guidelines.  Ocean Finance said earlier Brennan might be thinking twice in the Gold Cup if it was a tight finish.  I just don't see it.  You could give him six months for all he cares, most of it would be in the summer and he's just won the Gold Cup and they've copped half a mill at Cheltenham and another Mill on the bonus. Bloody sweet 6 month holiday that would be.

The penalty has to fit the "crime". If a cynical foul is committed in football saving a goal the team don't automatically lose the game. Frankly I think Brennan has been harshly treated, I thought he rode a fantastic race.

Disqualification for such a minor issue would never work, punters would stop betting in their droves and it would be an open door for corruption.

Disagree completely,jockeys would learn to stick to the rules very quickly.
  Your "cynical foul" example can be explained by the "last man" rule,whereby a penalty IS GIVEN!
Look how jockeys have adapted to the walking in to the start,rather than trying to "jump" the start,and get an advantage.
  All changes take time to adapt to,that's life.