Well done Barry Gerathy....

Did he know there was horse 20 lengths clear?

"ill-judged"

didn't have a hope if you laid the cash horse ....

Geraghty is absolute filth

Shocker 3 out it went 2nd then back to 4th.

Good to see the usual nonsense arguments getting an airing again when this kind of thing happens from time to time.

A poorly judge ride when a leader goes off and nobody wants to lead the rest and do the donkey work for the field and close the leader down, until eventually someone realises "maybe I'd better think about doing it myself now" except often it's all too late.

all jockeys bar cash hauled in front of stewards ...

jumps racing is bollox

That was worse

The nonsense jimeen is over the usual reasons why some on here are suggesting it happened.

30 days for BG

Well Ima,what do you make of that?
No nonsense by anyone,it was pure rotten.
Well done Limerick stewards,getting away with murder for God knows how long.

No doubt overturned on appeal, but at least they took some action on the day.

Not sure why the trainer just gets a fine and the owner nothing at all.

"A clearly shocked and angry Barry Geraghty chose not to be quoted with regard to his 30-day ban. He's almost certain to appeal." = RP

I bet he's not as angry as the punters he robbed.

Ima mazed on the ball .

I won't be gunning for the stewards at all when I have often argued over the irony of jockeys getting banned and/or fined for losing a race by dropping their hands when it was a mistake and they had actually been trying to win but just caught out when easing up early, and jockeys sitting so far out of their ground and getting beaten. Surely in both cases the stewards and anyone else can rightly argue that with both, that those incidents have cost the horses any chance of winning, yet previously the jockey dropping his hands would get the ban, whereas the one giving his horse far too much to do wouldn't.

My point here wasn't that Geraghty didn't deserve criticism or that the way he rode the horse wasn't responsible for it getting beaten because it clearly was. My issue was whether he did so for some of the nonsense reasons some on here suggested. Forgive me if I find it hard to believe that the horse's multi-millionaire owner was on the winner for a few euros with comments like "job done" when why not do it in the first race then where he owned the 6/4f? Or if you ride one to deliberately get it beaten, why not do so later on the card on the same owner's horse that went off odds-on?

The start of this race and how starters let plenty of races go off like this too needs to be looked at, as if it's OK to do so then why make so much fuss about starts at the big festival meetings? I don't know for sure if the winning jockey set out to try to make all but nicking as much distance as was allowed at the start kind of made his mind up for him.

As for what pot will Geraghty pay it from comments, well I hope for his sake it's a big one and big enough to cover not only 30 days of lost riding fees but his percentage of any prize money during those 30 days too, and especially as it now means he will be missing the Punchestown Festival so I hope he considers it as worthwhile. Or then again there just might not be anything here to consider.

Seems odd too that the connections of the 2nd were the only ones punished and therefore the stewards presumably think the rides given to all of the other runners were perfectly acceptable. So apart from Geraghty's obvious flaw in this race, maybe his next biggest mistake was to finish 2nd. Oh and just out of interest, if he had fallen at say any of the last few hurdles, do you think he would still have been banned and fined for an ill-judged ride? If he's given the horse too much to do then why would a fall change any of that? Or if he had actually fallen then would the jockey that ended up being 2nd have been fined instead?

Just seen the replay BG deserves a lengthy ban for that,full enquiry including trainer i expect ?? did BG hear any noises from the horse or was it just between his ears,disgusting.

The Stewards enquired into the running and riding of Noble Emperor, ridden by B.J. Geraghty, and trained by A.J.Martin.
Evidence was heard from the rider and trainer concerned. A.J.Martin, stated that his instructions were to get some cover and try switch him off, bearing in mind that the horse can be keen. He added that the horse has disappointed in the past but should have enjoyed today's heavy conditions over two miles, despite having form over further.
He expressed satisfaction with the ride and that the lost shoe had no bearing on the run on today's ground.
Evidence was also heard from B.J.Geraghty who confirmed the instructions adding that the horse needs to be covered up and delivered late.
He added that the winner quickly established a good lead at the start and circumstance meant that he was unable to chase the leader until the straight as he was riding strictly to instructions.
He confirmed that the horse felt healthy at all stages.
The Stewards also received a report from the Turf Club Veterinary Officer who stated that Noble Emperor was post race normal, having lost a left fore shoe.
Having viewed the recording of the race and considered the evidence, the Stewards were of the opinion that the rider was in breach of Rule 212 having failed to take all reasonable and permissible measures to give his mount the full opportunity to win or obtain his best possible place and having considered his record suspended him for thirty race days and ordered that he forfeit his riding fee.
Furthermore the stewards also found A.J.Martin in breach of Rule 212 and having considered his record,fined him euro 3,000 and suspended Noble Emperor for sixty days.

---------------

* The Stewards also interviewed many more of the jockeys and trainers - The text of which too long to post here.

So they don't knacker the hcp mark. Big owners want winners at big meetings.