There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 161 comments are related to the topic:
Barry Geraghty - 30 day ban!
Barry Geraghty - 30 day ban!
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 161
|
By:
I would like to ask one more question. Is Geraghty a good judge of pace? My answer unreservedly would be yes. Therefore I quite understandably draw only one conclusion. Bnet.
|
|
By:
Correct evilroyslade.Why keep the horse so far off the pace at limerick?Well done to the stewards for doing they job.
|
|
By:
Would he really need to take a tug when already 20-odd lengths behind the leader hello :-) if trying to get his horse beaten?
Or if by "early on" you mean right at the start, well the starter gifted the winner an easy early lead and if Geraghty's instructions were to give his horse cover then he would give it a tug, wouldn't he? |
|
By:
give the horse cover
 |
|
By:
I didn't actually give those instruction out myself and didn't just pluck that phrase out of thin air either.
 The Turf Club report said: "Tony Martin stated that his instructions were to get some cover and try switch him off, bearing in mind that the horse can be keen." "Evidence was also heard from Barry 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." |
|
By:
It all boils down to who was going the right pace. Was it conceivable that the leader had gone too fast and would come back on that ground at that pace. Could BG have miscalculated how bad the ground was?
If you can definitively answer no to both questions, then the ban is quite correct. |
|
By:
The race he won at punchestown he was not held up 20 lenghts off the pace.The winner is a good horse.
|
|
By:
At last a ban that actually means something.
Really important for the sport and in particular punters that the ban is not overturned. If it is it would raise serious questions as to who is actually running Irish racing. |
|
By:
Your saying your right and the stewards at limerick and most of racing public are wrong Ima , do you realise what your saying
you have lost a fair bit of credibility here |
|
By:
In my view the ban is entirely reasonable;the problem is that it is so unusual for the Stewards to take any action against blatant non triers.If they toughened up and stood jockeys down/fined trainers/prohibited the horse from running again in the near future whenever such incidents are identified then it would not be an isolated incident and could force the sport into cleaning up its act.
|
|
By:
A seasoned experienced jockey like BG should/could/would have been able to "adjust/tweak" his riding plan accordingly ie depending on how the race is panning out, and in this case BG was guilty of not doing that - in this race it looked bad and it was bad!
The "action" of the starter was immaterial - I'd seen worse in England where Peter Scudamore "stole" lengths at the off on a front running horse like Sabin Du Loir on many occasions - why? It did not precipitate the riding of BG ie it was not responsible for the mount of BG being beaten so far - BG was culpable for his "inaction" to deal with the situation at hand and upon him. |
|
By:
The ride given by Geraghty was extremely poor & you have to question the "fairness" of the race; irrespective of what he told the stewards about wanting cover, holding the horse up & riding explicitly to instructions; it doesn't wash with the majority of punters who could see what was happening. He simply did not give the horse any sort of chance of winning and as a seasoned professional he surely must have anticipated he would need to alter the riding instructions given him (isn't a top jockey supposed to interpret a race whilst involved in it and react accordingly) and should have taken some remedial action long before he did to at least eat into the lead given to the eventual winner.
He cannot have any complaints; I wonder if this will affect future race riding within the Emerald Isle for the non-jiggers at least in the short term; if nothing else it suggests the local stewards offered a shot across the bow although when the appeal is heard will be interesting to see if the ban is upheld |
|
By:
I see Shutthefrontdoor has come in for some support. Barry will be a hero once more if he gets this one home.
If back to last years form, and Jonjo working his ' magic' after a disappointing run last time out, has a decent chance imo. |
|
By:
Shutthefrontdoor did not look as if he stayed the distance last year (good ground I believe) hence what chance if ground is softer? Also, his form this year is not encouraging.
|
|
By:
Looks like the "untouchables" halo is slipping , hopefully the UK stewards will take note and act accordinly
|
|
By:
Pity the stewards at Navan on Saturday did not pay as much attention to the bumper that finished the card , given the race was run exactly the same
|
|
By:
attheraces appearing to go with the "poor Barry" argument
|
|
By:
sewter, I think he's employed by ATR on their website!
But hey, let's be thankful for small mercies, at least the RP didn't ask Colin 'he stopped riding, but didn't ease up' Russell to do an analysis again on another controversial ride! |
|
By:
* not forgetting of course, BG has the atr slogan on his breeches!
|
|
By:
Rather ironic that it is the LIMERICK stewards who have (indirectly) 'had a go' at J P McManus (OWNER of the horse) -
- given that LIMERICK is his local course - along with Tipperary. |
|
By:
hello :-) 04 Apr 16 02:18
Your saying your right and the stewards at limerick and most of racing public are wrong Ima , do you realise what your saying you have lost a fair bit of credibility here. No, what I'm saying is the stewards clearly haven't decided he deliberately stopped the horse but that they have deemed him not to have ridden it to obtain the best possible chance or winning or finishing in the best possible position or whatever the official wording of that rule is. I've already said it was a poor ride and the way it was ridden didn't give it the best chance of winning, but I've also already said that description applies whether it was a dishonest ride or an incompetent one. Why didn't Eddie Ahern get 30 days? Why didn't Jason Behan get 30 days? Wasn't it because the authorities deemed them to have deliberately stopped the horse from winning via the type or ride given? If they thought that about Geraghty then why wasn't he banned and warned off for several years like they were? I'm afraid to say you are the one maybe losing a bit of credibility considering I've not said I have any problem with the ban and have also clearly said these kind of rides are as bad as easing up and getting caught on the line. My use of the word "nonsense" wasn't to suggest it was actually a good ride and Geraghty wasn't in any way at fault, it was used to suggest it was nonsense to say connections were on the winner. impossible123 04 Apr 16 11:19 A seasoned experienced jockey like BG should/could/would have been able to "adjust/tweak" his riding plan accordingly ie depending on how the race is panning out, and in this case BG was guilty of not doing that - in this race it looked bad and it was bad! The "action" of the starter was immaterial - I'd seen worse in England where Peter Scudamore "stole" lengths at the off on a front running horse like Sabin Du Loir on many occasions - why? With your first point above, if a jockey's riding instructions are to hold a horse up and given it some cover because it can race a bit keenly and one runner goes off into a 20L lead, then how does he adjust/tweak that without completely ignoring his riding instructions from the very start? I appreciate and agree that sometimes they have to go to plan B and use a bit of common sense after a certain while and Geraghty did that when pulling away form the rest, although he clearly left things far too late to trouble the winner. Regarding your second point about Scudamore, pointing out an additional example of something being wrong doesn't then made the other one any less wrong. The starter yesterday basically made the winning jockey's mind up for him regarding how he would ride his mount due to the soft lead he gifted him at the start. |
|
By:
There is something very wrong if we are to believe the idea that a supposed top jockey goes out with a plan and then is unable to adjust when it is falling apart in front of him. The Stewards would have been entitled to have fallen about laughing at this stage.
Why do ATR need Geraghty? A complete waste of money. Since joining JP his blog has gone from useful to pointless. |
|
By:
onlooker, the stewards aren't Limerick stewards..they tend to travel around
ffs |
|
By:
Tony Martin gets fined €3,000 (about time) yet the ban could cost Geraghty anything from €50k to €150k plus. yet he was riding to instructions and yet Martin is allowed to carry on pulling the wool over punters and stewards eyes
|
|
By:
dodgydog 04 Apr 16 13:37
onlooker, the stewards aren't Limerick stewards..they tend to travel around ffs ----------- Is that the case? Because it certainly is NOT the case in England. Punters have been clamouring for 'Central Stewarding' for decades here - But it has NOT happened. Well, actually - on looking up Turf Club regulations - it turns out that we are BOTH correct. A minimum of two Stewards attend - drawn from a panel of 4 Flat, or 4 Jumps, lists. "A further two will be appointed by the committee of the racecourse involved." |
|
By:
differentdrum 04 Apr 16 13:34
There is something very wrong if we are to believe the idea that a supposed top jockey goes out with a plan and then is unable to adjust when it is falling apart in front of him. The Stewards would have been entitled to have fallen about laughing at this stage...... Yes they sometimes have to use a bit of common sense but it depends on what those specific orders are. If a jockey is told to go out and make all, yet another horse goes tearing off in front and far too fast, or if he's told to track the leader and hit the front 1f out yet at 2f out the leader has fallen into a hole, you would like to think in those instance the jockey could use his initiative and break from his strict instructions. I suppose Geraghty could have ignored his instructions from the very start once the leader was gifted an early lead, yet if he did so and his horse ran too keenly due to no cover, and closed down the leader too soon, ending up going by it and finding nothing at the business end and was passed again, not only would you expect the trainer not to be best pleased but no doubt Geraghty would have been crucified on here for ignoring his riding instructions if they became publicly known. The starter created a problem for Geraghty by giving the winner such a soft early lead, whereas if he didn't and Geraghty could have covered his horse up in 3rd, with the 2nd being say 2-3 lengths off the leader, then we might have seen a different story. That's not to say the winner might not have still won anyway but maybe just not as easily. |
|
By:
Carrot1960 you are one deluded poster if you think Martin had any part in this. He wouldnt have known if the horse was off or not until they left the parade ring never mind having an input into tactics. FranK Berry does all that. You obviously dont know how the green and gold operate.
|
|
By:
So who do you blame for all the other horses from the yard who run for the "owners" and not the punters
|
|
By:
In this instance Martin would have had little input.
I think Martin is good at his job. Placing of horses and knowing their ability is what training is all about and it is why 95% of trainers are failures. They have no idea about handicaps and placing horses. Its pretty obvious which horses are not off in maidens etc so its your fault if you are on a non jigger. |
|
By:
big willy is totally correct on this one..and im sure bg will be sorted for loss of earnings as will harvey for the fine..
|
|
By:
Of course the trainer would be aware of whether the horse was "off" or not; that really is a fatuous comment to suggest he would have no knowledge of intentions for the day
|
|
By:
no geordie how may have been but prob not..thats how it works.last word from frank berry
|
|
By:
ima
For goodness sake stop blaming the starter - Noble Endeavour was only a few lengths behind at the off but it got progressively bigger. In a nutshell BG did not make any token attempt to address the eventual result. BG has a "brain" and the experience to ride a race ACCORDINGLY; if the winner had been "helped" by the starter as claimed by you BG could so easily have adjusted his riding there and then like most professionals in any field to deal with the situation at hand to limit damage ie eventual finishing position, but BG clearly did not; BG could not just blame it on the trainer because he's an experienced, seasoned professional. I hope BG does not appeal but just learn from it; if BG does appeal BG will/could be ridiculed further by the general public - his riding of Yanworth against Yorkhill was not "lauded" by most in the racing fraternity either. Clearly, BG rode a very badly judged race - in other words he left his racing "brain" behind! |
|
By:
impossible123 04 Apr 16 12:56
Shutthefrontdoor did not look as if he stayed the distance last year (good ground I believe) hence what chance if ground is softer? Also, his form this year is not encouraging. Plenty of winning form in Soft/Heavy going. First run this season was a Hurdle race - a well used strategy !! Second run - Jonjo stated the reason for the poor performance was that the horse had an infected foot. Has since pleased on a racecourse gallop. Jonjo on record as stating he thought the horse ran much too free last year, and as a result didn't last the trip. This time, he hopes Shutthefrontdoor will be ' more professional ' |
|
By:
Facts
I hope Shutthefrontdoor runs more professionally however, I do believe this year's National is of a higher grade than last with several new up-and-coming horses in the picture eg the Last Samuri, Ucello Conti, Gallant Oscar, Bishops Road, and Silviniaco Conti (well handicapped if staying the distance). |
|
By:
If BG's horse was meant to win there's not a chance in hell he would have left himself in such a poor position. This is what punters want (I contend) every horse ridden as if it's off for it's life.
|
|
By:
I can see the sense in Ima Mazed's argument. It may be that the stewards have been wanting to hit the JP operation with a severe slap on the wrist, but I really think 30 days for BJG, in this specific instance, is harsh, and 4-5 days would have been enough.For sure, it wasn't his finest hour but there are circumstances that make that ride at least somewhat forgiveable.
The winner is a decent horse who, imo would have won regardless but has a history of pulling too hard and going off too quick for his own good. At times in the past he's fallen in a hole,but when he doesn't he's very decent so what do you do in Geraghty's case? Go after him from the start and maybe they both pay the penalty? It cannot be easy knowing how best to ride against a horse like this. As a general rule,Tony Martin does like his horses dropped out and switched off( whether gambled on or outsiders) so the instructions seem plausible. So it's not hard to imagine BG opting to drop him out and if Velocity Boy keeps galloping then at least he has ridden to instructions. Of course he could have made a move earlier than he did but to me this looked like poor judgement rather than a deliberate intent to lose. And why was only BG suspended? Surely all the other jockeys were equally guilty of ignoring the winner. Why just punish the second? |
|
By:
impossible123 04 Apr 16 15:27 Facts I hope Shutthefrontdoor runs more professionally however, I do believe this year's National is of a higher grade than last with several new up-and-coming horses in the picture eg the Last Samuri, Ucello Conti, Gallant Oscar, Bishops Road, and Silviniaco Conti (well handicapped if staying the distance). I believe you already know my opinion regarding The Last Samuri  |
|
By:
It was a 16f race and not 20/24f; BG should have cottoned on to the inevitable "impending" result ie finishing position - not stewards - by the 3rd hurdle from home; BG made it looked bad from the start to the finish, and in my view it was a just penalty by the Limerick stewards.
|
|
By:
How many is only a few lengths impossible123?
I make it at least 7L and 3 positions behind when the starter let them go when some of the runners were barely on the course proper and coming sideways onto it. You shouldn't already be in 4th position like Geraghty was before the race has even started. I've also covered why Geraghty probably didn't adjust his tactics in an earlier post in the thread, when saying if the starter had them form anything remotely resembling a straight line, as opposed to the winner being 7L clear of Geraghty right from the start and about a dozen lengths of the back markers, then he could have still covered up his horse in 3rd or 4th when only 1 or 2 lengths off the lead. When nothing else wants to chase the leader and Geraghty's orders are to cover up his horse to get it to settle, then he obviously has a dilemma early on regarding does he disregard his orders and close down the leader himself, or obey them and sit off behind and hopefully track another runner towing him along to do so. Neither of which would have been as much of an issue with a more even start by the whole field. That's not to say he didn't still leave it too late to make up his mind what to do, but obviously he was hoping he would get that tow but like I said elsewhere in the thread, often when one goes well clear then nobody else wants to do the donkey work for the others by being in 2nd and closing down the leader whilst they rest get towed along, until eventually someone decides they had better do something and Geraghty ended up pulling well clear of the 3rd but all too late. Another prime example of this that has been largely overlooked despite happening on the same day was Adrien Du Pont in the 2:35 at Ascot yesterday, where not only was it a Nicholls/Twiston-Davies horse that was 13/8F, but also a Grade 1 winner the time before. In both races the winners had such a big buffer of a leader, that they could even afford the jumping mistakes they made at the last too, which would probably have been significant had something else been upsides. |