There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
29 Aug 16
12:50
Joined:
Date Joined:
28 Aug 07
had the momentum but was butchered and lost all momentum, then closed at line
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 51
|
By:
The winner in any normal country with proper rules would be disqualified.
|
|
By:
Agreed, ought to get the race but can't see it happening.
|
|
By:
stewards still having lunch.
 |
|
By:
The rules in this country are a joke. U can put a horse over the rails and still be allowed to keep a race. It's like a win at all costs
|
|
By:
stewards now.
|
|
By:
The biggest nonsense of the lot is this so called winning distances debacle.
|
|
By:
Would have already been thrown out in US before the Newcastle stewards called the enquiry
|
|
By:
surprised to see 11k done at 1.01, must have known a chance of stewards ...
|
|
By:
They obviously looked at it before announcing it. Very poor just call one.
|
|
By:
correct kriskin, the more you hamper a horse the further it is likely to be beaten
|
|
By:
the perfect example of why the rules are wrong
|
|
By:
Chapman back peddling quickly now, thinks the second was beat. Not for me
|
|
By:
The Racetech boys will be having a good day today at these tracks.....
|
|
By:
it was a neck behind then went 2L behind...3 my 4rse
|
|
By:
was a neck behind, then knocked back 2 lengths, only beat 3/4 length. Best horse obv lost
|
|
By:
squeaky backside time now
 |
|
By:
overturned
|
|
By:
revised result
|
|
By:
last price on the 2nd 2.98
 |
|
By:
stunned
|
|
By:
Well well well, good thing I got out there.
 |
|
By:
Surely one of the worst decisions in history. it was only closing because he was taking it easy on the winner.
|
|
By:
JUSTICE
|
|
By:
The 2nd went as high as at least 65 in the stewards.
Staggering. |
|
By:
i think it should have gone but under the rules they operate never in a month of sundays did i think it would be reversed
|
|
By:
im very suprised they chucked winner...
but..i said to lads in our room that 2nd was a neck down and its lost 2L and beat a closing 3/4L... |
|
By:
Wrong decision with our rules. I reckon they had ATR on and just wanted to get back at Chapman.
|
|
By:
To be honest the betting indicates what a ridiculous decision it was. A remarkable misinterpretation of the rules. No consistency.
|
|
By:
The inconsistency is beyond a joke.
|
|
By:
They did the correct thing for once, shame they dont do it every time, most of the time they thing its greyhound racing rules
|
|
By:
It might be morally the right thing but under the rules it was clearly an appalling decision.
|
|
By:
i concur ^
|
|
By:
very strange just looked at stewards' report and it says 'no enquiry'.
http://media.britishhorseracing.com/pdf/stewardsreport/?fixtureId=1198&year=2016 |
|
By:
The Stewards held an enquiry under Rule (B)11.6 into possible interference inside the final furlong. Having
heard their evidence and viewed recordings of the race they found that the winner, SINCIL BANK (USA), ridden by Joe Fanning, had interfered with MUSHAIREB, placed second, ridden by David Nolan, and that the interference had improved SINCIL BANK (USA)’s placing. The Stewards found that Fanning had allowed his mount to drift left carrying MUSHAIREB across the track towards the rail causing Nolan to take back when he was approximately half a length behind SINCIL BANK (USA). Following the interference Nolan was approximately 1½ lengths down after having lost momentum and having to switch around to renew his effort, then rallying to be beaten only ¾ a length in the short distance to the line. They placed MUSHAIREB first, and SINCIL BANK (USA), second. The Stewards found Fanning in breach of Rule (B)54.1 and guilty of careless riding in that he allowed his mount to drift left without correction. They suspended him for 2 days as follows: Monday 12 and Tuesday 13 September 2016. |
|
By:
bookies have to payout twice this the problem there needs to be a delay of like 2 minutes of announcing the result so they wont have to pay out twicew
|
|
By:
Just back in after being away for the day after that race today. A very nice surprise to read this thread and to see my bank well up after laying the FPTP. As stated earlier thought the FPTP should have been chucked out but didn't think the stewards would with the rules we have.
|
|
By:
so you didnt think it would be chucked but laid it?
|
|
By:
the £11k 1.01 i/r was very odd given what had happened.
1.01 boys don't normally get involved with a good chance of a stewards. |
|
By:
same happened few weeks back...blatanly obvious was gona be stewards and was done at 1.01..ridic
|