A simple and practical question to ask with regards to this fiasco (apologies if someone else has flagged it before) 

Since there appears a reluctance to void the race - as apparently this cant be done after the jockeys have "weighed in" - could the authorities please explain what they propose to put in the formbook?

Surely the "winner" should be declared a non runner/disqualified and the race awarded to the runner-up?

why did the stewards withdraw it from the other race ,or were they looking at the wrong horse lol

terry on course not payed out.

once again common sense takes a back seat

as stated by the dealer the bha once again proving they are not fit for purpose, perhaps if they spent more time been honest they would do a better job.

all the books will pay out on the second, would be astounded if they dont

Stan J have treated as void.

Can SJ really not pay out on the first past the post?

To Whistlejacket and others, the BHA decision not to void has less to do with "weighed in" and more to do with their rules. Put simply they can only void a race under very specific circumstances. See below...

PART 5 - THE RESULT - (B)60 to (B)66
66. Circumstances in which a race is void

66.1 A race shall be void where a yellow stop race flag is waved, as described in Rule 48.
66.2 A race may be declared void if no qualified horse covers the course in accordance with these Rules.
66.3 A race is liable to be declared void if
66.3.1 all the horses in the race ran at the wrong weights;
66.3.2 all the horses ran over the wrong course;
66.3.3 all the horses started from the wrong start, unless the Stewards have exercised their powers under Rule 10.1;
66.3.4 no horses returned to the start after the recall flag was raised (see Rule 39);
66.3.5 the Starter declared a false start but the recall flag was not raised, unless the horses pull up as described in Rule 40.2;
66.3.6 no horse finished;
66.3.7 the Judge or an authorised substitute was not in the Judge's Box, as required by Rule 60.2.1, unless the Stewards are able to determine the result as described in Rule 60.2.2;
66.3.8 the circumstances described in Rule 10.4 occur.

This race has some similarity to others.  Young Master in the Badger is a good one.  Horse not qualifed by race record (not age) but first past the post disqualified with the race awarded to the second as the winner. Race not voided.

How much was traded on the race on the exchange?

Nillies Kiss should now be banned from all racetracks for invading the race course during the 1st at Yarmouth.

What are betfair doing about this? I bet the 3rd to be in first two.... surely I should either be paid out or have my stakes refunded. Can't believe this can be allowed to go with no recourse..... ????

I think there will have to be group action on this one.

What would the BHA do if a previous winner inadvertently ran in a maiden race and won and had weighed in?

Must be one of the most obvious sutuations for voiding all bets there has ever been. That was my biggest bet of the day - the 2nd favourite to be in 1st two - it was a head away too just to rub salt in.

Surely they can't allow this to stand.

Beyond ridiculous that the winner isn't automatically disqualifed ahead of any enquiry!

not a chance

Absolutely agree Barton.  If it had been found to have carried the wrong weight instead of being born in the wrong year, it would have been disqualified straight away.

There's a horse loose at Doncaster flying down the track screaming "I'm not racing till I've seen ALL their passports!!" :p

Thought they had moved to Cloudcukoo land ?