There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
For excessive use of the whip on Native River
Utterly ridiculous the horse was responding all the time to his urgings
Utterly ridiculous the horse was responding all the time to his urgings
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 144
|
By:
Not sure he's mightily bothered.
|
|
By:
Doesn't matter if the horse was responding he broke the rules
|
|
By:
We'd better organise a whip round
|
|
By:
I expect he will be bothered ! He's just lost his prize money, basically says, it's better not to try and win, than win.
|
|
By:
Percy
 |
|
By:
I have a feeling the owner will cover his fine
|
|
By:
he hasnt lost all his prizemoney - that must be 30k plus
|
|
By:
think it's 7% of winning to the jockey
so he gets about 42k minus his fine. I have a feeling the owner will cover his fine this +1 |
|
By:
*winnings
|
|
By:
7% =£19.387.54. AND UNLESS THEY DECIDE TO DISQUALIFY THE HORSE JOCKEYS WILL CARRY ON "CHEATING"
|
|
By:
is it not £625,000 guaranteed to the winner for 5 year old + , rated above 130 ?
|
|
By:
or is that total prize money all together ?
|
|
By:
don't need to disqualify horses, you just need to take all of the 370k away from winning connections and re-educate jockeys
|
|
By:
As we've seen this week, jockeys don't seem to care.
The punishments must be tougher. Not so much for welfare's sake, but for the sake of runner-up connections, who stick to the rules in a tight finish. It's cheating Ruby Walsh had a narrow win by cheating Katie Walsh doesn't give a monkeys and whipped the crap out of her winner, picking up yet another ban here Missed Approach's jockey got a ban for his narrow win, because he cheated Patrick Mullins was in manic double figures whipping in the last furlong on Rathvinden for his half-length win. That's four off the top of my head All cheating for close finishes and I believe all the defeated horses kept to the rules. (reposting from another thread) |
|
By:
they will continue to do it until they are absolutely hammered for rule breaches
|
|
By:
carrot sorry, you are right, 650k must be total prize money
 |
|
By:
Seeing as the fine was £6,550 it's £19,337,54.
Richard Johnson, the rider of the winner, NATIVE RIVER (IRE), was suspended for 7 days and fined £6,550 for using his whip above the permitted level from approaching the second last fence. |
|
By:
Simple solution, no limit on whip strokes
|
|
By:
very easy to sort, set a number of strikes and for every strike over the permitted level deduct 10% of prize money and pass this onto the horse behind, this should be applied for placed horses as well. so if the permitted is 7 and the jockey hits the horse 12 times then 50% of the owners prize money goes to the 2nd or if the horse came 2nd goes to the 3rd etc. by doing it this way the so called fine is increasing for the bigger breaches. in todays instance thw winning connections would forfit apprx £150000, that might make them stay nearer the rules
|
|
By:
Disqualify the winner for cheating, ban the jockey for three months.
Never happen again, simple. |
|
By:
The present punishments are more like a deal than a deterrent.
Johnson must feel he's had a bargain. |
|
By:
good post deejay
no need for fines, they disproportinately punish poorer jockeys no need to disqualify horses, it could be open to abuse and confidence in the sport would be shot small offences like 1 over or a bit of careless riding you can start at a jockey foregoing his riding fee and leave it at that then 2 over bring jockey prize money into it and a small moveable 1 day ban then 3 over its all jockey & trainer prize money and a % of owner prize and a small non-moveable ban and just ratchet it up like that stewards need to look at is the horse responding or been given time to respond? is it being hit in the correct place? is careless/dangerous riding involved? agree its really easy to solve this issue with firm measures |
|
By:
Amazingly no one had the balls to say anything until the fine/ban was announced.
Rather than the amount of strokes being set in stone surely a better compromise is to disregard that to an extent if a horse is responding? |
|
By:
with respect nobody is watching the finish of the gold cup counting strikes of the whip
|
|
By:
Maybe but it has brought the the "aftertimers" out in full force,horse makes all on heavy ground and just "driven" to keep running up the hill, pc gone mad.
|
|
By:
Well I disagree with deejay's suggestion.
Punishment for transgressing the rules isn't supposed to be like paying a fine. One extra stroke will cost you this, two extra strokes will cost you that. The stewards would be tied up after every race sorting out the penalties. Punishment is supposed to stop jockeys breaking the rules, not allow them to do as they like as long as they pay the required forfeit. |
|
By:
a fit professional jockey can drive horses out hands & heels without using the stick at all
13 is too many |
|
By:
|
|
By:
3 horse race, 2 horses fighting out a close finish, both jockeys break the whip rules, the tailed off horse in 3rd is awarded the race
the sport would soon be finished |
|
By:
If a horse goes the wrong side of a doll. The horse is disqualified for taking the wrong course.
If a rider cheats by using the whip in an illegal way, the horse in question should be disqualified for breaking the rules. Jockey error in each case. |
|
By:
I used to think disqualification was the way to go, but maybe losing all prize money would be better. Certainly over jumps.
|
|
By:
i guess what im trying to say is there are rules and in high profile races jockeys dont seem to give a dam,if the punishment i mentioned was implimented the owner trainer and jocket would be severly out of pocket, might make the owner /trainer think about said jockey when the 2nd picks up more than the winner because they stuck within the rules. on a side note i never noticed the whipping in the race , and thought it was a brilliant finish,was only when someone posted on here about dickies ban
|
|
By:
Bans and fines to the winning jock are pointless though.
|
|
By:
It wouldn't happen wondersobright, because what jockey would break the rules knowing they'd be disqualified?
|
|
By:
The rules aren't ever changing after the farce when the tough rules were rolled back a few years ago. So no point in speculating.
|
|
By:
Allowing the result to stand, but taking away the prize money from the winner would work either.
In a small race if the stable money was down, they'd willingly forfeit the prize money. |
|
By:
valid points dr
|
|
By:
I think DQs open up a can of worms though as there are unscrupulous people who could benefit from it
|
|
By:
Very tough on owners to confiscate the prize money for the rider using the whip too often. Not their fault.
|