BHA reply re Market Rasen photo sat.

conducting a study !!!!  aye lets waste more time and money, instead of getting on with the job

£25000 for each field camera

Our horse won' – Williams owners set to appeal against Market Rasen dead-heat
Ian Williams: "With no mirror image available we felt a dead-heat was an unsatisfactory result"
Ian Williams: "With no mirror image available we felt a dead-heat was an unsatisfactory result"
Martin Lynch
1 of 1
By Colin Russell
6:27PM, JUL 23 2018
   
Ian Williams is to ask the BHA to review the result of the sixth race at Market Rasen on Saturday, when Royal Village was adjudged to have dead-heated with Whoshotwho in the novice handicap chase.

On Saturday Nick Bostock, the senior racecourse judge on duty at Market Rasen, had no mirror image available to him, so because the head of Royal Village almost totally obscured that of Whoshotwho the judge felt he had no option other than to declare a dead-heat.

The trainer has five days to lodge an appeal, which will be considered by Bostock, another member of the judging team and BHA officials, including Emma Marley, who is the BHA's head of raceday operations.

Watch the 4.25 at Market Rasen on Saturday

A disgruntled Williams said: "With no mirror image available we felt a dead-heat was an unsatisfactory result, so on behalf of my owners I'm asking for an official review."

Jon Holmes, part-owner of Royal Village, was in no doubt the result was wrong, saying on Monday: "Our horse won. You could see from the photo and the outline of the head of the other horse that it didn't dead-heat.

"To have done so it would have had to have had a deformed lower jaw."


Royal Village (centre) leads the field before he was adjudged to have dead-heated with Whoshotwho (left) at Market Rasen
Royal Village (centre) leads the field before he was adjudged to have dead-heated with Whoshotwho (left) at Market Rasen
Martin Lynch (racingpost.com/photos)
Bostock explained that he did not have a mirror image because of the width of the two tracks at Market Rasen.

He said: "If the horses had been on the hurdles course then it wouldn't have been a problem, but the further they are away from the mirror the more likely they are to be out of its range. The dead-heat was on the chase course, which is on the outside of the hurdles course."

Haydock, with multiple jump and Flat courses, is one of the widest in the country and has solved the problem with a second camera situated on the inside of the course.

In-field camera study under way

The BHA said in a statement on Monday: "The issue with mirrors is not confined to Market Rasen, which is one of a number of racecourses where the width of the finishing line, dependant on the rail position, is too great for the mirror system to cover the entirety of the line.

"The BHA is currently conducting a study into the feasibility of the introduction of in-field cameras at more racecourses, and whether this would be a cost-effective solution to this issue.”

Robin Mounsey, the BHA's head of media, added: "Credit to Haydock for having one, but in-field cameras are expensive – each one costs around £25,000 – and it would be up to the individual racecourses to install their own."

Comment
Racing is a fairly simple sport. Unless there has been a transgression of the rules the horse who passes the winning post first is the winner.

In a couple of high-profile instances this year human error has meant the decision as to which horse has passed the post first was incorrect.

However, at Market Rasen on Saturday it wasn't human error but a technological deficiency. And given there was no mirror image, it was highly unsatisfactory.

On the balance of probability the near-side horse Royal Village was the winner, but with no mirror image it wasn't nailed on.

Surely that is not acceptable when tens, or even hundreds, of thousands of pounds are at stake on the outcome of a race.

Although the BHA claims that in-field cameras, which are the solution to the problem, are expensive to install at £25,000, surely that's peanuts when something as important as getting the correct result is at stake.

Colin Russell

ian williams can have 33's they change result.

Leicester I believe.

Dead heat imo.

I think the 5f course at Sandown is similarly without proper technology.

Tells you what they REALLY think of us punters...

desperate, even sent 2 emails!

hulk gets semi erected thinking ive done money...

Stewards enquiries are decided on the balance of probability so why not photos until they can afford the proper equipment? This side should have been declared the winner. Millions bet on every race and they can't afford 25 grand, it's pathetic.

good point adamski. It should have been asked why the judge needed best part of 5 minutes to call it a dead heat. He knew straight away he couldn't see the nose of the far side horse so if he's not going to go on probability he should give a dead heat within 30 seconds.  Unlike people backing pre-race backers on the photo lost a massive chunk of their stake never mind winnings.

glad to assist.

since 2010

wullie should have been a doctor,,fabrication

fear knows me

who's figures on those please..

certainly ****,,  hes good at it as well,,

someone had £23,000 on the photo?