Rooney's 2 fingered salute to Cheltenham

Rooneys not running their horses at Cheltenham for fear of injuries.

Paul Rooney, 71, and his wife Clare, 52, have written to their trainers informing them they do not want their horses to be considered for races at Cheltenham for the time being due to worries their runners at the course are at a heightened threat of potential harm.

https://www.racingpost.com/news/latest/rooneys-to-stop-having-runners-at-cheltenham-due-to-injury-fears/359521

Sounds cool, except we do not really know the root causes yet. Of course, there have always been owners who'd boycott specific races at the Festival, such as the RSA or the Bumper.

they lost starchitect last year when it had a race in the bag.

Cheltenhams loss Aintrees gain

The Whateley's and Brocade Racing never have runners over the National fences for the same reason but that never makes the RP news.

Up to them but hardly a great loss for Cheltenham. Without this thread I wouldn't have been any the wiser.

Don't really think they have many up to Cheltenham class at the moment, not winning a lot of big races.

perhaps cheltenham should consider getting rid of the jumping aspect to appease them.

Truth may well be they simply object to paying eight quid for a burger!

Run them when the sun's out

won't be missed

doesn't have any grade 1 horses anyway

Is Cheltenham any more dangerous than other tracks ? Genuine question
Appreciate the 2nd last is wrong and will be moved in the future, clerk tried to defend the fence by saying it was better than it was but that's not a reasonable argument

If that's how they feel pull out of racing altogether sounds a bit like i want some attention please.Look at us.

^spot on

the fact they wish to publicise it suggests its as much about them as it is the horses

maybe they want to force cheltenham to sort the course by going public.

it may not be the fences that are the problem.

Ah... The compensation of a Winner on the Fibresand at Southwell.

Saint Equiano.

Who needs cheltenham when you have southwell.

Wasnt it Muss 4 horses died the other week?

couple of right clowns wouldnt know a horses backside from its head either of them.have seen several interviews with the looneys over the years and their complete lack of knowledge of the game beggars belief.

fair play for having a bird 19 years younger

wonder how he got her

I read yesterday they had a hundred million fortune so can`t be clowns, must be a bit switched on to get that kind of dosh.

Obviously they can do as they please with their own animals, but this seems to be a pretty irrational decision. Firstly I am sure that trainers and jockeys know far more about course safety and suitability for a particular horse, than a pair of owners who probably only see their horses when they are at a course on raceday. Are the Rooney's going to adopt the same approach if/when one of their horses is fatally injured at another course? They have such middle of the road horses when compared to their numbers and annual spend, so its probably not going to make too much difference to the quality of races at Cheltenham.

Was there a requirement to be extremely over dramatic with this request?

A heightened threat of potential harm?

Are we still discussing horse racing or an ISIS operation??

Why ensure this was leaked without actually contacting the course first? BBC seems to indicate the first Cheltenham knew of this was via the press.

Agreed ptlish......far from it.

In the top 4 of owners championship last 4 seasons.

Last 5 seasons only....

122 hurdle winners

81 chase winners

35 nhf winners

Horses spread around some of the top trainers in the country.

Very strange statement,on the eve of the January 1st meeting,was that timing planned ?

Barney Dwan ran at the 2018 festival,were there others from these owners,that suggests poor old Starchitect was not the reason behind this move.

This could have huge repercussions on the sport,and the track in question.

"Heightened threat of potential harm"

Just what do they mean by that ?

There were signs of dissent from some jockeys last season over the state of the ground at certain meetings,are these the first set of owners to agree with those sentiments ?

Or perhaps they do not want to run their horses on artificially watered ground,seen here so often nowadays.

Interesting to see if this is discussed on racing channels,or indeed if the track responds.

These people are big investors in the sport,be nice to get some answers from all concerned.

From what I recall didn't Starchitect suffer the fatal injury on the flat between the last 2 fences at Cheltenham?

why be in this game if your not gonna run at the big house

Four fatalities at Musselburgh.. nobody can forecast these tragedies... I'm afraid these catastrophe's are part of the game..... most would argue horse racing has never been so safe....

They are racehorse owners spending a lot of money and can do as they please. I don't think that national statistics would indicate a higher risk at Cheltenham but personal experience will be more important to them or anyone else. A few ante post vouchers may have gone astray.

I'd be interested to know if they will withdraw their horses from all tracks with a worse record (deaths/runners) than Cheltenham - if they don't then they are obviously attention seeking hypocrites. There may be more deaths at  Chelt but there are also  many more runners than probably all other Nh tracks. They will obviously not be allowing their horses out in the field as more horses die there than anywhere else, or indeed any yards that use roads to take their horses to the gallops as more die there than on the racecourse!

I agree with evilroyslade, I mean £8 for a burger? You have to make a stand somewhere. It's about time everyone started boycotting these courses until they got  realistic with their prices.

Big Cheltenham problem is jockeys setting to fast a pace.

The opposite of Ireland then where they seem to dawdle then it turns into a sprint at the end.

Did not wa t too pay £9 for a burger

Nicholls has defended the course. You can bet you won't hear anything from 25+ trainers even though they probably agree with him.

Nice to see jumping a jumping owner doesn't buy buy into the Cheltenham festival hysteria..... AINTREE a far better meeting for me..

A recent Haydock race was void for `safety reasons` as there was a fatally injured horse on the track.
Ironic

Animal Aid launched Horse Death Watch in 2007 to record every on-course thoroughbred fatality in Britain, after 11 horses died during the Cheltenham Festival in 2006.

I suspect they are verging on loopy.

Don't forget they removed their horses from McCain and seemed unconcerned about the redundancies and mayhem that would cause.

This decision makes absolutely no sense. Yes, they pay the bills and can do what they want but try to find logic in this and there isn't any.

Too much money without the brain to go with it is a toxic mix.

I've said for years that I think Claisse made hard work for himself by putting in very efficient drainage without having control over it during dry periods, so the track keeps draining so quickly that they have to throw water back on top. If they don't do this the horses go to fast and are more likely to get killed, hence the recommendation to start the Festival on ground no worse than good to soft. Draining the ground so quickly that you have to artificially water it has never made any sense to me and I feel sure it messes with the going. Horses didn't evolve while running on artificially watered ground. It would be interesting to know the horse fatality rates before and after the drainage "improvements" of the early nineties.
Don't get me wrong here. I'm not saying the drainage didn't need improving. Not many people want to see bad ground at Festival time. It's just that I don't think the track needs brilliant drainage during dry weather. That's what it's got. Controlling drainage is mediaeval technology so Claisse wasn't asked to put a man on the moon.
This is obviously a complicated issue as what I've written above has no bearing on the deaths at the Festival last year. Cheltenham has become too big in my opinion and when money is involved it's the horses that will pay the price.

last year's festival was run on the softest ground they've had in years and we still had all the fatalities

it is speed that kills

jockeys riding like idiots like they did in the grand annual was the cause of most of the fatalities yet few people seem to have identified this

if i was mr rooney i would get rid of maguire

While I agree with your point on the course being too well drained I am not convinced that it means more fatalities. That is partly down to too many horses going faster than they ever have before in their careers because they are outclassed and jockeys try too hard to stay in contention. That is not the only reason either. It is a very complex issue. I would be interested in the Irish stats as they seem to have an awful lot of falls and much bigger fields on average. Is their injury rate as high as UK?

also the fences have been made much less demanding than what they were years ago...jockeys take more liberties with the speed they go

Oh no the end of NH Racing,if they don't want to run their horses big deal who the fark are they anyway,if Jason is advising them it might be for the best for them not to play in races at Cheltenham,he spent most of his time there flat out on the turf anyway.....

I agree with the comments regarding maguire

he's about as much use as a chocolate fireguard as racing manager imo

what that fry horse was doing in the xmas hurdle I have no idea, should have over-ruled fehily
2m on good ground in a grade 1 its fkin laughable it even ran imo

A bad start to the year with two horses dead at Hereford today. Overall it seems to be leg injures rather than falls that are the cause of deaths although it is falls that we tend to remember. I still remember a group of builders cheering when One Man had his fatal fall at Aintree in a very close betting race.

Nicholls had to defend the course as he does not want his owners following the Rooney's

possibly a case of the racing manager trying to deflect from his own incompetence and lack of quality horses...reckon if they are shrewd business people they would have found him out by now

i wouldnt agree they havent a horse capable of winning at cheltenham buy any manner of means..

"While I agree with your point on the course being too well drained I am not convinced that it means more fatalities."
It's not just what I think. A report some years ago concluded that quicker ground caused more deaths at Cheltenham hence the requirement to water when the course has drained to good or faster before the Festival. Someone should report on the fatality rates before and after the drainage change which from memory was around 1995/96. I'd do it but I don't have access to the required data and anyway others get paid to do that sort of thing. I agree with the other point about speed being an issue. The desperation to win at Cheltenham has become unhealthy in my opinion.

IF OWNERS DID THIS TO EVERY TRACK ,,  would be no racing ,,horse are lost at most tracks,, even the flat

Autocue, I again agree that faster ground because of drainage can be an issue, do the stats suggest that good/soft since drainage took place is different from good/soft before? There was a time when a lot of falls at the old second last was due to horses slipping on lush grass when going downhill which is why the second last was moved. Is that a factor at the first fence on the far side which was identified in the report as that is met downhill.

It would need a better man than me to get to the truth sageform.

Didn't Mary Reveley hate Cheltenham? It has got too big that's true enough. Like's been said I'd like to see a detailed review of Britain and Ireland and the issues re ground/drainage/field sizes could all be brought out.