stewards southwell

Hushwing is correct.

if he'd knocked him over the rail the winning distance would've been about 200 yards, so impossible to throw out ??

Head on showed plenty of room...

Lowest 2nd went in running was 1.9 if stewards turn this around I wouldn't ever bet on one again.

The winner was 3 horse widths off the rail before crossing. I don't know what the jockey on the second is expected to do if he can't take that gap. After all if you go wide the horse in front can also hang wide across you.

Was on his quarters and closing fast!

2nd would have won.  Looks like 1st picked up but that's because 2nd was halted.  Only way winner keeps is if Jockey gets an Oscar.

He only hit 1.9 but if you look at the chart he may have hit that at the exact moment the interference happened, therefore a probable winner.

I'm green both of these (laid the jolly) but amazed if winner loses it.

Laid Train Hill I meant.

amended

Correct decision glad the Stewards are making the right decision nowadays

Lot's of so called Experts on here!! IDIOTS!!!

central stewarding now please
consistency out the window

Blimey, I am amazed. Don't see how that could be changed, but they make rules up as they go along.

2nd was a possible winner, but not enough to change it.

2 3/4 LENGTHS. WOW

if the stewards disq a horse thats won 3L without it being dangerous i'll be amazed.

Rico, serious question kid.  are you definitely a "pro-gambler" ? 

you're fackin hopeless man

When was the last one chucked out winning by 3 lengths?

hulk23 21 Mar 22 16:59 
if the stewards disq a horse thats won 3L without it being dangerous i'll be amazed.

80% of the market formers agreed with me..any bet in the stewards or still got nee funds? YDC.

Can't think of one ladyc, apart from non-uk of course.

ladycarla 21 Mar 22 17:00 
When was the last one chucked out winning by 3 lengths?


just saud that to m8 in here..without being dangerous i cant ever recall.

Watched multiple times paused and restarted horse was stopped dead whilst almost being put through the rail.  Gap was easily wide enough to get through and had every right in my opinion.  The market post race was very generous.  CustomCut I assume you joined me in the boot filling exercise.

Same here Stu, was the stewards American

80% of the market formers agreed with me

tell that to the bailiffs when they come to take all your motors away ...

I actually don't bet on stewards but congrats O1.

post ya stewards bet hulk..show us clowns how shreewd you are?

SOME OF THE COMMENTS ON HERE ALMOST HAD ME DOUBTING MY OWN EYES AND SANITY... Excuse the caps.

I love Money

post yer losses, give us a fookin laugh.  you got torched

Right decision but still a little surprising.

I only 'dabble' in stewards markets (vastly reduced staking). They alter rules when they please.

Impossible to call that a probable winner so far from the line with the other surging and running through the line late on. Loss of momentum is only a guess as to amount, as 2nd failed to pick up at all again with plenty running left in the race.

The stewards totally guessed at that decision, which is something they're not supposed to do.

correct stu..another precedent set by the idiots that call the shots.

you're the 'idiot' risking £21,000 on the decisions of the idiots that call the shots ...

Emitdab never doub your own eyes especially when the recent trend has changed. Majority will look at a market then formulate an argument based on price.  The price influences their subconscious mind to formulate an opinion.  This is general human nature without most even realising it.  Fortunately you fall in the bracket of emotional intelligence which is a winning mentality.  The masses simply do not succeed it just does not work in a world of Capatilism.

Second would have won the race on the balance of probabilities. I'm surprised that they reversed it nonetheless. I've read the rules many times but long since gave up on predicting the outcome. Watched a million races and a thousand enquiries. Can't predict them. End

2nd was closing granted..how do they know for sure the winner wouldnt have picked up?..has hardly out on its feet..as ive said,another precedent been set.

They don't know for sure. They're supposed to determine the outcome based on the balance of probabilities. But they normally give too much benefit to the FPTP

in recent weeks stewards enquiries becoming no-go areas for punters as now every chance of winners being thrown out whatever the distances

Isleham... I think this is definitely the right decision. It was bordering on dangerous riding IMHO. Perhaps the guidance has changed somewhat to chuck 'em out

What a joke what jock going to let u go up rail ,he went for rail and couldn’t get it it so how u going to turn that around.I could of cashed out 1,01 but dint think there was chance he’d go .
By the time I realised they ain’t payed out it was 1,2 ,I won’t risk a stewards again

a horse drifting a yard right under a left hand whip is hardly dangerous..dangerous is a deliberate manoeuvre likey to cause serious troble.

If 2nd appeals hel get it back but we won’t get paid

It didn't go 1.01 AFAIK. 1.05 is what I saw last. I wasn't tempted either, even though I think chucking the winner was the right thing to do in accordance with the guidance. Like I say, normally too much benefit of the doubt is given to the FPTP and the winning distance. No doubt we'll see the same thing next week and placing will remain unaltered.

rico sez:

winner was heading to rail about 1L clear when 2nd decided to go up inside..2nd would certainly have went close but if the stewards disq a horse thats won 3L without it being dangerous i'll be amazed.


ffs not content with stiffing Shiskin, he gets another 1/5 turned over

hopeless just fackin hopeless

as now every chance of winners being thrown out whatever the distances

Not seen one winning this far though? Can't remember one at all (UK rules)?

Riding across to prevent a horse from going ‘up the inner’
An example of 'serious interference' taken from BHA site

biggest bully on the forum definitely deserves to be potless

If the jock had let him up the rail he would of got hammered by everyone including owner and trainer

If the jock had let him up the rail he would of got hammered by everyone including owner and trainer

Big cat sure it went massive 1.01 19K I think then last price was 1.05

Anyways, despite knowing the guidance in detail, they don't apply it consistently, so rarely get involved and am inclined to green up or red up otherwise I'll end up fed up

ladycarla, ok I didn't check for 1.01. Just saw 1.05 on Gruss and assumed that was as low as it went

Can anyone tell me the time the amended result was called pls? Thanks

https://www.attheraces.com/atrplayer-popup/VOD/1256762

I have seen the head on, which really underlines the case for the eventual winner.

Further evidence not to bet on this rubbish
And yes, I saw the interference and got out, as I nearly always do with stewards, not like there aint enough opportunities to make money without having to take a position on them all.

Like some others have said. I can't recall them overturning an incident of this nature with a comparable winning distance

Bushy it took about 25 mins

Bushy it took about 25 mins

It’s just a joke coz if they appeal they will get it 100 % but we won’t get paid on here,bookies pay both.
He had no right to expect to be given a free ride up the rail,I’m telling the jock to do exactly what he did ,fair enough go for rail but if the gap goes u no u are fcked ,that’s how it should be ,he should of gone round him if he wanted where the space was

Fair play to jock on 2nd aswell if u backed that coz only way he could of won was go for a gap u ain’t going to get then snatch up and get it in stewards,he wasnt ever catching that horse

Rob, I thought exactly that when watching it real time - there was a gap, but not one by the time the 2nd had closed up, the one in front was entitled to go for the rail IMO.

But hey-ho, it all makes no difference now, so we have to just forget it and move on.

pretty similar to the Wynford & Dereham finish @Ponte'
in a way.Winner kept it that day.

Big cat sure it went massive 1.01 19K I think then last price was 1.05

£14k matched @ 1.01 .

Rob, I thought exactly that when watching it real time - there was a gap, but not one by the time the 2nd had closed up, the one in front was entitled to go for the rail IMO.

Have to call BS! on this opinion.. There was a gap, there was a horse in the gap when the Questioner veered to the right causing major interference (potentially dangerous)... imo.

He was trying to push through a gap by time he'd reached the other (was bigger before that granted).

Anyway, debating opinions on it now is rather pointless as it's been and gone, and I probably won't be bothering with stewards betting.

Sorry mate... That just isn't true.

The apparent improvement in form of the winner, THE QUESTIONER (IRE) which had never previously been placed, was considered. The representative of Oliver Greenall explained that the gelding had benefitted from the step up in trip and the application of first time cheekpieces. His explanation was noted, and THE QUESTIONER (IRE) was routine tested.

An enquiry was held to consider the placings in this race following interference inside the final ½ furlong when the winner, THE QUESTIONER (IRE), ridden by Craig Nichol, interfered with HILLVIEW (IRE), placed second, ridden by Sean Bowen. The Stewards considered that the interference had improved THE QUESTIONER (IRE)’s placing as HILLVIEW (IRE) lost all momentum as a result of the interference when appearing to be gaining ground at a critical stage of the race. The placings were revised as follows: First: HILLVIEW (IRE), Second: THE QUESTIONER (IRE). Nichol was suspended for 4 days for careless riding as he failed to take sufficient corrective action to prevent his mount from drifting right-handed and causing Bowen to be tightened for room against the rail and to take a check.

Following the race, the Veterinary Officer reported that OPTIMISTIC BIAS (IRE), which was pulled up, finished lame on its right-hind.

pretty similar to the Wynford & Dereham finish @Ponte'
in a way.Winner kept it that day.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/horseracing/16330673/watch-race-spark-fury-ped-off-trainer-pontefract/

Yeah just like it... In an almost absolutely nothing like it sort of way....

ex-jockey Lucien Harvey - that'll be getting thrown out
rico (zero career wins) - i'm having £21k on it to keep the race

pmsl ...

some experts without an opinion before the outcome..most potless mugs.

hulk i think you'll have noticed..if im having a bet i post it..unlike yourself who hasnt any funds to post...

potless mugless absolute silleekkhuunt.

Rico- Did you have a bet on the stewards? You rarely get one wrong, this one well what more can I say.

if i bet in a stewards i post it well before outcome..

If the interference happened on the bend nothing would have done about it.

Thanks for reply.

nothing ceases to amaze me with these clowns..they have set a few precedents in last couple of yrs..i thought the 2nd would have went very close,maybe winning but the winner wasnt exactly out on its legs and could have picked up..if the 2nd had been beaten less than 1/2L it would have been 1.1 to get the race..i didnt think or have i seen a near 3L winner being disq unless jock being done with dangerous riding..

whats the next precedent?

think Harris migth get it...

Agree, how can you bet in a stewards anymore, bet the winner but was 95% sure FPTP would keep it just purely on distance won so piled into the stewards betting. Lesson learnt will leave it to the professionals from now, seem alot on here.

what they have also done now is set a precedent that if a winner costs any on runner a closer place it will be put behind that runner..im not saying thats isnt right but was never carried out.

Exactly why chose to do it today? Only conclusion I can come up with after reading the stewards report(posted it above) is that they didn't like the improved form of FPTP but's that's only my opinion which is worth toffee. Oh well move on and learn from it.

Dodged a bullet here. Thought there was no chance this would be overturned. Got side tracked so didn't even look at the stewards betting. If I had and saw 1/5, I would have got burnt.

Just not understanding this at all... Watch the last 1/2 furlong, the eventual winner was practically on the girth of the leader but finishing much the better.. Leader veers right causing eventual winner to snatch up!  What are you bleating about?

Emitdeb 21 Mar 22 20:25 
Just not understanding this at all...

im  ot understanding why ive never to the best of my memory seen a 3L winner being demoted..is that hard to fathom out?

btw..how much you have on to get the race?

^Professional must of took my money in the stewards

^^

All opinion Emit. I'm not so sure he was gonna win this regardless. Winner has stayed on well enough. Either way, it's a bit novel for a horse winning so far to be dq. Of no monetary relevance to me. Thank gawd I didn't get involved.

But Dangle, the fptp stopped the eventual winner dead 100yds from the line... I'm a small timer but as soon as i saw the head on pushed all in.... tbh, you lot did have me doubting at one point

yes it stopped its momentum when 3/4L down...how many horses kick on again when challenged?

imo, the leaders jock was much the more animated at the time and in my opinion clearly breezes past...

Good night guys...

Dangerous to bet on these now with Stewards making some surprising decisions. Having just seen this one now I am amazed that this one was reversed, but the one at Lingfield a few weeks ago when the second horse was awarded the race when the original winner hampered the third beats all imho.

Must admit, I've not been paying much attention to racing for a while until Cheltenham.  Have things materially changed in the way stewarding takes place since the Tylicki ruling?  That would seem the most obvious explanation to me.

somethings changed as at least 2 new precedents been set lately.

Its clearly the woke agenda
Wins will be cancelled next and every race declared a draw so not to upset the useless

horse in third last race 3L down 3 out..12 to back 800 to lay..seems fair.

I would have been about 80/20 that the result would not have changed in that sherry quaffers enquiry ,they could have had a word with the jockey on FPP and move on.

Still can't believe the outcome of this enquiry.

Even more galling having seen the FPP stay on strongly to win at Wetherby today.

How they decided that the runner up was likely winning without the interference, is beyond me.

One of the biggest headscratchers I have seen in my 20+ years in the industry.

another race hardly comparable imo..

I am not comparing them, just reminded me how annoyed I was at the time by the inconsistent interpretation of the rules.

And I lost money, so I am still bitter!!