stewards MRasen

Why do pundits keep talking when the judge is calling the result?

It cost the runner up the race tho imo.

Cant believe no stewards.

fav should get it

Winner won fair and square

Over the last the 2nd gets jump into and then up the run in gets another smaller bump near the line.
Turned around imo with the class at the last
Surprised if they don't

Got to have a look, surely.

It cost the runner up the race tho imo.


  100%, side on looked bad, carted the second way off course.

Should be overturned, carried 2nd out at the last.

1/4 the runner up.

Looks pretty straight forward imo

why the hell does it take them best part of FIVE MINUTES to call a stewards ?

utter disgrace imv...

as has been said many times before these BHA folk are not fit for purpose...

should have taken less than 60 seconds to call that.

When the horse infront is jumping to the left all race use your brain

That’s going to be amended, seen less recently changed

The FPTP had his whip in the wrong hand so I think he has to go.(no Bet)

Would think that it has to be revised, but 1.25 too skinny for me to dip my toe in.

On balance I think it should go but I also think there is an argument that the 2nd has brought the issue on itself by placing itself on the close outside of a horse that has jumped left at every hurdle. Challenge wider if you can't get on the inside of it.

lost more than it was beaten-so has to go

1.4 fairly priced now ??

Think it probably gets amended, but on the run-in the fav was leaning/drifting in as much as anything else...

should go but

I had a little at 1.43.

Now into 1.18. Seems someone knows something...

Revised

Amended

common sense prevails

600 suddenly appears wanting 1.5

Next few seconds price is 1.18

Funny to watch

don't like horses been booted out for what happens at last obstacle,the winner could have hampered the 2nd at every obstacle costing him lengths but if he jumps the last straight he,d keep the race

Rico finished his sausage ?

That is a very good point Poster and true

watt appened..

1.01 in foto?

If he jumped the last straight he would have been beaten,maybe even up to a length.

ya shoulda told them jeehovas to come back later Rico !

he was upsides for a furlong and never went passed so not sure that's true

Fair enough,conjecture on my part which i made by how it was closing late on.

just scene hd on..deffo cost it ground but dont norm change when its jumping

true but normally more than cig paper margin jumps Rico

Bowen would've won on it without needing a stewards. That lad Stones is average at best and seemed unable to pull his horse out.

glad i mist it..disq horse looked winner in foto..foto betting?

on my stopped slow mo I knew the fav was beat but was too slow to back the other at 3.55.  Just as well though I could have got out on stewards betting.

what happened to make you think there was a chance of a disq?  i cudnt see nowt.

Jan 17, 2025 -- 12:44PM, Rico-Dangleflaps wrote:

glad i mist it..disq horse looked winner in foto..foto betting?

FPTP was around 3-3.5 both before and after the slo-mo. Opened similar for the stewards, drifting a little when the head-on was shown.

Rico-Dangleflaps • January 17, 2025 12:14 PM GMT
1.01 in foto?

err, no.

" i cudnt see nowt".   I thought there was slight danger but yeah bearing in mind it's jumps and some way out....   but when you see head on it had to be changed.

FPTP was around 3-3.5 both before and after the slo-mo.

i find that simply incredible..what live was seen to think the 2nd was 1.4 to get the race?

That's what I thought and why I wanted to bet fptp.  I reckon some people thought the 2nd had won on the live pics.  You couldn't be THAT SURE there was going to be a disq.  imo.

far side deffo won..the nudge over wouldnt have been noticed on drone..even on RTV looks nowt. 3.5 incredible.

far side deffo won..the nudge over last wouldnt have been noticed on drone..even on RTV looks nowt. 3.5 incredible.

someone/s (in the van, whoever) are definitely watching head-ons live and betting photos accordingly. I backed fptp in the photo, and sure enough it was far too good a price to be true, not that i think in a jumps race it was a certain dq.

It was extremely tight. I wouldn't like to have tried to call it live. And u knew if there was a stewards it would change result.

"someone/s (in the van, whoever) are definitely watching head-ons live"   think you are on to something swifty.  Either that or someone is paying for someone to go racing and just watch all races head on with bins if needed.

the interference after the final flight was negligible imo, so it was the interference going into the last hurdle , which again begs the question how far back in a race do you have to look for the interference to be result-changing.....half a mile, lining up in the National(?!), i think it certainly could do with clarification in the rule book.

howard 17 Jan 25 14:40 
It was extremely tight. I wouldn't like to have tried to call it live. And u knew if there was a stewards it would change result.


max bet in stewards then?

i missed the 1st race..my only chance of a return over £20 is a foto..as on drone it would have been impossible to see anything i would have been in on foto far side soon as it opened after slo mo.
how much im not sure.

the market in the stewards kind of agrees with you swifty.  The guys offering big odds KNEW there was going to be a stewards without being certain of a change.  But that's all you need to trade.

don't think I will ever be max bet or anything at all in stewards Rico.  We know you can't trust 'em.  Look how many appeals are won.

howard, that was my thinking , luck of the draw with which stewards panel etc, i though the eventual winner would get it but it was too short for me to limit the damage so thought I'd sweat it out, wrongly of course!

i realise it was an inch but cant recall when the last horse was disq for interference during a jump.

yeah bottom line is someone knew there would be a stewards.   They would have needed a live head on view to think that imo.

btw I started this thread before a stewards was announced but rtv were talking about possible.

Is it worth you paying a man to go racing ? Say at the AW tracks esp. Newc.

right after they crossed the line one of the comms last something about the last hurdle and them maybe taking a look, i didn't think it was that bad on watching live

who in their right mind would lay 5/2 a winner cos its caused minor interence in flight?

chief stipe

same person who didn't want 1.5 on the 2ptp for 5 mins but happily took 1.18 just before the announcement.

if Betfair had any credibility.........


....paper trails...my rrrrrrrrs

i didn't watch the betting mainly as they didnt call a stewards quickly

Toyah's song is playing.

indeed, the stewards report is pretty clear tho as to why they reversed, just never saw it like that myself live

The Stewards considered that the interference had improved LAHIRE (FR)’s placing as when jumping the last DOUBLE OBAN received a significant bump and was taken off its intended line by LAHIRE (FR) losing both ground and momentum, to then run on strongly to be beaten a diminishing nose margin at the line. Having taken this into account the Stewards were satisfied that the interference suffered by DOUBLE OBAN was more than the minimum margin of a nose between the runners at the line and revised the placings

I have no problem with the DQ, the problem is you can't trust a different set of stewards to follow the same principles next time.

So any horse, bumped and taken off its intended line beaten a marginal distance must get the race. We'll see.

... you'll have a similar incident with stewards saying the second had enough time to get passed, result stands.

i disagree with that approach by the way.

it has 100% cost it way more than the winning distance..but others have lost ground being hmp taking off and nowt done.

someone/s (in the van, whoever) are definitely watching head-ons live and betting photos accordingly. I backed fptp in the photo, and sure enough it was far too good a price to be true, not that i think in a jumps race it was a certain dq.

 
RUK Showed the side on before the last, it looked Horrific with the winner getting carried way off course.

It might have closing at the line but it  was also as close half way up the run in and the eventual winner himself hung towards the 1ptp, no certaintity it would have gone by the 1ptp at anytime

" no certaintity it would have gone by the 1ptp at anytime"    It WAS in front less than a foot after the line   

would it have been in front 4 foot after the line is the point

nice day in Rampton ?

GLASGOWCALLING 17 Jan 25 17:57 
someone/s (in the van, whoever) are definitely watching head-ons live and betting photos accordingly. I backed fptp in the photo, and sure enough it was far too good a price to be true, not that i think in a jumps race it was a certain dq.


RUK Showed the side on before the last, it looked Horrific with the winner getting carried way off course.

ive just showed someone replay, he said..'cant see much on RTV'.

" I backed fptp in the photo"    "RUK Showed the side on before the last, it looked Horrific with the winner getting carried way off course".   

hd on looked bad..side on didnt.

hd on looked bad..side on didnt.         Correct. BIG money can be made if a live head on can be seen.  No good if drones are employed cos then everyone sees it.  Need your own drone.

My mistake, all i know is the racing channel showed the replay just after the race ( head on or side not sure ) but if you saw it just before the last the eventual winner was carted half way across the course and a reversal looked almost inevitable.

was carted about 4yds off its line..as swifty said tho..if interference jumping is now considered to be a disq offence ,how far back in the race counts?