There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 60 comments are related to the topic:
Stewards Leopardstown..
Stewards Leopardstown..
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 60
|
By:
would have been interesting if hmp horse wasnt 2nd.
|
|
By:
Irish Stewards a law to themselves thought winner would have kept that.
|
|
By:
Agreed,Matt22
|
|
By:
They should not be a law unto themselves as they made the right decision. Others should follow
Standardisation should be an easy fix |
|
By:
I didn't even watch the race but some of the most outrageous Stewards decisions over the years have been in Ireland
|
|
By:
no arguing winner badly hmp the 2nd..take 2nd out the race winner was staying on well,pack wernt closing...winner cud easily have picked up when straightened...impossible to know if 2nd would have won,therefore benefit of doubt should have been given to the winner.
imo |
|
By:
Just watched it.
Would have stood all day long here. The Wild West over there |
|
By:
horse wins over 3L and stewards decides probably would have won.
|
|
By:
What were the prices in the Stewards,Rico?
|
|
By:
but the point is , is was a length when the contact was made, 3l at the finish is immaterial, imo,
it was around 4/6 to keep initially, then hardend up once Walsh, Berry, Mcnae all claimed it can't possibly be reversed the way the rules are written. turns out that expert view/advice was codswallop. |
|
By:
if the pack closed on the winner i'd of agreed 2nd may have won...but they didnt and i think there was ev chance the winner would have kept on once straightened and held on..all supposition of course.
|
|
By:
it's one of those, fptp probably wasn't stopping, I think the DQ is the way forward in these kind of instances, even though that's not the way the rules are written currently according to those paid to know (or not).
|
|
By:
That is,until you back the FPTP,Swifty.
A very strange decision which only reminds me to try not to get involved over there |
|
By:
I stand by my 10pm post
|
|
By:
The Raceday Stewards enquired into possible interference in the home straight involving Blake (GB), ridden by C.D. Hayes, placed second and Navy Waters, ridden by N.M. Crosse, placed first, where it appeared that interference may have occurred. Evidence was heard from the riders concerned. C.D. Hayes stated that he was carried wide early in the straight and at no stage did he get a fair run up the straight. He further added that as he got his mount going Navy Waters leaned in on top of him. He concluded by stating that he felt this interference had cost him the winning of the race. N.M. Crosse stated that his mount was hanging right and he did his best to keep him straight. He further added that Blake ran into the back of his hind quarters. Having viewed the recording of the race and considered the evidence, the Raceday Stewards were of the opinion that Navy Waters had caused interference to Blake and as a result of this interference had improved it’s finishing position
As a consequence, the Raceday Stewards amended the result to read as follows: Amended Result: First: Blake Second: Navy Waters Third: Teed Up Fourth: Speckled Meadow Fifth: Immutable Sixth: Bottler'secret Furthermore, the Raceday Stewards were of the opinion that N.M. Crosse was in breach of Rule 214 in that he had ridden carelessly, and having considered his clean record in this regard they suspended him for two racedays |
|
By:
So everything stated is correct. I don't feel anyone can reasonably categorically state that the winner improved their finishing position. So they haven't applied the rules correctly, and the decision would/should be reversed on appeal (assuming those determining the appeal applied the rules correctly!).
improved it’s finishing position btw, what the f is that  |
|
By:
I don't feel anyone can reasonably categorically state that the winner improved their finishing position.
well it did,went from 1L in front to 3L. |
|
By:
cider will be back shortly to say he was wrong
 |
|
By:
Did anybody back the second to get the race in the Stewards?
|
|
By:
The finishing position is in terms of order, not distance. But Rico knows that, and is being unusually facetious :)
|
|
By:
 |