Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There are currently 3 people viewing this thread.
Would any racing post member be able to pots today's racing post article by tom segal, thanks in advance
Show More
It's not worth reading,bellico.
Just Segal spouting nonsense
Just Segal spouting nonsense
Sometimes I think I'm living in a parallel universe. I'm alone in finding certain things interesting, and nobody seems to care about issues that I think are important.
Saffie Osborne's success on Highwayman in the St Leger deserved top billing last week, and there were undoubtedly some impressive juvenile performances too, but I'm staggered that interference rules – or lack of them – were barely touched on in light of what happened in recent days.
Two of the biggest races last week featured cases of interference that prevented horses having any chance of achieving their best possible placing. However, once again the stewards decided that the results weren't affected.
How can they possibly know that? In every other walk of life the perpetrator of an offence gets penalised but not in British or Irish racing. Nothing to see here, move on!
At Doncaster, James Doyle didn't even get a ban for his winning ride on Final Objective in the Flying Childers Stakes, despite the fact that PJ McDonald was nearly brought down on In The Black. Quite clearly In The Black was denied a chance of winning the race through no fault of his own and he was beaten only two short heads for third place.
That cannot in any shape or form be right. In any other sport the person that commits a foul would be penalised, yet in the Doncaster case absolutely nothing happened. Truly laughable in my opinion.
At Leopardstown, at least Shane Foley was given a lengthy ban for what Donnacha O'Brien described as "brutal riding" on the winner Hotazhell in the Irish Champion Stakes. The stewards clearly thought the same but that's scant consolation to the connections of A Boy Named Susie, who was fifth, or the nose runner-up Wimbledon Hawkeye.
A Boy Named Susie was put out of the race by Hotazhell, but if Foley had ridden to the rules and straightened up his horse rather than continually letting him cannon into those inside him, he might have lost a bit of momentum, and that might have allowed Wimbledon Hawkeye to win the race.
The message being sent by the stewards is that you're allowed to commit professional fouls but there's no recompense for those that are sinned against. In fact, all the benefit seems to go to those that commit the fouls.
To me they were both clear cases of poor riding. Doyle thought Seb Sanders was talking nonsense on At The Races in the aftermath of the Doncaster race for saying horses should be "thrown out" in these circumstances, but there was only one person talking sense in my opinion and it certainly wasn't Doyle.
Saffie Osborne's success on Highwayman in the St Leger deserved top billing last week, and there were undoubtedly some impressive juvenile performances too, but I'm staggered that interference rules – or lack of them – were barely touched on in light of what happened in recent days.
Two of the biggest races last week featured cases of interference that prevented horses having any chance of achieving their best possible placing. However, once again the stewards decided that the results weren't affected.
How can they possibly know that? In every other walk of life the perpetrator of an offence gets penalised but not in British or Irish racing. Nothing to see here, move on!
At Doncaster, James Doyle didn't even get a ban for his winning ride on Final Objective in the Flying Childers Stakes, despite the fact that PJ McDonald was nearly brought down on In The Black. Quite clearly In The Black was denied a chance of winning the race through no fault of his own and he was beaten only two short heads for third place.
That cannot in any shape or form be right. In any other sport the person that commits a foul would be penalised, yet in the Doncaster case absolutely nothing happened. Truly laughable in my opinion.
At Leopardstown, at least Shane Foley was given a lengthy ban for what Donnacha O'Brien described as "brutal riding" on the winner Hotazhell in the Irish Champion Stakes. The stewards clearly thought the same but that's scant consolation to the connections of A Boy Named Susie, who was fifth, or the nose runner-up Wimbledon Hawkeye.
A Boy Named Susie was put out of the race by Hotazhell, but if Foley had ridden to the rules and straightened up his horse rather than continually letting him cannon into those inside him, he might have lost a bit of momentum, and that might have allowed Wimbledon Hawkeye to win the race.
The message being sent by the stewards is that you're allowed to commit professional fouls but there's no recompense for those that are sinned against. In fact, all the benefit seems to go to those that commit the fouls.
To me they were both clear cases of poor riding. Doyle thought Seb Sanders was talking nonsense on At The Races in the aftermath of the Doncaster race for saying horses should be "thrown out" in these circumstances, but there was only one person talking sense in my opinion and it certainly wasn't Doyle.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539