The DQ (or non-DQ) complaint thread

[cj]

Originally Posted by tophatmert

Did the 6 make contact with the 1 ?

I don't think he did if memory servers.

[pandy]

Originally Posted by tophatmert

Did the 6 make contact with the 1 ?

You're right, the 6 came over on the 1 but probably didn't make contact. But this whole "he was just race riding" theory is actually being taken the wrong way in many instances. According to the rules the rider is supposed to maintain a straight path. The 6 came over on the 1 and then the 1 moved over. If the 6 doesn't come over, does the 1 drift in? This is why it's too ambiguous and the 1 should not have been dq'd. The 6 started the progression.

[SG4]

For the pay the winners side, you'll probably want to put this race on loop on your desktop so you can have a smile on your face all day:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1pSuM8SSR0

No wonder Jamie Spencer thought his ride was a thing of beauty in the Beverly D when results like this are left up in Europe. I don't think this is acceptable at all, especially as it's hard to argue that the best horse absolutely won this race the way the 3rd place finisher was knocked off stride.


Furthermore, there was a G1 DQ earlier on the card & the most interesting part of this is this clip I saw of a video (which I can only guess was live & broadcast as such) where the jockeys sit with the stewards & argue their case while watching the replays. Why can't we have this in America on every decision?? Time to remove the curtain on the secrecy, especially when this helps add a compelling factor to the inquiry process.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=diny3MgdMHY

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by SG4

For the pay the winners side, you'll probably want to put this race on loop on your desktop so you can have a smile on your face all day:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1pSuM8SSR0

No wonder Jamie Spencer thought his ride was a thing of beauty in the Beverly D when results like this are left up in Europe. I don't think this is acceptable at all, especially as it's hard to argue that the best horse absolutely won this race the way the 3rd place finisher was knocked off stride.


Furthermore, there was a G1 DQ earlier on the card & the most interesting part of this is this clip I saw of a video (which I can only guess was live & broadcast as such) where the jockeys sit with the stewards & argue their case while watching the replays. Why can't we have this in America on every decision?? Time to remove the curtain on the secrecy, especially when this helps add a compelling factor to the inquiry process.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=diny3MgdMHY

How about just paying the winners like sports books do when you win a sports bet?

When the game is officially over, they don't 'review' the game to see if they want to go back in time and not pay off the winner, when the buzzer sounds and your team is ahead, you get paid.

I know it's a novel concept.

[no breathalyzer]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

How about just paying the winners like sports books do when you win a sports bet?

When the game is officially over, they don't 'review' the game to see if they want to go back in time and not pay off the winner, when the buzzer sounds and your team is ahead, you get paid.

I know it's a novel concept.

If only it were that simple... you know it can't be done like that for many reasons

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by no breathalyzer

If only it were that simple... you know it can't be done like that for many reasons

There's no reason other than their desire to not make fines and suspensions for careless riding a lot more extreme as well as lifetime bans for jocks crashing on purpose to alter the results.

[castaway01]

Yeah, no penalties have ever decided a game in other sports. Before you say "Yeah but they don't go back after they're over and make the call", no they stop the game while it's taking place.

But same BS, different day from the usual suspects here.

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by castaway01

Yeah, no penalties have ever decided a game in other sports. Before you say "Yeah but they don't go back after they're over and make the call", no they stop the game while it's taking place.

But same BS, different day from the usual suspects here.

The official penalty isn't "loss of game" though. If a team has a big enough lead, a penalty won't ever be the difference, a horse could win by a large margin and yet, the penalty could still be loss of game.

If a team loses due to a penalty, it only happens rarely and they're not technically losing because the official description of the penalty states that committing this specific infraction is loss of game, in racing, a 'penalty' is 'loss of game' 100 pct of the time. If you get penalized in racing, no matter how severe the infraction is, the punishment is that you lose the 'game' no matter how slight.

Could you imagine an nfl ref coming out on the first play from scrimmage and saying "offsides defense number 73, that infraction will result in loss of GAME"

This happens in racing. Loss of game no matter how slight.

But you knew that already.

[cj]

Originally Posted by SG4

For the pay the winners side, you'll probably want to put this race on loop on your desktop so you can have a smile on your face all day:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1pSuM8SSR0

No wonder Jamie Spencer thought his ride was a thing of beauty in the Beverly D when results like this are left up in Europe. I don't think this is acceptable at all, especially as it's hard to argue that the best horse absolutely won this race the way the 3rd place finisher was knocked off stride.


Furthermore, there was a G1 DQ earlier on the card & the most interesting part of this is this clip I saw of a video (which I can only guess was live & broadcast as such) where the jockeys sit with the stewards & argue their case while watching the replays. Why can't we have this in America on every decision?? Time to remove the curtain on the secrecy, especially when this helps add a compelling factor to the inquiry process.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=diny3MgdMHY

I have no idea how this could stand in any jurisdiction. Must be anything goes.

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by cj

I have no idea how this could stand in any jurisdiction. Must be anything goes.

They respect the punter and want to pay them for picking winners. America is 'soft' in that regard.

[taxicab]

Originally Posted by SG4

For the pay the winners side, you'll probably want to put this race on loop on your desktop so you can have a smile on your face all day:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1pSuM8SSR0

This has to be one of the worst non-calls you will ever see.
I would really question the Stewards competence and or integrity for botching this one up.

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by taxicab

This has to be one of the worst non-calls you will ever see.
I would really question the Stewards competence and or integrity for botching this one up.

You only should question integrity if this isnt how they normally call them. If they have this funny habit of paying the winners (i know, imagine that) than theres nothing inconsistent about how they call. If they DQ horses like they do in America where they pick and choose which ticky tack fouls they want to call one day but leave alone the next, than you have a situation where you can question the motives.

[taxicab]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

You only should question integrity if this isnt how they normally call them. If they have this funny habit of paying the winners (i know, imagine that) than theres nothing inconsistent about how they call. If they DQ horses like they do in America where they pick and choose which ticky tack fouls they want to call one day but leave alone the next, than you have a situation where you can question the motives.

Make no mistake about it,you really ask for the abuse you receive on this board with your clownish remarks.
Don't give me your Smart aleck sarcastic "they have this funny habit of paying the winners(I know,imagine that)" line of BS.
Do you think everybody on this board you play fastidious troll with doesn't see exactly what you're doing ?
Look Einstein, it's as obvious as the bridge you live under that Dettori's horse cost the third place finisher the victory by poleaxing him as he was about to go by.
There was ZERO excuse for the stewards to not place the winner behind the third place finisher.
I would ask you if you even know how to watch a horse race properly,but what's the use......you have a contrarian agenda towards logic that you practice on this board daily.

[open_question]

Originally Posted by taxicab

This has to be one of the worst non-calls you will ever see.
I would really question the Stewards competence and or integrity for botching this one up.

Yes. An absurd result in the Irish Champion Stakes.

Simple Verse's DQ earlier on the card, in the Doncaster St Leger, illustrates the incongruity of the stewards' decision in this contest.

[thespaah]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

How about just paying the winners like sports books do when you win a sports bet?

When the game is officially over, they don't 'review' the game to see if they want to go back in time and not pay off the winner, when the buzzer sounds and your team is ahead, you get paid.

I know it's a novel concept.

During play of a game, the game can be stopped and a ruling issued before play continues. In horse racing, this is not possible.
Furthermore, those who have bets on the fouled horse, do they not have a legitimate beef when their horse is denied a position based on the rule breaching actions of another horse?
Have you never had your horse fouled or impeded and thought that you were the victim of a bad non call?
It cuts both ways.
I would rather see a rules violation punished and a good faith effort to rectify that breach with a proper placing of the finishers.
Loo, I've been pulled down more than I've been pulled forward. I have also seen where my horse has been impeded and no call was made to adjust the order of finish....In other words, IMO they 'missed' it