 |
|
06-16-2022, 09:46 AM
|
#31
|
|
C'est Tout
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Cajunland
Posts: 13,271
|
Alright, WTF is going on over there?
The winner of R1 comes over egregiously and interferes with two runners who could have gotten a better placing, and they leave him up.
The Stews can cite a rider for careless riding, irresponsible riding, or dangerous riding; with only the latter being cause for a DQ.
Talk about wiggle room...they apparently don't consider whether the interference caused another horse a placing, but whether or not it prevented them from beating the accused runner (which is ridiculous).
I'm done with that place.
__________________
How do I work this?
-David Byrne
|
|
|
|
06-16-2022, 09:55 AM
|
#32
|
|
The Voice of Reason!
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Canandaigua, New york
Posts: 112,861
|
The Queen will be devastaed! 
__________________
Who does the Racing Form Detective like in this one?
|
|
|
|
|
06-16-2022, 10:53 AM
|
#33
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Dark Side of the Moon
Posts: 5,870
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhantomOnTour
Alright, WTF is going on over there?
The winner of R1 comes over egregiously and interferes with two runners who could have gotten a better placing, and they leave him up.
The Stews can cite a rider for careless riding, irresponsible riding, or dangerous riding; with only the latter being cause for a DQ.
Talk about wiggle room...they apparently don't consider whether the interference caused another horse a placing, but whether or not it prevented them from beating the accused runner (which is ridiculous).
I'm done with that place.
|
yea thats the old cat 1/cat 2 system that a lot of people want over here, some instances it makes sense, others not so much.
can you imagine the rough race riding we would have over here with basically no DQ's.
|
|
|
|
|
06-16-2022, 05:28 PM
|
#34
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Coventry, UK
Posts: 424
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhantomOnTour
Alright, WTF is going on over there?
The winner of R1 comes over egregiously and interferes with two runners who could have gotten a better placing, and they leave him up.
The Stews can cite a rider for careless riding, irresponsible riding, or dangerous riding; with only the latter being cause for a DQ.
Talk about wiggle room...they apparently don't consider whether the interference caused another horse a placing, but whether or not it prevented them from beating the accused runner (which is ridiculous).
I'm done with that place.
|
Agree with a lot of what you say. In fairness though the rules have worked pretty well and are the same rules that are broadly followed in most countries now (I understand the USA and Canada are exceptions). The general point of the rules are to ensure the best horse is declared the winners however, I do understand the counter arguments. In this country most bookies have a first past the post rule so even if a horse wins and is disqualified they still pay out on it as well as the eventual winner so a DQ doesn't affect punters.
The trouble with todays race is that they classed the ride as careless. I have watched it several times now and personally think it most probably should have been classed as dangerous as the jockey made no attempt to change his whip and didn't use the reins properly to steer the horse. There was an excellent analysis by Ruby Walsh, probably the best jumps jockey we have seen, who is now a TV analyst. He showed how the jockey didn't have proper contact of the reins with the horse.
I am not one of those who likes to criticise stewards, and in fairness the head of the stewards did go on TV over here and explain how they came to their decision, but do I think they got it wrong here.
|
|
|
|
|
06-17-2022, 10:34 AM
|
#35
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 4,520
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by GMB@BP
yea thats the old cat 1/cat 2 system that a lot of people want over here, some instances it makes sense, others not so much.
can you imagine the rough race riding we would have over here with basically no DQ's.
|
you get major time off for rough riding in the UK.
ask irad.
Allan
|
|
|
|
|
06-17-2022, 10:37 AM
|
#36
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 4,520
|
|
|
|
|
|
06-17-2022, 10:38 AM
|
#37
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 4,520
|
can you image such transparency at a us race track.
Allan
|
|
|
|
|
06-19-2022, 12:33 PM
|
#38
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Dark Side of the Moon
Posts: 5,870
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by biggestal99
you get major time off for rough riding in the UK.
ask irad.
Allan
|
here u just appeal to the courts and it takes a year or two to adjudicate.
|
|
|
|
|
06-20-2022, 03:28 PM
|
#39
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 4,520
|
ran the fastest timed furlong of the royal ascot meet 10.35 (second furlong of his race)
Allan
|
|
|
|
|
06-20-2022, 03:57 PM
|
#40
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 4,520
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by GMB@BP
here u just appeal to the courts and it takes a year or two to adjudicate.
|
i guess we will just have to see whether he has mounts on June 29-July 3
Allan
|
|
|
|
|
06-21-2022, 12:39 AM
|
#41
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Dark Side of the Moon
Posts: 5,870
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by biggestal99
i guess we will just have to see whether he has mounts on June 29-July 3
Allan
|
not quite the same situation, i am talking about american courts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
