PROTEST! - Racing Talk - Racehorse TALK harm-plan harm-plan

Racehorse TALK



PROTEST! - Racing Talk - Racehorse TALK

Author Topic: PROTEST!  (Read 144487 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online westie

  • Group 1
  • User 8
  • Posts: 14193
« 2009-Jan-27, 10:44 AM Reply #25 »
Reply
Recommend  Message 17 of 201 in Discussion 
From: The Carnegie Express Sent: 2/02/2008 3:36 PM
and if you think the TT protest should be upheld do the same champ.

Reply
Recommend  Message 18 of 201 in Discussion 
From: arakaan Sent: 2/02/2008 3:39 PM
you might want to go read what I said on the race thread for TT and get back to me.

Reply
Recommend  Message 19 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMattDjebel31 Sent: 2/02/2008 3:43 PM
If there is a lip in it i do not see how any interferance can not affect the result.

Reply
Recommend  Message 20 of 201 in Discussion 
From: The Carnegie Express Sent: 2/02/2008 4:06 PM
I agree Matt. I thought there was no chance it would be dismissed as had the bump not happened then TOH wins. It was only a nose so the bump was extremely important.

Reply
Recommend  Message 21 of 201 in Discussion 
From: arakaan Sent: 2/02/2008 4:13 PM
if the bump didn't happen element wins by further than a nose. It was cost more by the bump the TOH ever was.
 
stewards finally get one right.

Reply
Recommend  Message 22 of 201 in Discussion 
From: The Carnegie Express Sent: 2/02/2008 4:17 PM
I don't think so. The bump pushes TOH out.

Reply
Recommend  Message 23 of 201 in Discussion 
From: arakaan Sent: 2/02/2008 4:20 PM
TCE,
 
TOH never loses balance or ground and accelerates straight past element after the bump because of this.
 
It would have never got the neck infront had element run striaght from the 400m and it would have lost by more than 1/2 length.

Reply
Recommend  Message 24 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMattDjebel31 Sent: 2/02/2008 4:25 PM
That is your opinion Arakaan it is NOT fact.
 
The FACT is he caused interference to another runner. How much wind did that bump nock out of the runner up ?

Reply
Recommend  Message 25 of 201 in Discussion 
From: arakaan Sent: 2/02/2008 4:29 PM
Matt,
 
If you think a horse with the wind knocked out of him accelerates immediately like TOH did straight after the bump, I've got an Opera House to sell you. Has great views.
 
Wouldn't you love to have Matt on a jury. You be tried and committted before you walked in the door.

Reply
Recommend  Message 26 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMattDjebel31 Sent: 2/02/2008 4:39 PM
No mate, for a thinker your really not thinking.
 
If he has had little wind nocked out of him ( who knows how much ? ) it may explain the fact that Element was able to fight back on the inside. If however the bump never occured perhaps PERHAPS  Ten Of hearts may have gone 3 or 4 lengths in front. What i am doing here Mr Thinker is speculating what may of may not have happened.
 
The FACTS are that Element interfered with Ten Of Hearts they are the facts. How much it cost either horse if any is speculation and or OPINION.
 
 

Reply
Recommend  Message 27 of 201 in Discussion 
From: arakaan Sent: 2/02/2008 4:52 PM
btw Matt did you see this race last mon.
 
From: arakaan Sent: 28/01/2008 3:08 PM
wonder if Matt watched race 4 in sydney.

Reply
Recommend  Message 28 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMattDjebel31 Sent: 2/02/2008 4:58 PM
No, i did not see that race, i saw the comment.

Reply
Recommend  Message 29 of 201 in Discussion 
From: navajo Sent: 3/02/2008 2:03 PM

I backed Ten of Hearts yesterday and in my opinion he was just out ridden by a more experienced jockey

RACE 4: - Rosehill Gardens Grand Pavilion Handicap 1200m

On return to scale, an objection was lodged by Apprentice K Nestor, rider of second placegetter,

Ten Of Hearts against Element (J Lloyd) being declared the winner alleging interference near the

300m. After taking evidence from the parties and viewing the videos, the stewards dismissed the

objection when they found that, whilst at the 300m Element shifted out, inconveniencing Ten Of

Hearts, bearing in mind Ten Of Hearts later in the straight headed Element and had full

opportunity to win, they were not of the view that the incident at the 300m had a material effect on

the relevant finishing positions of the respective horses. At the 300m Cresta Run had to be check

when disappointed for a run between Blessus and Testimonial, which shifted out. Cresta Run

then shifted back to the inside of Testimonial to improve and then again had to be steadied near

the 50m when on the heels of Clevergaze. The whip of Apprentice M Beadman (Eight Moons)

was accidently knocked from his grasp by the whip of B Shinn (Boncoeur) passing the 200m. A

post race veterinary examination of Eight Moons did not reveal any abnormality.


Reply
The number of members that recommended this message. 0 recommendations  Message 30 of 201 in Discussion 
Sent: 3/02/2008 2:31 PM
This message has been deleted by the manager or assistant manager.

Reply
Recommend  Message 31 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMattDjebel31 Sent: 3/02/2008 3:15 PM
bearing in mind Ten Of Hearts later in the straight headed Element and had full

opportunity to win, they were not of the view that the incident at the 300m had a material effect on

the relevant finishing positions of the respective horses.

 

DUMB.


Online westie

  • Group 1
  • User 8
  • Posts: 14193
« 2009-Jan-27, 10:45 AM Reply #26 »
Reply
Recommend  Message 32 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameGunstan Sent: 3/02/2008 7:55 PM
AMAZING!
the stipes got it right for a change.
how a horse can hit the front and then fold up like a "ten of hearts" lol, and then protest under the guise of a weakening "heart" had me laughing.

Reply
Recommend  Message 33 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMattDjebel31 Sent: 3/02/2008 7:58 PM
Your obviously a thinking person.

Reply
Recommend  Message 34 of 201 in Discussion 
From: arakaan Sent: 9/02/2008 3:22 PM
another horse about to be rewarded in Sydney for not having tactical speed.

Reply
Recommend  Message 35 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN Nicknamevedder_69 Sent: 9/02/2008 3:25 PM
Can't possibly be upheld.......I hope?

Reply
Recommend  Message 36 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameLuskin_Star© Sent: 9/02/2008 3:28 PM
If Cape Breton does get the protest over Vision & Power, then the can of worms is well and truely opened. I reckon CB simply died on its run and wasn't good enough to run down the leader. They certainly did not touch at any time in the straight.

Reply
Recommend  Message 37 of 201 in Discussion 
From: wily Sent: 9/02/2008 3:28 PM
Sorry Vedder but this HAS to be upheld.
It's no different in anyway to the race they took off Takeover target.
They delivered the wrong decision then and they HAVE to do it today to keep their integrity

Reply
Recommend  Message 38 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameGunstan Sent: 9/02/2008 3:31 PM
agree wily.

Reply
Recommend  Message 39 of 201 in Discussion 
From: arakaan Sent: 9/02/2008 3:32 PM
We'll see how Ray and his panel goes without the media to get his face on.

Reply
Recommend  Message 40 of 201 in Discussion 
From: arakaan Sent: 9/02/2008 3:35 PM
well, well, well. no media and dismissed. I could act shocked but I'm not a good actor.
 
the whole panel is a sham.

Reply
Recommend  Message 41 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameGunstan Sent: 9/02/2008 3:37 PM
unbelievable????

Reply
Recommend  Message 42 of 201 in Discussion 
From: dubbledee Sent: 9/02/2008 3:43 PM
I couldn't see any grounds.  They didn't touch did they?

Reply
Recommend  Message 43 of 201 in Discussion 
From: wily Sent: 9/02/2008 3:48 PM
DD, Takeover didn't touch Honour in War either.
Disgusting double standars but I've come to expect that from this lot

Reply
Recommend  Message 44 of 201 in Discussion 
From: arakaan Sent: 9/02/2008 3:48 PM
Neither did TT and Honor in War. That wasn't important that day with all the bright lights present.

Reply
Recommend  Message 45 of 201 in Discussion 
From: dubbledee Sent: 9/02/2008 3:55 PM
No, but the allegation was that TOT took the other horse's running.  Nothing like that in this race.

Reply
Recommend  Message 46 of 201 in Discussion 
From: arakaan Sent: 9/02/2008 4:01 PM
DD, Cape Breton was as far behind as HIW was when the leaders shift in the respective races.
 
TT was penlised because a 3rd horse didn't allow HIW to get out and let the jockey escape for his piss poor ride.
 
We might as well be being run by some young hollywood starlet.
 
let's just hope we never see Ray not wearing underwear getting out of a car.

Online westie

  • Group 1
  • User 8
  • Posts: 14193
« 2009-Jan-27, 10:46 AM Reply #27 »
Reply
Recommend  Message 47 of 201 in Discussion 
From: wily Sent: 9/02/2008 4:08 PM
DD
Cape B had established the run when the other thing started to drift.
He was as far away and in the clear as HIW was.
Joe must be filthy.......I pharking hell am

Reply
Recommend  Message 48 of 201 in Discussion 
From: Geoff Sent: 9/02/2008 4:10 PM
You don't say

Reply
Recommend  Message 49 of 201 in Discussion 
From: Bubble Sent: 9/02/2008 4:28 PM
Absolutely spot on Arakaan and Wily
 
The only reason TT lost his race is because there was a tired horse outside him. At the time I said that if that horse was not there then HIW would have the whole track to get past TT. That was shown exactly in this race.
 
I still can't work out how TT lost because he had a tired horse outside him.

Reply
Recommend  Message 50 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMattDjebel31 Sent: 9/02/2008 5:25 PM
I don't understand why people get into a pickle over these things, so they have a different OPINION to you so be it, thats what makes the world go around.
 
OPINION.

Reply
Recommend  Message 51 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameManikato1 Sent: 9/02/2008 5:36 PM
Wouldn't the margin have been a factor today?

Reply
Recommend  Message 52 of 201 in Discussion 
From: Bubble Sent: 10/02/2008 4:51 PM
Matt,
 
Your post is silly. Of course it is their opinion and that is what we are debating. This is a forum where people share opinions. This whole industry that we are debating is built on opinion.
 
It is my opinion that Redoutes Choice colt is worth $3 million. It is my opinion that the 5/2 offered for Might and Power is great value. It is my opinion that Makybe Diva will win this Melbourne Cup so I will back her.
 
You think that She's Archie will win the Melbourne Cup and one of us might be right so let's debate it up until the race and then let's debate our opinion on how the race was run, how the track played, how the jockeys performed and how the stewards completely stuffed up that decision.
 
This is a forum. This is where it happens.  

Reply
Recommend  Message 53 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMattDjebel31 Sent: 10/02/2008 5:05 PM
Unlike your good self i do not believe races should be decided on OPINION they should be decided on FACTS.
 
If a horse causes interference it should be relegated behind the horse/s it interferes with.

Reply
Recommend  Message 54 of 201 in Discussion 
From: Geoff Sent: 10/02/2008 5:42 PM
Yeah, but "facts" are only "opinions".
 
What I think is a "fact", what you think is only an opinion unless it coincides with what I think in which case it is also a fact.

Reply
Recommend  Message 55 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameBundynVain Sent: 10/02/2008 5:45 PM
Protest!!

Reply
Recommend  Message 56 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMuggins136 Sent: 10/02/2008 8:39 PM
Go Geoff ! move up to the dress circle

Reply
Recommend  Message 57 of 201 in Discussion 
From: dubbledee Sent: 11/02/2008 6:58 PM
The "controversial" Rosehill protest didn't even rate a mention on Retro.
 
Was there any discussion in the print media?  Or was it all a storm in a forum teacup?
 
Looked at the replay and head-on again.  Dismissal was the only option, IMO.

Reply
Recommend  Message 58 of 201 in Discussion 
From: arakaan Sent: 11/02/2008 7:08 PM
I just like to see consistency from Hollywood Ray.

Reply
Recommend  Message 59 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMattDjebel31 Sent: 11/02/2008 7:40 PM
Kenny Callander got stuck into wily

Reply
Recommend  Message 60 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMuggins136 Sent: 11/02/2008 8:02 PM

ARB BREAKS NEW GROUND

 <o:p></o:p>

 The Australian Racing Board will break new ground if it adopts a proposal to include a panel of independent observers to assist stewards in deciding protest decisions. Whilst a spokesperson for the ARB refused to confirm or deny the report, insiders say the Board is concerned at the depth of public criticism following recent  protest decisions by stewards.

The Take Over Target protest in Sydney generated much debate with many experts disputing the decision to uphold the protest. Insiders say that the Board wants to put procedures in place to avoid such out pourings in future. Establishing a select expert group in each state jurisdiction to assist the stewards in reaching their decisions will be on the agenda.Support for this approach is believed to have come from the forthcoming Australia 2020 summit called by the Prime Minister.

It is believed a number of expert commentators from Internet horse racing forums have been tagged for their experience and objectivity. Those selected to be considered for appointment will be subject to passing probity and other checks. It is understood the positions will be honorary but appointees will receive reasonable expenses and be issued with badges to enter all enclosures. They will be breathalysed and drug tested before taking up duty each day and must not bet at the meetings they officiate at.


Reply
Recommend  Message 61 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN Nicknamegratlog1 Sent: 11/02/2008 8:06 PM
They will be breathalysed and drug tested
 
If this happened before you were allowed to post , there would'nt be half the traffic that this forum gets

Online westie

  • Group 1
  • User 8
  • Posts: 14193
« 2009-Jan-27, 10:48 AM Reply #28 »
Reply
Recommend  Message 62 of 201 in Discussion 
From: Geoff Sent: 11/02/2008 8:15 PM
They will be breathalysed and drug tested
 
If this happened before you were allowed to participate in board meetings, there would'nt be half the traffic that this forum gets

Reply
Recommend  Message 63 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameGunstan Sent: 16/02/2008 4:27 PM
Stanzout takes Damiens running.....upheld....maybe.lol

Reply
Recommend  Message 64 of 201 in Discussion 
From: arakaan Sent: 16/02/2008 4:33 PM
G1 race. Ray would be salivating.

Reply
Recommend  Message 65 of 201 in Discussion 
From: vorogue Sent: 1/03/2008 2:07 PM
the person that had 20 large on Blake to win the jockeys challenge today at something like $1.24 must be a tad nervous after the 3's on pop Montana Flyer earned no points, , and now not only did Sliding Cube get rolled, but there's a protest 5th Vs 2nd thats got a big hope of being upheld and Cube going back to 5th instead of 2nd, was one hell of a bump

Reply
Recommend  Message 66 of 201 in Discussion 
From: vorogue Sent: 1/03/2008 2:16 PM
he's still alive......Dismissed

Reply
Recommend  Message 67 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN Nicknamegratlog1 Sent: 1/03/2008 4:02 PM
What about this one at Randwick race 6?

Reply
Recommend  Message 68 of 201 in Discussion 
From: arakaan Sent: 1/03/2008 4:08 PM
it's a strange one grats. I've forgotten that protests could involve horses that actually touch each other.
 
I'll go upheld.

Reply
Recommend  Message 69 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN Nicknamegratlog1 Sent: 1/03/2008 4:09 PM
Yep, you are probably right as I stand to win a few bob if it is dismissed

Reply
Recommend  Message 70 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN Nicknamegratlog1 Sent: 1/03/2008 4:16 PM

Reply
Recommend  Message 71 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMattDjebel31 Sent: 27/04/2008 9:36 PM
Interesting protest in Hong Kong.
 
Can not get any closer then that finish.

Reply
Recommend  Message 72 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMattDjebel31 Sent: 27/04/2008 9:38 PM
Protest - DISMISSED

Reply
Recommend  Message 73 of 201 in Discussion 
From: vorogue Sent: 17/05/2008 6:53 PM
last in bris, El Cambio is the winner at odds on, but likely to lose on protest...looks bad head on

Reply
Recommend  Message 74 of 201 in Discussion 
From: wily Sent: 17/05/2008 6:54 PM
I hope you're right VO
 
I had a dabble on the 2nd horse and boxed the tri

Reply
Recommend  Message 75 of 201 in Discussion 
From: wily Sent: 17/05/2008 7:03 PM
They have to be kidding don't they
 
Clearly your allowed to knocked down a horse, never straighten you mount and no consideration is given to how much ground the loser was cost by being knocked down
 
Crap decision

Reply
Recommend  Message 76 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameLuskin_Star© Sent: 17/05/2008 7:04 PM
U woz robbed, wily     

Online westie

  • Group 1
  • User 8
  • Posts: 14193
« 2009-Jan-27, 10:49 AM Reply #29 »
Reply
Recommend  Message 77 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMattDjebel31 Sent: 17/05/2008 7:06 PM
Opinions, don't ya just love em.

Reply
Recommend  Message 78 of 201 in Discussion 
From: wily Sent: 17/05/2008 7:12 PM
I'm staggered by the decision luskin.
 
That was one hell of a bump atleast 50 metres before the post

Reply
Recommend  Message 79 of 201 in Discussion 
From: vorogue Sent: 17/05/2008 7:17 PM
it's a mystery to me how it kept the race

Reply
Recommend  Message 80 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMattDjebel31 Sent: 17/05/2008 7:18 PM
There is only one reason required - OPINION.

Reply
Recommend  Message 81 of 201 in Discussion 
From: wily Sent: 17/05/2008 7:24 PM
Reasoned opinion, of course

Reply
Recommend  Message 82 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameGrega9430 Sent: 17/05/2008 7:54 PM
Commisserations to anyone that backed the second horse but he would not have beaten El Cambio if the interference did not occur, El Cambio was finishing better than it.
 
Correct interpretation of the Australian Rule and correct decision.
 
Our Australian rule is which horse was going to win the race if the interference did not occur, and I agree with it. Basically it is irrelevant how much ground the interference costs the losing horse.
 
I know that a few people will disagree with this. Don't protests get the emotions running.

Reply
Recommend  Message 83 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMattDjebel31 Sent: 17/05/2008 8:27 PM
How much ground did Helideck cost Antidotes ?

Reply
Recommend  Message 84 of 201 in Discussion 
From: wily Sent: 17/05/2008 8:38 PM
Greg
 
Not sure if the rule is that simple.
 
In order to avoid the interferrance a rider has to stop riding and straighten his mount.
If he had bothered to do that PRIOR to the bashing EC would have lost atleast a neck in distance and momentum.
Aso, by being pushed in 3by about 3 horses you could assume that MR U lost atleast a neck compared to if he was allowed to travel in a straight line, as he was

Reply
Recommend  Message 85 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMattDjebel31 Sent: 17/05/2008 8:45 PM
In order to avoid the interferrance a rider has to stop riding and straighten his mount.
If he had bothered to do that PRIOR to the bashing EC would have lost atleast a neck in distance and momentum.
 
For as long as we have been argueing protests on this forum i have said this and 99% of the time i am howled down.
 
 

Reply
Recommend  Message 86 of 201 in Discussion 
From: wily Sent: 17/05/2008 8:47 PM
Great minds matt, great minds.
 
It's a fact and it's clearly lost on the idiot stewards in this case

Reply
Recommend  Message 87 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMattDjebel31 Sent: 17/05/2008 8:55 PM
Did you agree with the Planchet Vs Choisir protest dicision ?

Reply
Recommend  Message 88 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMattDjebel31 Sent: 17/05/2008 9:47 PM
Race 6: DARLEY BTC SPRINT - 1350m
1st - Helideck 2nd - Absolut Glam 3rd - Mr Hornblower 4th - Mr Baritone

MR BARITONE (S. Arnold) and DAUNTING LAD (S. Seamer) raced wide throughout.

ABSOLUT GLAM (S. King) was held up rounding the home turn and in the early stages of the straight.

Stewards adjourned an inquiry into the reasons for L. Nolen being dislodged from ANTIDOTES passing the 200m. As a result of the fall, LAURA'S CHARM (M. Paget), HARD TO CATCH (B. Stewart) and ATAPI (J. Byrne) were all hampered.

A post-race veterinary examination of ATAPI failed to reveal any abnormalities.

Reply
Recommend  Message 89 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMattDjebel31 Sent: 17/05/2008 9:47 PM
Was that all caused by the winner ?

Reply
Recommend  Message 90 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN Nicknameqwertyu1234567 Sent: 17/05/2008 10:00 PM
Flash back of STARSTRUCK
running past PINDI years ago
like it was nailed, brushing with
20m to go beating it about a half.
However on that occasion Upheld.
Cost me a heap

Reply
Recommend  Message 91 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMattDjebel31 Sent: 17/05/2008 10:21 PM
29 Oct 1994 1/17 0.0 2500 G2HCP FLEM A MATTHEWS 1 50.5 1 155.7 PINDI
 
If Starstrucks jockeys stopped riding as he is required to do would she have cruised on by and won by the nose that  was the margin in which "won' as she past the post ?
 
Why do people NEVER take into account the momentum lost by a jockey who should be stopping and straightening his mount ?
 
 
WHY ?

Online westie

  • Group 1
  • User 8
  • Posts: 14193
« 2009-Jan-27, 10:51 AM Reply #30 »
Reply
Recommend  Message 92 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMonologue9 Sent: 17/05/2008 10:36 PM
Maybe I was lucky but I had a really good go on the winner ,plus stood it out in the tri a few times with the winner. We were with the owner of the 3rd placegetter and he thought there was good grounds for a protest.
I will have to have a look at the replay but when was the last time a short priced favourite got beaten by a protest in the last race in Brisbane?...I can't remember one.

Reply
Recommend  Message 93 of 201 in Discussion 
From: Ascot Sent: 17/05/2008 10:59 PM
Mono  I don't think luck was an issue.
 
Jockey advised connections at dismount that there would likely be a protest.  But he was also confident of retaining the race.  This was because the winner was always travelling the better and had a soft win on the line. 

Reply
Recommend  Message 94 of 201 in Discussion 
From: dubbledee Sent: 17/05/2008 11:21 PM
From what I have seen, I would have upheld the protest.
 
The fact that El Cambio would have won if had gone straight is not the issue.  It didn't go straight, and this was the grounds for the protest.  The decision must be based on what would have been the likely outcome had the winner been allowed to hang in (and lose ground) and the 2nd horse allowed to proceed to the post in a straight line.
 
The head-on shown on Sky showed significant contact with the inside horse.  If - as it appeared - the interference was before the post, it was sufficient to support upholding the protest.

Reply
Recommend  Message 95 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMonologue9 Sent: 18/05/2008 11:05 AM
Glad it wasn't .

Reply
Recommend  Message 96 of 201 in Discussion 
From: wily Sent: 18/05/2008 3:10 PM
I'm still filthy about it this morning.
 
Anyone got an email address for the stewards.
 
I'd luv to hear their explanation
 
 
By the way, well done mono

Reply
Recommend  Message 97 of 201 in Discussion 
From: Geoff Sent: 18/05/2008 3:18 PM
Wily
 
He wouldn't have won had the interference not occurred.
 
What was the one that E C bumped earlier in the staight?

Reply
Recommend  Message 98 of 201 in Discussion 
From: wily Sent: 18/05/2008 3:23 PM
Possibly right geoff but that is not the point in question
 
Would EC have won if the jock TRIED to AVOID the interferrance?
 
I say he would not have.
He should have stopped riding and straightened his mount to avoid possibly putting the other thing over the inside fence.
 
In doing so i think he would have lost atleast half a length and Mr U would have not been impeded as well.
 
I think EC also came out and smashed the 3rd horse. Diplomatic Force when they cornered

Reply
Recommend  Message 99 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMattDjebel31 Sent: 18/05/2008 3:30 PM
Until we see the relegation rule brought in we will continue to see falls like Luke Nolens yesterday.

Reply
Recommend  Message 100 of 201 in Discussion 
From: dubbledee Sent: 18/05/2008 3:51 PM
There's frequent confusion about protests.
 
The aim of the hearing isn't to find out which was the better horse on the day.  Rather, it's all about determining who would have been the most likely winner had the race been run in accordance with the Rules.
 

Reply
Recommend  Message 101 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMattDjebel31 Sent: 18/05/2008 4:01 PM
Rather, it's all about determining who would have been the most likely winner had the race been run in accordance with the Rules.
 
That is never the way they are decided. If they were 99% of protests would be upheld.

Reply
Recommend  Message 102 of 201 in Discussion 
From: Geoff Sent: 18/05/2008 4:10 PM
Surely the question that exercises the stewards' minds is
 
"Was the interference severe enough to change the placing?" 
 
 

Reply
Recommend  Message 103 of 201 in Discussion 
From: dubbledee Sent: 18/05/2008 4:11 PM
That's a load of nonsense, MD.

Reply
Recommend  Message 104 of 201 in Discussion 
From: dubbledee Sent: 18/05/2008 4:15 PM
Yes, Geoff....that's what they do in arriving at the decision as per point 2 above.

Reply
Recommend  Message 105 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMattDjebel31 Sent: 18/05/2008 4:30 PM
How is it nonsense DD ?

Reply
Recommend  Message 106 of 201 in Discussion 
From: dubbledee Sent: 18/05/2008 4:48 PM
To suggest that 99% of protests would be upheld if the Rules of Racing were applied is nonsense, IMO.

Online westie

  • Group 1
  • User 8
  • Posts: 14193
« 2009-Jan-27, 10:52 AM Reply #31 »
Reply
Recommend  Message 107 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMattDjebel31 Sent: 18/05/2008 4:53 PM
Fair enough.........95%

Reply
The number of members that recommended this message. 0 recommendations  Message 108 of 201 in Discussion 
Sent: 18/05/2008 4:59 PM
This message has been deleted by the author.

Reply
Recommend  Message 109 of 201 in Discussion 
From: Geoff Sent: 18/05/2008 5:01 PM
MattD seems to be getting the question of whether protests should be held up or dismissed confused with that of whether jockeys are held enough to account for interference.

Reply
Recommend  Message 110 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMattDjebel31 Sent: 18/05/2008 5:06 PM
If we had the relegation rule, jockeys would at least attempt to straighten their mounts. At the moment they could not care less. I still say Antidotes would have been in the finish but was denied his chance and his jockey is in hospital as a consequence of the winner laying in.
 
Much like Josh Jones.

Reply
Recommend  Message 111 of 201 in Discussion 
From: wily Sent: 18/05/2008 5:16 PM
G Colless can thank his luck stars that his mount is still standing as well
 
 
Brown, by allowing his horse to barge in as he did showed contempt for his fellow riders and the rules

Reply
Recommend  Message 112 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMattDjebel31 Sent: 18/05/2008 7:23 PM
Argue against it Geoff.............Tell me why that comment is not true.
 
You Know its the truth, you can't handle the truth deep down whilst you sleep at night you know the relegation rule should be brought in. Not for punters but for jockey safety.

Reply
The number of members that recommended this message. 0 recommendations  Message 113 of 201 in Discussion 
Sent: 18/05/2008 7:27 PM
This message has been deleted by the author.

Reply
Recommend  Message 114 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameGrega9430 Sent: 19/05/2008 3:11 AM
"The fact that El Cambio would have won if it had gone straight is not the issue."
 
DD, nobody has stated anything about El Cambio winning if it goes straight, what has been said is that it wins if the interference does not occur, and therefore the protest was correctly dismissed. I agree with the methodology you describe, but not with "hang in (and lose ground)" - the fastest finishing sprints I have seen were mainly from horses that were hanging in or out.
 
On another matter, the ride on Diplomatic Force was a shocker - he could have trailled up behind El Cambio on the corner, instead he decides to try to go around it on the point of the Doomben bend on a horse having its first start going the clockwise way. The horse got lost and probably nearly wins if ridden better, he may have been confused which horse he was following as it was in the new Woodlands colours.

Reply
Recommend  Message 115 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN Nicknameatlast2 Sent: 19/05/2008 4:38 PM
I think the deciding factors would have been the fact that EC contacted  MU as he OVERTOOK him and then went to the line ON THE BIT thus proving that he was the TOO GOOD for MU in the finish even though he DID interfere with the other horse. Therefore how can you take the race away from the winner whent it is too good for the second placegetter?

Reply
Recommend  Message 116 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameHeathledgerr1 Sent: 19/05/2008 6:51 PM
Hope stewards look closely at the last at Musselbrook...........definite grounds

Reply
Recommend  Message 117 of 201 in Discussion 
From: MagiC** Sent: 19/05/2008 7:13 PM
I think the stewards took the stand that the second horse was never going to beat El Cambio even with out the interference.
 
Basically El Cambio was always going to win, and was always travelling better then the second horse.
 
And to reinforce this belief, a jockey that is truely confident of a protest being upheld doesn't normally look at the stewards footage before protesting, so bascially the Jock wasn't real confident to begin with

Reply
Recommend  Message 118 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMuggins136 Sent: 19/05/2008 7:25 PM

AR.136. (1) If a horse -

(a) crosses another horse so as to interfere with that, or any other horse, or

(b) jostles, or itself, or its rider, in any way interferes with another horse or its rider,

unless such jostle or interference was caused by some other horse or rider -

such horse and any other horse in the same nomination may be disqualified for the race.

[amended 1.2.2001]

(2) If a placed horse or its rider causes interference within the meaning of this Rule to another

placed horse, and the stewards are of the opinion that the horse interfered with would have

finished ahead of the first mentioned horse had such interference not occurred, they may place the

first mentioned horse immediately after the horse interfered with. For the purpose of this Rule

"placed horse" shall be a horse placed by the Judge in accordance with AR.157.


Reply
Recommend  Message 119 of 201 in Discussion 
From: wily Sent: 19/05/2008 7:37 PM
magic did you see the race?

Reply
Recommend  Message 120 of 201 in Discussion 
From: MagiC** Sent: 19/05/2008 7:48 PM
Yes wily i did,
 
and i was of the belief from the very begining that the protest would not be upheld for a few reasons
 
One the inteference even though it looked bad, the winner looked to have had the second horse's measure even after the jockey had to stop riding him and straighten him up and he still won
 
the second reason was, i was of the belief that the second horse would not have beaten the winner even if it hadn't of copped the bump.
 
And thirdly, when a Jock asks to look at the stewards footage before lodging the protest he is grasping a straws

Reply
Recommend  Message 121 of 201 in Discussion 
From: wily Sent: 19/05/2008 7:51 PM
Do you believe, under the rules, that a rider is allowed to let his horse run in and crash into another?

Online westie

  • Group 1
  • User 8
  • Posts: 14193
« 2009-Jan-27, 10:53 AM Reply #32 »
Reply
Recommend  Message 122 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMattDjebel31 Sent: 19/05/2008 9:00 PM
Magic is 100% right, as soon as a jockeys asks to look at the footage it must frow doubt in the Stewards minds.
 
I'll bet there has never been a protest upheld when a jockey has viewed the film first. I should qualify that - Unless the jockey is unsure who did the dasterdly deed.

Reply
Recommend  Message 123 of 201 in Discussion 
From: vorogue Sent: 19/05/2008 9:21 PM
there were THREE protests upheld today, 2 at the gallops Wangaratta and Musswellbrook, and one at the trots (Bulli) I lost 2 of them   I cant ever recall 3 protests upheld on seperate races at different tracks in the one day before

Reply
The number of members that recommended this message. 0 recommendations  Message 124 of 201 in Discussion 
Sent: 11/06/2008 11:38 AM
This message has been deleted by the author.

Reply
Recommend  Message 125 of 201 in Discussion 
From: dubbledee Sent: 14/06/2008 11:48 PM
Everyone seems happy with the Bareena decision at Royal Ipswich.
 
From the head-on I saw it was a no-brainer.

Reply
Recommend  Message 126 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN Nickname_imaufo_ Sent: 15/06/2008 1:23 AM
Maybe the pre-protest winner was the one responsible for the carnage...and the stewards need someone to blame?

Reply
Recommend  Message 127 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN Nicknamecoinswell Sent: 15/06/2008 12:01 PM
The head on would have been critical - from side on it looked to be a different story.

Reply
Recommend  Message 128 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMuggins136 Sent: 15/06/2008 1:02 PM
Only watched the replay once and the head on showed contact but it looked minimal and Bella Valentina seemed to be safely holding Bareena on the line Didn't affect me at all but I'm surprised it was upheld in comparison to El Cambio decision
RF on Retro thought the same 50/50 call
Dismissed if my call.Lucky it was J.Hackett not R.Sanders.

Reply
Recommend  Message 129 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN Nicknamecoinswell Sent: 15/06/2008 1:05 PM
After watching the head on Bareena was a bit lucky to get it. The other horse seemed to going better on the line.

The one involving Daunting Lad? a few weeks back looked a more worthy candidate to me.

Reply
Recommend  Message 130 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMuggins136 Sent: 15/06/2008 3:51 PM
I think so too

Reply
Recommend  Message 131 of 201 in Discussion 
From: Geoff Sent: 15/06/2008 5:41 PM
I was mildly surprised that the protest was upheld. I thought the side-on showed that Bareena had had enough just before the post.
 
But, on reflection, I think she's had enough because of the bump, if the bump hadn't occurred then probably she'd have won.
 
Therefore, although not a no-brainer, the result was probably the right one.

Reply
Recommend  Message 132 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMonologue9 Sent: 15/06/2008 5:54 PM
As an owner it must be a hollow feeling when you have a race taken off you ,especially when it's not as cut and dried as it may seem to steward.
Protests that could go either way ,why not declare a dead heat, that wey we all get something out of it.

Reply
Recommend  Message 133 of 201 in Discussion 
From: richo Sent: 15/06/2008 10:37 PM
mono even winning a race on protest is a hollow feeling.

Reply
Recommend  Message 134 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameThenamy1 Sent: 12/07/2008 5:25 PM
A 5th v 1st protest is on in Perth .. the winner was odds on and the interferance was in the first 50m !

Reply
Recommend  Message 135 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN Nicknamegratlog1 Sent: 12/07/2008 5:39 PM
Dismissed.    Thank heavens

Reply
Recommend  Message 136 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameOLD_LARSY Sent: 12/07/2008 5:43 PM
I wonder if it would have been disqualified in USA

Offline Antitab#

  • Group 2
  • User 234
  • Posts: 2109
« 2009-Jan-27, 10:53 AM Reply #33 »
Was it a matter of Cassidy out talking the kid? :what:

I often hear people say that, but surely the stewards put very little credence in what the jockeys say and use their eyes to come to their decision.

I am yet to hear a jockey say I cut him in half and should lose the race regardless of how blatant the interference is.

Online westie

  • Group 1
  • User 8
  • Posts: 14193
« 2009-Jan-27, 10:54 AM Reply #34 »
Reply
Recommend  Message 137 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMattDjebel31 Sent: 12/07/2008 8:39 PM
Wether it is in the 1st 50 or last 50 it makes no difference it can still change the whole complexion of a race.
 
Did it ?

Reply
Recommend  Message 138 of 201 in Discussion 
From: red Sent: 12/07/2008 11:32 PM
In USA it seems to depend too much on Stipendary stewards' opinion, they consider beaten margin less important than it does here.
I think Australia has got it right. In this case dismissed was correct, and giving the jockey Whiting a 14 day suspension was deserved as well.

Reply
Recommend  Message 139 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMattDjebel31 Sent: 12/07/2008 11:40 PM
It is not done on OPINION in the US it is done on FACT.
 
Australia it is done on OPINION, whenever they uphold a protest they are 100% right, when they dismiss them, then it is a matter of conjecture.

Reply
Recommend  Message 140 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameThenamy1 Sent: 13/07/2008 1:18 AM
MD31 - It was hard to tell. The winner led all the way. As it was crossing the field to  lead, it caused the 5th placed horse to dip in the first 50m. However the first 3 horses gapped the field.

Reply
Recommend  Message 141 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN Nicknamefatprawn Sent: 15/07/2008 5:19 PM
It is a known fact that when a certain chief steward in brisbane decided on the result of a protest,the rest of the panel had to vote with him or he would not speak to them for weeks after.Is this a fair go for the owners and trainers?

Reply
Recommend  Message 142 of 201 in Discussion 
From: arakaan Sent: 30/08/2008 4:29 PM
Interesting protest in Sydney. Result turned out better for me but I must say Murrihy said they had no doubt it would've won.
 
So they have no doubt Very Grand would of taken the narrow(and it was very narrow) gap with the same gusto it did with clear room when switched to the outside.
 
I've seen many a horse baulk at going through a gap until it becomes wide enough.

Reply
Recommend  Message 143 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameOLD_LARSY Sent: 30/08/2008 4:33 PM
Reply
Recommend Delete    Message 2 of 3 in Discussion 
From: <NOBR>NineMSN NicknameOLD_LARSY</NOBR> Sent: 30/08/2008 2:21 PM
Protest should be upheld going on Honour and War v Takeover Target.
Neroli ducked in and took Very Grand's run, which had to change course.

Reply
Recommend  Message 144 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameKnight1609 Sent: 30/08/2008 4:34 PM
I comprehend what you say about the gap arakaan
 
But did Nestor do everything in his power to stop riding and straighten Neroli which is his requirement? I don't think he did.
 
Therefore Very Grand must be given the opportunity to take that gap and I don't think she did - hence I think Murrihy made the right decision.
 
 

Reply
Recommend  Message 145 of 201 in Discussion 
From: arakaan Sent: 30/08/2008 4:42 PM
As I said it was better for me for it to be upheld and I think it was the right decision.
 
But is a gap just under the width of a horse good enough.
 
Should the stewards who said it was entitled to the run at the point when they stopped the footage and showed both side and head on, when at that time it was less than a horse wide be engouraging that type of riding. Very dangerous in my opinion.
 
As for the HNW protest I thought someone would bring it up. And I'm glad they did as today's showed why that protest was total BS. HNW was 1 3/4 behind when the gap closed, Very Grand was 1 Length. Difference is huge.

Reply
Recommend  Message 146 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameKnight1609 Sent: 30/08/2008 4:45 PM
Fair enough - I understand your point

Reply
Recommend  Message 147 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN Nicknamegintara™ Sent: 30/08/2008 5:21 PM
and both times I'm on the wrong end F#$%^

Reply
Recommend  Message 148 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN Nicknameqwertyu1234567 Sent: 31/08/2008 12:38 PM
Didn't have a bet in the race, but fancy upholding that,
Neroli  V  Very Grand  Crock of Shit that was.
I back horse every weekend that SHOULD win with a clear run.
The run was never there to take.

Reply
Recommend  Message 149 of 201 in Discussion 
From: dubbledee Sent: 31/08/2008 1:31 PM
I would have dismissed it.

Reply
Recommend  Message 150 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameOLD_LARSY Sent: 31/08/2008 1:39 PM
I had it upheld before they got to the winning post. Was same circumstances as Honour n War v Takeover Target. Murrihy had no other option.

Reply
Recommend  Message 151 of 201 in Discussion 
From: dubbledee Sent: 31/08/2008 1:43 PM
Had Neroli held its original line there would never have been a run for the 2nd dog.
 
Very strange decision - and pleased I wasn't on the receiving end of it.

Online westie

  • Group 1
  • User 8
  • Posts: 14193
« 2009-Jan-27, 10:55 AM Reply #35 »
Reply
Recommend  Message 152 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMattDjebel31 Sent: 31/08/2008 8:44 PM
Anybody who thinks that was as clear cut as the Honour In War Vs Takeover Target case is kidding themselves.
 
There was in my OPINION no run there for Very Grand. Jockeys should not be encouraged to take such a narrow gap.

Reply
Recommend  Message 153 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameOLD_LARSY Sent: 31/08/2008 9:52 PM
It's quite a slender horse compared to most

Reply
Recommend  Message 154 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameOLD_LARSY Sent: 7/09/2008 3:15 AM
Did anyone happen to see the 4th at Kempton tonight?
Currently a protest 2 v 1
$1.22 dismissed $5.60 upheld at moment on Betfair.
Should be upheld in an instant IMO
Will go to bed now and get up in morning for some happy news hopefully

Reply
Recommend  Message 155 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameOLD_LARSY Sent: 7/09/2008 10:44 AM
Was dismissed, seriously it would have been upheld in record time here and in the US the winner would have been rubbed out just after crossing the line

Reply
Recommend  Message 156 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMullerbeck Sent: 13/09/2008 6:49 PM
I can see one coming up in Sydney and Upheld as well.

Reply
Recommend  Message 157 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMattDjebel31 Sent: 13/09/2008 7:02 PM
You are wrong and silly for even thinking it.

Reply
Recommend  Message 158 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMattDjebel31 Sent: 13/09/2008 7:06 PM
Just in case............

Reply
Recommend  Message 159 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMullerbeck Sent: 13/09/2008 7:24 PM
I was wrong indeed and I was totally impartial, didn't have either of them. Just for naked eye looked that PP moved in, but obviously I was wrong.

Reply
Recommend  Message 160 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMattDjebel31 Sent: 26/09/2008 9:47 PM
That winner at the Valley race 3 intimidated the runner up.

Reply
Recommend  Message 161 of 201 in Discussion 
From: ShortHalfHead Sent: 26/09/2008 9:49 PM
LMAO Matt
 
Laid the 2nd one.....never a hope

Reply
Recommend  Message 162 of 201 in Discussion 
From: muggins1936 Sent: 1/10/2008 12:10 PM
 I  partly heard a comment on 4TAB by Steve Hewlitt  a day or so back that Vic chief stipe Terry Bailey has asked the chairman of stewards, I thought he said from Sale, to explain why he dismissed a  recent protest.No record of any protest from Sale recently  but there was one at Swan Hill which could be it.After watching the replay on Bigpond and reading the stewards report I wouldn't think there's anything wrong.Anyone have any more info on it?
 

"Race 6 – commerical hotel swan hill 0 – 72 handicap - 1000 metres: Correct weight was delayed as stewards wished to view the head on footage of the start to ascertain whether Elmatrice had been afforded a fair start, after viewing the video and taking evidence from the starter and jockey A. Darmanin, steward was satisfied that Elmatrice was afforded a fair start. Correct weight was further delayed as W. Hokai rider of 2nd placed Our Jazzxaar wished to lodge an objection against the 1st placed Redi Zedi Dash alleging interference over the final 250m. Stewards established that near the 200m Our Jazzxaar shifted inwards and at the same stage Redi Zedi Dash shifted outwards resulting in contact being made between both runners. A short distance later Redi Zedi Dash continued to shift out and at a point near the 150m mark brushed Our Jazzxaar on a number of occasions. Stewards were of the opinion that the interference suffered to Our Jazzxaar at this stage and the minor impediment it received over the final 100m due to Redi Zedi Dash continuing to shift out marginally was insufficient to warrant a reversal of the placings, therefore correct weight was given on the following numbers 5 – Redi Zedi Dash, 2 – Our Jazzxaar, 8 – Divine Matilda, 6 – Uncle Speed. Sungarrin Tango returned lame in the off fore leg. Trainer Mr B Barry was advised Sungarrin Tango would require a Veterinary Certificate prior to racing again. Elmatrice reared at the start, losing considerable ground. "


Reply
Recommend  Message 163 of 201 in Discussion 
From: jules Sent: 1/10/2008 4:17 PM
Anyone see Race 1 at Bendigo? If that is upheld I am giving the punt away.

Reply
Recommend  Message 164 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameGeokel2 Sent: 1/10/2008 5:18 PM
 
This would have to be one of the most incredible decisions yet.  The winner of the race ran out on the turn and the horse that ran 3rd got pushed out.
3rd vs 1st protest dismissed!!!
 
 

Reply
Recommend  Message 165 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameGrega9430 Sent: 1/10/2008 5:43 PM
My Spring Carnival prediction is that the Victorian Chief Steward will controversially uphold a protest.
 
This bloke is a new appointment after many years of Des Gleeson as Chief, his appointment was apparently not that well received and there is still a fair bit of dissent in the ranks according to TheMailman/Ringading.
 
He will uphold a protest that should have been dismissed in order to assert his authority and to announce to the Racing World that he is the new boss. Victorian and NSW Stewards have a bad habit of grandstanding.

Reply
Recommend  Message 166 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameGrega9430 Sent: 1/10/2008 6:26 PM
Geokel, if the Australian Rule of Racing was "that the ground lost by the interference is more than the final margin" then it would have been upheld, but our rule is "would the horse interfered with have beaten the other horse, if the interference did not occur". I doubt that it would have beaten the winner so in accordance with the rules they made the correct decision.
 
Occasionaly Stewards incorrectly apply the "ground lost/beaten margin" method which is not the Australian Rule and rightly so. The current rule is a good rule but a better rule would be "if the interference does not occur, but the waywardness of the horse that caused the interference is taken into account, what would the result have been " - using this rule your protest would have been upheld and their first and third placings swapped as it is also silly to award the race to the horse that finished second as it was not going to beat both of them home.

Online westie

  • Group 1
  • User 8
  • Posts: 14193
« 2009-Jan-27, 10:57 AM Reply #36 »
Reply
Recommend  Message 167 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameMattDjebel31 Sent: 1/10/2008 6:30 PM
The stewards are never wrong when upholding a protest. The same cannot be said whenst they dismiss them.

Reply
Recommend  Message 168 of 201 in Discussion 
From: muggins1936 Sent: 3/10/2008 11:58 AM
SWAN HILL PROTEST STEWARDS REPORT Print

countrypic.jpgRacing Victoria Limited Chairman of Stewards Mr Terry Bailey today reviewed the video evidence relating to the protest decision handed down by the Swan Hill Stewards panel on 28 September 2008.

The protest concerned an objection lodged by Wayne Hokai the rider of Our Jazzxaar, which finished second past the post, alleging interference in the home straight against Redi Zedi Dash ridden by Craig Robertson who was first past the post.

The protest hearing was conducted by the Stewards after the running of Race 6 at Swan Hill - Commercial Hotel Swan Hill 0 – 72 Handicap. At the conclusion of the protest hearing after considering all the evidence the Stewards dismissed the objection, indicating in their opinion, the interference caused to Our Jazzxaar over the final 150 metres, by Redi Zedi Dash, was insufficient to warrant a reversal of the placings. 

The Stewards acted under the provisions of AR 136 (2) which states that such a decision rests with the Steward’s opinion.  The four members of the Stewards’ panel at Swan Hill outlined their reasons as to what led them to forming the opinion they did.

The Stewards panel stated:

* At the 200 metre mark Our Jazzxaar shifted in and Redi Zedi Dash shifted out simultaneously causing both horses to bump

* Redi Zedi Dash then shifted out causing interference to Our Jazzxaar

* Our Jazzxaar contiued to be ridden out by rider Wayne Hokai over the final 150 metres of the race

* The interference caused to Our Jazzxaar did not justify a reversal of the placings

Mr Bailey was satisfied with the process the Stewards’ panel went through during the protest hearing and ultimately the decision they had reached. The Stewards had taken into account the evidence of all the relevant parties and assessed the race footage objectively before making their final decision.  The Stewards must make their decisions quickly and decisively, the current system makes them the final arbiter of protests irrespective of debates or differing personal views.

ONYA TERRY


Reply
Recommend  Message 169 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameOLD_LARSY Sent: 10/10/2008 10:34 PM
3rd v 1st at MV has to be the definition of all definitions of frivilous

Reply
Recommend  Message 170 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameOLD_LARSY Sent: 10/10/2008 10:35 PM
Dismissed in a flash basically

Reply
Recommend  Message 171 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameShifty6991 Sent: 11/10/2008 8:30 AM
What about the protest in the Port Macquarie Cup, I backed Delago Star and still cant believe it was dismissed!!!!

Reply
Recommend  Message 172 of 201 in Discussion 
From: muggins1936 Sent: 12/10/2008 11:36 PM

Cassidy's appeal fails

Article from: The Daily Telegraph
  • By Christian Nicolussi

October 12, 2008 12:00am

News Alert
Rosehill races ... Race 1 winner Opter ridden by Jeff Lloyd (centre) takes the lead while the race favourite News Alert finishes last (left) after problems at the start. Photograph: Mark Evans

AN impassioned plea by jockey Jimmy Cassidy to protect punters fell on stewards' deaf ears after the first race at Rosehill yesterday.

Cassidy and favourite News Alert blew any chance of victory when the horse reared in the gates and missed the start of The Spring Is Schweppes Handicap (1200m) by five lengths.

The Pumper told a stewards' inquiry on three separate occasions that the Garry White-trained gelding, who was chasing a hat-trick, should have been declared a non-runner and punters' money refunded.

News Alert, who started $2, failed to get past a horse and was beaten more than seven lengths behind Opter ($21).

"In fairness to the connections and the punters who have backed this horse, I believe this horse has been denied a fair start,'' Cassidy told chief steward Ray Murrihy.

"Had it been the horse's own doing I could understand. But the horse was in mid-air and had 100 per cent no chance of beginning or participating in the race; in this situation I was denied 110 per cent a fair start.''

Under racing's rules, a horse can be declared a non-runner if it has its head in another stall when the field jumps or a gate fails to open.

Cassidy said the horse reared once and was attended to before leaping again when assistant starter Peter Svendsen pressed the button.

Svendsen said there would have been a "milli-second'' between the horse rearing up and the gates opening. Murrihy ruled that the horse had cost itself the race by being fractious in the barrier.

His decision drew an angry response from Cassidy and White, the jockey standing up out of his seat to further plead his case and pointing to the big-screen television.

 


Reply
Recommend  Message 173 of 201 in Discussion 
From: arakaan Sent: 12/10/2008 11:44 PM
as I said in saturdays racing thread it not being scratched was a disgrace and I had zero interest in the race.
 
On the head on it was clear as day. It was already in the air and importantly also being held be an attendant when the stater opened the gates and still being held after the gates were well open.
 
and the milli second quote by the starter is just him covering his arse as to be expected.

Reply
Recommend  Message 174 of 201 in Discussion 
From: muggins1936 Sent: 13/10/2008 7:55 PM
Something similar happened in Brisbane a few years ago, a horse owned by the then  club chairman was being held in the barrier by an attendant and reared as the starter released them. It missed the start completely , was declared a non runner and  bets refunded with deductions on the winner and placegetters.The horse was banished to the bush after that.Thought the stewards' conference  some time back were bringing in a rule about horses being held in the barriers and missing the start .

Reply
Recommend  Message 175 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN Nicknameqwertyu1234567 Sent: 13/10/2008 9:58 PM
 
 
 

Reply
Recommend  Message 176 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameManikato1 Sent: 14/10/2008 11:49 AM
Muggins,

In the case you are talking about, did the horse rear, or did the horse rear because it went to go while still being held? I have seen the latter being declared a non runner while if it rears as the gates open while being held, the stewards will mostly declare it a runner, I have even seen instances where it is seen as an advantage (as opposed to rearing without being held).

BTW, I disagree with the stewards decision, I felt he was going up as the gates opened, but I can understand the stewards decision.

Reply
Recommend  Message 177 of 201 in Discussion 
From: muggins1936 Sent: 14/10/2008 9:14 PM
Manikato1  I really can't remember

Reply
Recommend  Message 178 of 201 in Discussion 
From: ShortHalfHead Sent: 19/10/2008 6:30 PM
Race 7 at the Sun Coast. The TAb site says "Protest". No mention of "who V who".
 
Might be grounds for 3rd V 2nd or 1st....maybe.
 
Anyone have more details?

Reply
Recommend  Message 179 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameOLD_LARSY Sent: 19/10/2008 6:31 PM
ALL PAYING on mine

Reply
Recommend  Message 180 of 201 in Discussion 
From: specialweek Sent: 19/10/2008 6:33 PM
Tightened up at the 50m mark. Yes the protest was 3rd vs 1st and 2nd.........dismissed.
Bad luck j.r.b.
3rd 4th and 5th for the trainer on the day.

Reply
Recommend  Message 181 of 201 in Discussion 
From: ShortHalfHead Sent: 19/10/2008 6:34 PM
All Paying at 17:29
 
Protest - DISMISSED
 
 
Love how they give you SFA details.
 
Sure the old site used to  at least tell you

Online westie

  • Group 1
  • User 8
  • Posts: 14193
« 2009-Jan-27, 10:58 AM Reply #37 »
Reply
Recommend  Message 182 of 201 in Discussion 
From: ShortHalfHead Sent: 19/10/2008 6:37 PM
Thx SW. I had a little EW on the 3rd one at $30/$5.60. Didn't look to be finishing over the top of them though, but was very tight.

Reply
Recommend  Message 183 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameOLD_LARSY Sent: 19/10/2008 6:42 PM
Nice win SHH, I know your definition of "little" minimunm 3 figures

Reply
Recommend  Message 184 of 201 in Discussion 
From: ShortHalfHead Sent: 19/10/2008 6:55 PM
You got me again, OL.
 
 
A nice $3.85 pickup

Reply
Recommend  Message 185 of 201 in Discussion 
From: ShortHalfHead Sent: 8/11/2008 5:56 PM
Should be two late protests.
 
Brisbane and Newcastle.
 
Although Brisbane depends on what stewards backed

Reply
Recommend  Message 186 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameWenonaagain1 Sent: 8/11/2008 6:01 PM
Geez, my first bet in Brissie is Nellie - hope she holds it.

Reply
Recommend  Message 187 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameLuskin_Star© Sent: 8/11/2008 6:03 PM
Didn't look good side on, however I haven't see a head on shot. Fingers crossed for you, mate.

Reply
Recommend  Message 188 of 201 in Discussion 
From: wenona Sent: 8/11/2008 6:05 PM
On at $32 Betfair

Reply
Recommend  Message 189 of 201 in Discussion 
From: wenona Sent: 8/11/2008 6:09 PM
YIPPPPEEEEEEEEE  !!!!!!!!!! 

Reply
Recommend  Message 190 of 201 in Discussion 
From: ShortHalfHead Sent: 8/11/2008 6:14 PM
Well done Wenona,
 
The only way it could have been dismissed is if it was a Queensland race.
 
Should have been upheld before jockeys got back to scale.

Reply
Recommend  Message 191 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameLuskin_Star© Sent: 8/11/2008 6:17 PM
Excellent, well done, mate   

Reply
Recommend  Message 192 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN Nicknamebgm1409 Sent: 8/11/2008 6:31 PM
Newcastle upheld--you beauty party time tonight

Reply
Recommend  Message 193 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameOLD_LARSY Sent: 22/11/2008 5:17 PM
$1.00 The Champion to get protest at Kembla

Reply
Recommend  Message 194 of 201 in Discussion 
From: ShortHalfHead Sent: 22/11/2008 5:34 PM
Protest at Old larsy's comp. SHH dudded. OL's calculator faulty
 
8 + 5 = 13
Not 6 !

Reply
The number of members that recommended this message. 0 recommendations  Message 195 of 201 in Discussion 
Sent: 22/11/2008 5:37 PM
This message has been deleted by the author.

Reply
Recommend  Message 196 of 201 in Discussion 
From: muggins1936 Sent: 23/11/2008 1:36 PM
Bris R 2 protest Our Lukas against Chilli Magic dismissed on the margin being  3/4 L and stewards while conceding there were grounds  weren't satisfied the interference made a difference. As I saw it on  replay Our Lukas was letting down around the 200m when Chilli Magic laid in and took its running OL stopped momentarily  then had to change direction and  was fast overtaking the winner when the Judge called a halt.While the stewards based their findings on their observations, and I'm not saying they were wrong, it  was the margin that was the determining factor.How can they judge what loss of momentum and changing lanes had on the second horse if they only have their own observations to rely on.Technology provides sectional times and I'll bet they don't compare the sectionals when they consider protests if they did it would save a lot of arguments imo. 

Online westie

  • Group 1
  • User 8
  • Posts: 14193
« 2009-Jan-27, 10:59 AM Reply #38 »
Reply
Recommend  Message 197 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameOLD_LARSY Sent: 23/11/2008 5:51 PM
OL stopped momentarily  then had to change direction and  was fast overtaking the winner when the Judge called a halt.
 
When I stop Muggins, it aint momentarily

Reply
Recommend  Message 198 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN Nicknamecoinswell Sent: 23/11/2008 6:05 PM
Stubby on Chilli Magic ($17) stole a march on Our Lukas ($4) and clearly outpointed Cormack rounding the bend.

I think the protest may have been lodged in part to conceal he had been outridden by a far superior jockey.

Reply
Recommend  Message 199 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameManikato1 Sent: 23/11/2008 6:31 PM
I will point out now I didn't have a bet in the race, but when watching it, I thought that the winner shifted in when he had the other horse beaten. In the end though, I have no doubt that the protest should have been upheld, I think it cost the runner up 1.5 to 2 lengths by the time he got back up to speed. Quite simply an appalling decision!

Reply
Recommend  Message 200 of 201 in Discussion 
From: dubbledee Sent: 24/11/2008 1:54 PM
I think the correct decision was made. 
 
I agree with coins' point about Cormack's ride on the home turn.  Had he made his run from that point - his horse was travelling very well - I think the result of the race could have been a lot different.
 
Our Lukas is a pretty handy performer.  Sold recently for $60,000.

Reply
Recommend  Message 201 of 201 in Discussion 
From: NineMSN NicknameGrega9430 Sent: 27/01/2009 11:20 AM
Bump

Offline KD

  • Open
  • User 163
  • Posts: 107
« 2009-Jan-27, 11:04 AM Reply #39 »
I didn't have an interest in the race but saw the head on...I'm with you Randwick, I would have Upheld it.

Offline dubbledee

  • VIP Club
  • Group 1
  • User 285
  • Posts: 34011
« 2009-Jan-27, 11:04 AM Reply #40 »
Yes, that conclusion is a load of nonsense.

From what I saw in the head-on of yesterday's race I'd have upheld the protest in quick time - regardless of what either jockey said.

Offline dubbledee

  • VIP Club
  • Group 1
  • User 285
  • Posts: 34011
« 2009-Jan-27, 11:06 AM Reply #41 »
From the Stewards' Report:

On return to scale a protest was lodge by apprentice L. Rolls, rider of the 2nd placegetter, SHUDULE GEE, against KING LEONIDAS (L. Cassidy) being declared the winner, alleging interference over the concluding stages. After taking evidence from the parties concerned and viewing the patrol films, it was established that near the 100m, KING LEONIDAS did shift out slightly inconveniencing SHUDULE GEE, however stewards could not be satisfied that the minor interference suffered by SHUDULE GEE had a material effect on the finishing positions of both horses and therefore the protest was dismissed and correct weight was semaphored on the Judge's placings.

Online MagiC~*

  • Admin
  • Group 1
  • User 2
  • *****
  • Posts: 14269
« 2009-Jan-27, 11:07 AM Reply #42 »
Out of curiosity ... who Chaired the meeting ?

Offline dubbledee

  • VIP Club
  • Group 1
  • User 285
  • Posts: 34011
« 2009-Jan-27, 11:07 AM Reply #43 »
Wade Birch.

Online MagiC~*

  • Admin
  • Group 1
  • User 2
  • *****
  • Posts: 14269
« 2009-Jan-27, 11:10 AM Reply #44 »
edit: corrected  ;)

Inexperience maybe, maybe felt intimadated by Cassidy who knows, but he is still very young to be placed in that position I feel  :what:
« Last Edit: 2009-Jan-27, 11:18 AM by MagiC~* »

Offline gallopers

  • VIP Club
  • Group 2
  • User 22
  • Posts: 1308
« 2009-Jan-27, 11:18 AM Reply #45 »
hes 24.

Offline Authorized

  • Group 1
  • User 18
  • Posts: 31144
« 2009-Jan-27, 11:20 AM Reply #46 »
He's old enough to have an OPINION.

Online MagiC~*

  • Admin
  • Group 1
  • User 2
  • *****
  • Posts: 14269
« 2009-Jan-27, 11:21 AM Reply #47 »
He's old enough to have an OPINION.

So is my 5 year old  :)

Online MagiC~*

  • Admin
  • Group 1
  • User 2
  • *****
  • Posts: 14269
« 2009-Jan-27, 11:23 AM Reply #48 »
Thanks Westie  :thumbsup:

Offline gallopers

  • VIP Club
  • Group 2
  • User 22
  • Posts: 1308
« 2009-Jan-27, 11:24 AM Reply #49 »
at what age magic will luke be comfortable in that position


BACK TO ALL TOPICS
Sitemap