objection at greyville

fcuking pathetic ..do stipes not know that when a horse starts to hang towards a horse the horse impeded will not go past that horse...shaun parker your explanation was pathetic and further more the winner should be suspended because he has done this on several occassions and gets away with it more times than not

pirates Wrote:

---

> fcuking pathetic ..do stipes not know that when a
> horse starts to hang towards a horse the horse
> impeded will not go past that horse...shaun parker
> your explanation was pathetic and further more the
> winner should be suspended because he has done
> this on several occassions and gets away with it
> more times than not


I backed Danish Silver and think his excuse was f$%^#&! pathetic as well .

Just another example of the absolute inconsistencies in Racing. This is nothing less than absolute daylight robbery at night.

Yes I agree Pirates, the rule makes provision for "intimidation" and I've seen objections upheld with way less intimidation than that.

No consistency, until they realise that they will always have to come up with ridiculously unbelievable excuses.

This incident is similar to the LAVERY one a few years ago whereby the objection was overruled but later changed on appeal and perhaps it's because the race stewards are poor at maths?
Danish Silver was forced to run a number of metres further than necessary by being made to run on a diagonal line.He finished less than that extra distance behind the winner and the objection was a sitter.......but not with our lot.
The winner also ran the additional distance ,but chose too,Danish silver was forced too and with the benefit of their technology that distance could have been estimated.

Like ive said before some of the stipes and there decissions are laughable . I realise the rule has now changed that they have to decide wether the impeded horse could have beaten the winner and not just finished in a better position but WTF . Andrew Fortune once said that these guys are the only people that need no experience or qualifications to get a job as a stipe. Some of these guys and there strange unbelievable rulings make Andrew 100% right.

What sank Danish Silver is that he wasn't gaining on Mr Premier over the last 100m or so. I think it is a huge leap to say that Danish Silver didn't go past Mr Premier only because he was impeded, and while I know I am in a minority here I think the stipes got it 100% right.

Whether we should go back to the old rules is another matter. Under the previous method, it would only have been needed to show that Danish Silver would have finished closer than third and not necessarily in front of the horse that impeded him. Under the current rules it is necessary to establish with reasonable certainty that Danish Silver would have beaten Mr Premier, and I think that would have taken a leap of faith that IMHO opinion the stipes were right not to take.

Having said that, I'd have no complaint if they banned Mr Premier as a potential source of danger, or at the very least restricted him to racing around the left-handed turns at Clairwood, where he seems to have less of a steering problem. He has caused trouble in too many races now, and sooner or later he may lead to an accident.

PS Where is Piet Botha? He's the only one who can seemingly keep the horse running straight on right-handed tracks.

magiclips Wrote:

---

> PS Where is Piet Botha? He's the only one who can
> seemingly keep the horse running straight on
> right-handed tracks.


Mr Empire was his last ride back in August

magiclips Wrote:

---

> What sank Danish Silver is that he wasn't gaining
> on Mr Premier over the last 100m or so. I think
> it is a huge leap to say that Danish Silver didn't
> go past Mr Premier only because he was impeded,
> and while I know I am in a minority here I think
> the stipes got it 100% right.
>
> Whether we should go back to the old rules is
> another matter. Under the previous method, it
> would only have been needed to show that Danish
> Silver would have finished closer than third and
> not necessarily in front of the horse that impeded
> him. Under the current rules it is necessary to
> establish with reasonable certainty that Danish
> Silver would have beaten Mr Premier, and I think
> that would have taken a leap of faith that IMHO
> opinion the stipes were right not to take.
>
> Having said that, I'd have no complaint if they
> banned Mr Premier as a potential source of danger,
> or at the very least restricted him to racing
> around the left-handed turns at Clairwood, where
> he seems to have less of a steering problem. He
> has caused trouble in too many races now, and
> sooner or later he may lead to an accident.
>
> PS Where is Piet Botha? He's the only one who can
> seemingly keep the horse running straight on
> right-handed tracks.

Magic Danish Silver was 1/2 a length behind Mr Premier when Mr Premier moved right across the track pushing Danish Silver to the right of the track . That would have spooked any horse but Danish Silver fought back and still went on to loose by 1/2 a length , how can anyone doubt that if not impeded that Danish Silver could have won. The fact that this is not the 1st time that Mr PREMIER has done this should have been enough to have taken the race away from him .

I'm talking straight from the pocket here .

The fact that Mr Premier has done this before is completely irrelevant.

I have to agree with Magic, Danish Silver did not close in on Mr Premier sufficiently IMHO. Even if the objection was upheld the race would have gone to Duntroon anyway, with Mr Premier placed third. Duntroon was not interferred with and would not have won the race anyway. I think the stipes made the correct call.