I Would Love An Explanation

From the stipes as to why the objection in race 9 at kenilworth today was overruled

I was at Kenilworth, after they showed the head-on replay most punters felt that the objection would be upheld.
Pacatuba shift outwards closing the gap for Pebble Path therefore Pebble Path had to ease.

On course most punters had backed Pacatuba to win the race.

It seemed to me that the 2nd horse had more than enough time to get past Pacatuba after the incident, if good enough, but couldn't. I thought it would be overruled, for what it's worth.

We were chatting about it earlier and majority of the racing people there said if you cause interference it should be upheld and not left up to the stipes to decide if it affected the result.Different horses will react differently and how do they know which horses will keep trying while or after being interfered with and which will not. No one can tell no matter who you are. Would also make jockeys more aware of keeping straight and this would also help the safety aspect.

The american way is the ONLY system that stops this kind of doubt BUT then all the "but the best horse won" brigade then start shouting their point across....for me its simple and black and white...interfere anywhere in the race , get placed behind the horse you interfered with.

Bearing in mind that one can cut across a 6/10 fav when jumping out the stalls and ruin its chances of winning and NOTHING happens cause it was at the start of the race.

Easy I agree.Highwaymans Gold was carried 3/4 across the track at Clairwood by Sunday Monday but because he came from behind HG they said he would have won anyway.I had an inexperienced appie up who said he could not ride the horse out properly because he was been taken way off a straight course. Only beaten 1/2 a length.We won easily next time out.30yrs ago a horse called Custodian ridden by Paul Gadsby was interfered with by a horse called Kumluckie ridden by Michael Roberts after 100m in the nursery at Greyville and we got back to run 2nd to Michael and the objection was upheld and we won the race.The right result.

Craig you and easy 100% correct its about time the rule was ammended. If a horse causes interferance to another he should be placed behind him end of story. There is no stipe anywhere that can tell how a horse will respond after interferance some might fight back others will just turn it up never mind how much time or space they have after the interferance.

Just be careful, we dont want to end up being like the French

there you go, the 1st objection........


thats why the rule is the way it is. Too mnay experts "evaluating the probable" outcome and leaving it up to HUMAN interpretation of what
WOULD HAVE HAPPENED


Last week at brighton there was a hot pot fav that looked impossible to loose, it was side swiped at the start of the race a for sure lost all its chances there. The horse that made the kak ran 2nd the fav ran no where, how can that be allowed?

Sometimes it is better to do the logical thing than to follow the international standard - go back to the old rules and forget following Europe

It appeared to me like fortune punched the other horse or did i see wrong. Maybe Hibs can put up the replay.

scotia Wrote:

---

> Just be careful, we dont want to end up being like
> the French

Indeed!