Act of War scratching - reason to be advised

You mentioned Andrews on Sat Leseding,the jockey change come through on the 6th Tuesday

get upto speed

The conspiracy theorists and after the event merchants are ruining this forum.

Over the Air wrote: The conspiracy theorists and after the event merchants are ruining this forum.

This is no conspiracy theory.

Fact: Act of War was scratched

Fact: Reason for scratching 'to be advised'

As far as I know, no reason has been provided yet. Why should the rules be different in this case?

royal president wrote: No reason will be fortcoming alll. You will hear "scratched with stipes permission"
As a matter of interest the scratching was planned considering:
1 no betting value at 5/10
2 Andrews was carded to at least get a price which DB must have punted. The lighhtie gets jocked off with striker put on
3 the rest is historry
That's a plan come together.
This horse is set for the Derby

Not directed at you Frodo, I enclose one of the postings that give me the viewpoint that I have . I agree that a reason should have been given. The fact one was not does not give the conspiracy theorists carte blanche to fantasize.

royal president wrote: I'm kinda sure betting was open when the discussion broke that AoW was goin to be scratched.
Andrews was carded as the jock.
In a big race as the Queens a top jock like striker not approached for a ride or was it already done by the JR stable
I agree the scratching n jock change took place simutaneously BUT was there a plan already in place n dats so much for transparency

Another pearler from the clueless.

Over the Air u are entitled to your opinions but calling me on this forum is far from true
And I rest my case in this regard

Rest your case by giving FACTS supporting the last statement in your post and I will retract my statement, apologise and give up punting.

I really miss Colours on this type of thread :lol:

Over the air u either green in this game or u clueless boet abt stable ramifications when plotting a graff
U won't get another comment again iro this thread rather tip. Me a winner

RP like I said give me the facts, I am sure there aren't any. Sometimes the truth can really fcuk up a good story can't it?

ruffian wrote: Will be interesting to see what the official reason will be given as.

the official stipes report for the 10th jan Kenilworth states that act of war scratched in terms of 53 .3.1 advised 6th January 14.18.....I went into the rules to find 53.3.1 and it says WITH THE PERMISSION OF THE SB... I then went to look up what SB STOOD FOR and it is 1,1,69 A PROPERLY CONSTITUED BODY OF THE STIPENDARY STEWARDS OF THE NATIONAL HORSERACING AUTHORITY....,,,,,,,,,,,,so why on the 6th January couldn't the sahra website state reason for scratching permission of stipes instead of saying REASON TO BE ADVISED and this stayed on there permanently...all I can say is third world third world

So an oversight - reason should have been shown on sahorseracing.

Still begs the question though, in the case of a 'high-profile horse like AoW, is the public not entitled to be made aware of the reasons put forward by the connections in terms of obtaining permission to scratch from the 'SB' :huh: