TURFONTEIN Saturday 22 August 09

woodruff race 4...

Wd dave drink paid for this weekend..

Can someone explain to me how there was no objection in Race 7????
I did not get to see the head on but the 5th placed horse was COMPLETELY taken out of the race by either the 1st or 2nd placed horses (or both). When last did we see a double objection???

Anyway I find it hard to believe that there was NO interference.

Any information out there?

Want the stipes to miss their PA's...

horse was finished when ce occured,would never have finished in front of the other 2 horses .

Pirates but surely it would of got 4th or maybe even 3rd in front of Field Gate, if not interfered with...only missed out by a ball hair on the fourth placing.

simple ruling ,,if not for the interference would it have finished in front of the horses who interfered with it...answer no

So often this has happened.....punter losses, horse out the PA....owner losses, stakes cheque....they need to re-look this ruling imo?

Tommy_Hotspur Wrote:

---

> Can someone explain to me how there was no
> objection in Race 7????
> I did not get to see the head on but the 5th
> placed horse was COMPLETELY taken out of the race
> by either the 1st or 2nd placed horses (or both).
> When last did we see a double objection???
>
> Anyway I find it hard to believe that there was NO
> interference.
>
> Any information out there?

With the double paying R76 on the tote (outside coupling wins previous race , with favourite coupling unplaced)

....you have to be delusional to expect an objection in this totally transparent administration

....the only information you can hope to get, will be misinformation, or should it be disinformation, and that will be after the fact,...with no recourse, like the little snippet of an article in racing Express, about the quartet payout been "investigated" and declared "above board"

I watched race7 today,and the head on replay....expected an objection,...the silence about this is DEAFENING

Perhaps, the solution should be...no more replays...why wisen up the masses of idiot punters...money for jam

And, by the way, I did not bet today...don't need to be out of pocket,to state an opinion, or to observe the crap that is filtrating this rainbow nation, money is not evil, the want of more money than is needed..is

Pirates,

I thought the ruling was if a horse was interfered with and due to the interference the horse in question was cost a BETTER placing?
That would make sense to me. The horse who was interfered with would surely have run better than 5th, thus it was cost a better placing?

I'm not 100% sure of the rules but all I know is that it was a crying shame that there was not some kind of objection.

There is also no evidence that could prove the horse was done for and therefore could not have beaten the top two. There was evidence though that the interverence caused by those two runners caused the horse to miss a better placing.

No wonder racing is dead, dead and dying.

Tommy Hotspur that would be a much better ruling..spot on.

THE NEW RULING is by far the best ,did the connections of the horse object and if not why..