Coopers ban unbelievable

Perhaps he deserved a 3 day ban tops but 52? do you really think he deserved it? as for hitting the horse 23 times I think you will find that there was absolutely no force in at least ten of them as he was obviously just flicking the horse with his motions.... I have seen horses getting floggings over the years but this was far from it.. and yes I do think he rode a good finish!

kk
 
It's irrelevant whether he rode a good finish, won, fell off, or exploded in a shower of sparks. Even under the previous whip rules, he'd have incurred a hefty ban. It's irrelevant how many horses you've seen unedifyingly slashed in the past, KK, we are now in the present and he obviously needs to learn how to control himself. I'd have banned him for a week for each hit past the allowance and sent him back to jockey school until he learned how to count. Pretty much all the jockeys, including amateurs like him, can now manage that.

Horse-racing isn't appreciated by a lot of people because they think it's corrupt and it's cruel to horses. I'd say that those who think it's the latter won't be disappointed if they see that replay. We racing fans have enough on our plate with bent jockeys, dodgy trainers and plotting owners without also having an occasional amateur like this one muddy the water even more.
 
I realise the pressure the authorities are under from animal rights groups etc. but this ban is extortionate and if the authorities do not lay down some clear guidelines (not seven days for each hit over) perhaps one day for 3 hits over then he would have received a 5 day ban which i feel would still be hefty in this instance!
 
The BHA has laid down clear guidelines, KK. You don't go over the new guidelines without picking up a ban, and you sure as hell pick up a helluva ban for one, hitting your horse too many times, and two, as Miesque has said, repeatedly not giving it time to respond. So he's done on two types of whip abuse.
 
krizon said:
I'd have banned him for a week for each hit past the allowance.
Click to expand...

You would have banned him for 105 days? Have you watched the race? If the old timers are starting to think like that I hate to think where the sport his headed.......time to respond from what? as I said earlier there was practically no force in the vast majority of those hits and I would bet my life the horse wasn't even marked.
 
The 34-year-old added another victory later on Uttoxeter's card, but now faces a lengthy spell out of the saddle, although his suspension will apply on days when there are amateur-only races scheduled.
Click to expand...

Could somebody please explain what this means, please? Does he have to wait for the next 52 days on which amateur races are scheduled to pass before he get back in the saddle, or can he already go ahead and ride on those days when there are no amateur-only races?
 
KK - are you just going to obstinately go on and on about what you think about him not just slightly exceeding the whip allowance, but just throw it to the four winds? You would bet your life the horse "wasn't even marked" - I hate to think where the sport is headed, too, (back to your dark ages of seeing horses "flogged", I suppose) if you think that's all that matters. Get a grip - the guy went well past what's acceptable and yes, I watched the replay, thanks. I don't know why you're so set on defending the indefensible.

"Oh, I was only doing 120 mph, officer, and no-one got hurt. It's not like I caused an accident or anything."

"But I'm only twice over the limit. I know loads of people who've been way more than that and I'm still okay to drive, you know."

You seem to want the rules to be bent for this one guy. I can tell you where that attitude takes us - into anarchy. I thought he gave the horse a ****-poor ride, if you're really asking. Terribly unbalanced and struck the horse out of sequence again and again. And as for him winning at Uttoxeter - that, too, is irrelevant. I don't care if he's the Second Bleedin' Coming, he rode poorly and he didn't so much break the whip rule as smash it to fragments.
 
Cooper gets a 52 day ban for winning a race yet Keith Mercer rides a horse for 4 miles and 4 furlongs with a fractured skull and recieves nothing!

You couldn't make this up, you really couldn't!
 
krizon said:
I thought he gave the horse a ****-poor ride, if you're really asking. Terribly unbalanced and struck the horse out of sequence again and again.
Click to expand...

I have seen far far worse riders out there.. sure enough he is not McCoy but he rode the horse to win the race to the best of his ability, he did not deserve the biggest ban in history although I stated earlier a 3 day ban may have been justified .... if you don't mind me asking what is your background Krizon? are you a steward? ex jockey?
 
Grey said:
Could somebody please explain what this means, please? Does he have to wait for the next 52 days on which amateur races are scheduled to pass before he get back in the saddle, or can he already go ahead and ride on those days when there are no amateur-only races?
Click to expand...

The same as Sam Waley-Cohen, he is banned for days when there are amatuer races but free to ride on other days, a bit silly really.
 
Thanks, Steve. A bit silly is right.



PS I see that he rode a winner at Fontwell yesterday
 
Last edited:
Cantoris said:
You could also say it is silly that jocks are allowed to ride in Grade/Group 1s if they are banned.
Click to expand...

I don't agree, that exemption was made so that penalties did not become disproportionate, and it was done for a different reason.

Cooper's ban on the other hand prevents him from riding in lowly amateur races while he can crack on in every other kind of race. He left his hearing yesterday after being banned, went straight to Fontwell and rode a winner. Is that not ridiculous?
 
Back
Top