New Whip Rules
- Thread starter Aragorn
- Start date
EC1
On a break
getting coverage on Sky news isn't the be all and end all..in fact as Stan said earlier anyone outside racing watching that probably thought the sport well rid of a jockey that wants to whip horses more than is allowed
so..his appearance on that is more likely to have had exactly the opposite effect
one person won't make a difference to this..it will always be a majority that gets changes..not individuals..imo
Last edited:
EC1
On a break
i'm not talking about people who know racing though..i'm talking about the image it sent out to the general public
On The Bridle
At the Start
That is the kernel of this whole problem. The general public couldn't care less!! It's the BHA who think the general public care based on a set of leading set questions that were
put to them. Anyone who takes McCrirrick seriously should take a long hard look at themselves. His article in the Mail during the week was appalling. I think Richard Hughes came out of last week with his reputation and respect enhanced.
Gamla Stan
At the Start
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2005
- Messages
- 4,337
This is becoming ridiculous, the new rules are fine and workable. Ruby is abusing his popularity with the betting public. He knew the rules before he rode in that race and he knew the punishments and he knows how to count, I have sod all sympathy for him. If a horse requires more than 8 slaps to go round Aintree, it shouldn't be going round Aintree in the first place.
The jockeys rightly got their final furlong concession but enough is enough, the BHA should take a hard line on this now, they've cocked it up but there's nothing wrong with the rules now. The jockeys wanted a set limit which was black and white and they've got one.
The public don't care for 364 days of the year but come the National and if someone decides to beat the living crap out of the winner again, they will care and you can't change the whip rules in one race just because Joe Public only watches that one. The only way this will change is if you convince them that the whip doesn't hurt and you won't manage that.
The jockeys rightly got their final furlong concession but enough is enough, the BHA should take a hard line on this now, they've cocked it up but there's nothing wrong with the rules now. The jockeys wanted a set limit which was black and white and they've got one.
The public don't care for 364 days of the year but come the National and if someone decides to beat the living crap out of the winner again, they will care and you can't change the whip rules in one race just because Joe Public only watches that one. The only way this will change is if you convince them that the whip doesn't hurt and you won't manage that.
One's tempted to riposte that anyone reading the Daily Mail should take a long hard look at themselves... seriously, McCririck has always been outspoken about detesting the whip. Good for him to keep to his line and not toady to the bleating that you can't ride/win without using one. Plenty of hands and heels wins since the tom-tit hit the fan, giving the lie to that old chestnut.
I find Cruella's statements completely in line with past ones of my own and my thinking remains unchanged. There's no point in thinking that because a horse is going over 3m or 4m over multiple obstacles that it needs battering more times than one going hell-for-leather over 5 or 6f. Most races are tactical or caretaking affairs over the longer distances, with the better horses being able to finish more strongly anyway, whip or not. I don't know how many times it has to be said (four thousand? 25,000?), but if your horse can't or won't manage any better after being whacked three or four times, you may as well light up a fag and read the, er, Daily Mail on the way back in. And yes, the more pouting and sulking that goes on, the more the inference will be drawn that nobody has the skill to conjure a decent run without belting horses - that isn't the image racing needs in order to attract future supporters. And hell, it sure needs future supporters, as it's a minority sport compared to the numbers watching stadium games, let alone other activities which consume the young public's leisure time, like shopping, the pub, eating out, clubbing, etc., etc.
I find Cruella's statements completely in line with past ones of my own and my thinking remains unchanged. There's no point in thinking that because a horse is going over 3m or 4m over multiple obstacles that it needs battering more times than one going hell-for-leather over 5 or 6f. Most races are tactical or caretaking affairs over the longer distances, with the better horses being able to finish more strongly anyway, whip or not. I don't know how many times it has to be said (four thousand? 25,000?), but if your horse can't or won't manage any better after being whacked three or four times, you may as well light up a fag and read the, er, Daily Mail on the way back in. And yes, the more pouting and sulking that goes on, the more the inference will be drawn that nobody has the skill to conjure a decent run without belting horses - that isn't the image racing needs in order to attract future supporters. And hell, it sure needs future supporters, as it's a minority sport compared to the numbers watching stadium games, let alone other activities which consume the young public's leisure time, like shopping, the pub, eating out, clubbing, etc., etc.
On The Bridle
At the Start
The revision to the rules is astep in the right direction but the punishments are still way too severe still.
Here is what is still wrong about the jocks attitudes to the rules:
From Ruby
“I don’t want to be coming over here and getting banned in small races and missing big rides for Willie Mullins back home. I will have to discuss it with Paul Nicholls.” So he is happy to break the rules if the punishment is minor.
“The punishment didn’t fit the crime. I miss a Grade 1 chase at Down Royal and a good race at Cork. If that deserves a five-day ban the game is f***ed." Again, his concern is missing grade 1s......then dont break the rules.
From Mackay
"Wins are hard to come by and I felt I wouldn't have won if I hadn't kept riding to the line" - so he had an unfair advantage over the jockey who stayed within the rules.....ban him and that will stop him doing it again.
I have hed the same line since the start of this. There is nothing wrong with the new rules except for the final furlong point and the corrective action issue. The bans and fines need to be sufficient for the likes of Ruby to be worried that he might miss a big day, or else there is little deterrent for whacking your favourite owner's horse an extra time to win by a short head.
Can someone tell me if the percentage of bans has increased since the first week when it was 1% of the jocks riding were getting bans. Clearly most of the jocks are able to play by the rules and I think McCoy gets it.
From Ruby
“I don’t want to be coming over here and getting banned in small races and missing big rides for Willie Mullins back home. I will have to discuss it with Paul Nicholls.” So he is happy to break the rules if the punishment is minor.
“The punishment didn’t fit the crime. I miss a Grade 1 chase at Down Royal and a good race at Cork. If that deserves a five-day ban the game is f***ed." Again, his concern is missing grade 1s......then dont break the rules.
From Mackay
"Wins are hard to come by and I felt I wouldn't have won if I hadn't kept riding to the line" - so he had an unfair advantage over the jockey who stayed within the rules.....ban him and that will stop him doing it again.
I have hed the same line since the start of this. There is nothing wrong with the new rules except for the final furlong point and the corrective action issue. The bans and fines need to be sufficient for the likes of Ruby to be worried that he might miss a big day, or else there is little deterrent for whacking your favourite owner's horse an extra time to win by a short head.
Can someone tell me if the percentage of bans has increased since the first week when it was 1% of the jocks riding were getting bans. Clearly most of the jocks are able to play by the rules and I think McCoy gets it.
On The Bridle
At the Start
The underlying message that the betting public are being given here is that jockeys WILL NOT be trying to win as hard as they were previously. In any other industry that would not be tolerated. At a time when there is a huge credibility issue being swept under the carpet regarding race fixing and non triers this really is farcical. Have the BHA considered how many people this will drive away from racing rather than trying to appease people who have no interest in racing in the first place?
I think the rules are ok in their current version, but the penalties still need sorting out because they are too severe.
There is such a thing as proportionality, and most of the cases so far have seen walloping penalties for minor infringements.
However, taking the Nicky Mackay case, where he says he wanted to ensure he won the race because wins are hard to come by, he is presumably saying they are hard to come by not just for himself but for trainers and owners too. Therefore in order to prevent jockeys from being pressurised into breaking the rules, the sanctions should include disqualification of the horse if the result of the race has been affected.
There is such a thing as proportionality, and most of the cases so far have seen walloping penalties for minor infringements.
However, taking the Nicky Mackay case, where he says he wanted to ensure he won the race because wins are hard to come by, he is presumably saying they are hard to come by not just for himself but for trainers and owners too. Therefore in order to prevent jockeys from being pressurised into breaking the rules, the sanctions should include disqualification of the horse if the result of the race has been affected.
Gamla Stan
At the Start
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2005
- Messages
- 4,337
Sorry OTB but this is total bollocks. I never shut up about cheating and non trying but it has sod all to do with this and the attempt to link the two by certain corners of the racing establishment is a nonsense.
To suggest jockeys won't be trying to win under the new rule is just ridiculous, they just can't win at all costs. In the same way you can't take steroids to win at Athletics. Jockeys can still their hardest to win races, and should be doing, they just can only hit their horses 7 or 8 times rather than not having a set limit. They have to try as hard as possible to win the race within the rules, something they've been doing for years and this new rule doesn't take that away from them.
The penalties need to act as a deterrent as in all walks of life and sports.
On The Bridle
At the Start
The new rules have affected several results already - if they start demoting horses due to new whip rule breaches then I am gone from the sport!
The fucking around with the rules was always going to have a monstrous effect down the line in a myriad of different ways. What was the need to change - where did it come from and WHAT ARE THEY TRYING TO ACHIEVE? I haven't heard of one solitary person saying that's great - because of these new rules I am going to go racing for the first time. I was in the company of several stakeholders - mostly owners last night - all agreed that if they impose the domotion of horse due to jockeys whip infringements then they are packing up racing and looking at something slightly less insane on which to waste their money!
The fucking around with the rules was always going to have a monstrous effect down the line in a myriad of different ways. What was the need to change - where did it come from and WHAT ARE THEY TRYING TO ACHIEVE? I haven't heard of one solitary person saying that's great - because of these new rules I am going to go racing for the first time. I was in the company of several stakeholders - mostly owners last night - all agreed that if they impose the domotion of horse due to jockeys whip infringements then they are packing up racing and looking at something slightly less insane on which to waste their money!
Gamla Stan
At the Start
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2005
- Messages
- 4,337
All rules affect all results in all sports. If the offside rule didn't exist in football, there would be much more higher scoring games etc. It's for the jockeys to adapt to these very workable new rules. Jockeys shouldn't have been hitting horses much more than 7/8 times previously anyway, the jockeys wanted a numerical limit set so I can't understand what the problem is?
I backed a horse last week at Nottingham that would probably have placed under the old rules (you can't say for sure) but I was more than happy with doing my money, they are now the rules and they are fair. Whilst in the heat of the moment, I might want to secure the place part of my bet at all costs but when I take a step back, I don't want to see a horse get hit eight or nine times just to cop a few quid back.
The new rules are for the good of the sport because they'll stop high profile incidents like Jason Maguire beating the living daylights out of a horse when millions are watching.
You agree that breaking/not breaking the whip rules can affect results, and you agree that some rules are needed about use of the whip. So why are you against demoting horses that have won because their jockey has broken the rules?
Irish Stamp
Forum Moderator
No but you would if they fielded an extra player.
If they break the rules they can expect to be punished - the important issue is making sure the penalty is so severe that it's not worth breaking the rules.
As Cantoris points out under the new penalty system nobody wants to break the rules - bring back the old rules but with the new penalties.
If they break the rules they can expect to be punished - the important issue is making sure the penalty is so severe that it's not worth breaking the rules.
As Cantoris points out under the new penalty system nobody wants to break the rules - bring back the old rules but with the new penalties.
Soary Stars
At the Start
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2011
- Messages
- 648
What are they trying to achieve?
Well, this, I think: they don't want examples like Ballabriggs and Rewilding being witnessed by the TV viewers.
I think they are perhaps being over sensitive in that the TV viewers don't get as exercised about it as the BHA does.
One other thing they're trying to achieve is an assertion that they run Racing & the jockeys are to be obedient.
When all's said & done (can't come too soon!), neither side have acted in the best interests of Racing, with the jocks' schoolboy maturity & the BHA's headmasterly imposition of the new rules.
It's no use getting bar-roomy about your objections; if you can't put up a reasoned argument you just fall into one of those 2 camps, don't you?
Well, this, I think: they don't want examples like Ballabriggs and Rewilding being witnessed by the TV viewers.
I think they are perhaps being over sensitive in that the TV viewers don't get as exercised about it as the BHA does.
One other thing they're trying to achieve is an assertion that they run Racing & the jockeys are to be obedient.
When all's said & done (can't come too soon!), neither side have acted in the best interests of Racing, with the jocks' schoolboy maturity & the BHA's headmasterly imposition of the new rules.
It's no use getting bar-roomy about your objections; if you can't put up a reasoned argument you just fall into one of those 2 camps, don't you?
Irish Stamp
Forum Moderator
The viewers didn't complain about the whip use though - they complained about the tarpaulins and the bodies of horses.
To the best of my knowledge with the old fences and the simple stakes on the fences and horses waved to jump the outside/inside of the fence nobody complained.
This has led me to believe that only the Animal Rights brigade cared until people could see these things had happened.
To the best of my knowledge with the old fences and the simple stakes on the fences and horses waved to jump the outside/inside of the fence nobody complained.
This has led me to believe that only the Animal Rights brigade cared until people could see these things had happened.
EC1
On a break
all past results have depended on rules and who was prepared to break them though..so comparing the last weeks results with the last 5 years isn't showing anything unusual..in both periods results have been changed by how much a jockey is prepared to break rules.
the only real solution is to do away with the whip..then you will get people saying that that also changes results
what does hitting a horse with the whip do anyway?..does it make them give more?..is this a fallacy?
i understand a horse won't go faster for the whip..but i assume it would encourage them to go the same speed for longer..which is in effect making them go faster
i doubt whilst the whip is there..we are never going to have a solution
does anyone know what the concensus is amongst teh jockeys about a reasonable number of whip strikes..is it 10..is it 20?...because it appears that single figures is making many of them unhappy
the only real solution is to do away with the whip..then you will get people saying that that also changes results
what does hitting a horse with the whip do anyway?..does it make them give more?..is this a fallacy?
i understand a horse won't go faster for the whip..but i assume it would encourage them to go the same speed for longer..which is in effect making them go faster
i doubt whilst the whip is there..we are never going to have a solution
does anyone know what the concensus is amongst teh jockeys about a reasonable number of whip strikes..is it 10..is it 20?...because it appears that single figures is making many of them unhappy
On The Bridle
At the Start
I don't agree with the arbitary number of hits, one over which is deemed to be a banable offence. The old rules with something approaching the new punishments would have been enough of a move if a move were needed. BBC got 8 yes only 8 complaints after thus years Grand National yet we need a seismic shift in the rules?? Who says - the BHA?? Several million people watched the race yet there were only 8 complaints!!
Why not run the horses in lanes? Why not just time trial them? Because the spectacle of the race is lost, the excitement of the driving finish with man and beast pitted against their valiant opponents striving to be the one who comes out on top.