RUK Lambasts Trainers/Jockeys

[uncle goober]

So, where now, what do you think you will post next?

 

[Warbler]

Well, he blathered on to me for two minutes before the Arsenal match so yes!

I think Shadz has kind of conceeded that she doesn't watch much football, although she could argue that Fergie scowling at a camera under obvious duress giving soundbite one liners from the Managers almanac of cliches doesn't exactly promote the sport of course?

 

[walsworth]

You wouldn't hear Fergie say "Sorry Rishi, can't chat now, got to go and get comfy on the bench, I have to sit there for 45 minutes you know."

I've got a pretty good idea as to what he WOULD say though!

 

[Toobe]

:lol:

Brilliant idea indeed, it happens in every other sport. Why does insular, backward, ignorant, resistant to change racing need to be any different? (Answered my own question there).

:lol::lol::lol::lol:

 

[Toobe]

Sorry, I have no idea if you're male or female Toobe, it's a reference I made without thinking about it. I call most things 'he' QUOTE)



I thought I was a person but I will check

 

[Gamla Stan]

Andrew Balding just managed to come down in the royal procession when he has a runner in the first in 20 minutes so you'd think he'll manage an interview this week.

 

[Gamla Stan]

Quelle Surprise...

RADICAL plans aimed at forcing Flat racing's biggest names to engage the media in a bid to improve public perception of the sport and its participants look set to meet resistance among trainers unless they are watered-down.

If the groundbreaking blueprint being championed by Britain's major racecourses is approved by the BHA, it would become a condition of entry to certain races that trainers make themselves available to the press both before and after events, regardless of whether their horses win or lose.

National Trainers' Federation chief executive, Rupert Arnold, said: "There has been some sense that there would be compulsion, and I think that would be the wrong way to go about it."

 

[krizon]

That's a bit tricky, isn't it? You can imagine that 'small' trainers who've entered their star performer might feel justifiably snubbed it they didn't get interviewed over the bigger guns, who would probably be the predictable targets of interviewers - even if what they had to say would be banal, and probably nothing no-one hadn't thought of anyway. As for interviews with trainers if their horses lost - it'd be a brave soul who'd step forward and ask Brian Meehan and other warm, outgoing, sociable trainers what they felt about their 11-10 laid-out-for-it entry coming a gallant third.

There was huge support for racing back in the days of black-and-white telly (when many didn't have telly at all), and no-one expected endless prattle and a succession of usually inane questions to be aimed at owners or trainers. Just a "yes, we're very pleased with that" and off they went. With so much written in the Press, with so many of them being profiled in newspapers, racing mags and on videoed stable tours - is there really that much of use to add on racedays, however grand? What purpose would these interviews serve?

 

[Toobe]

None other than to amuse the taggers on who have no true interest in the horse and kill airtime between races, or like being seen on the telly in a nice frock. This is the area which I can see is the biggest problem to the media. However like with anything those taggers on should be brought up to a level not the presenters drag racing down to the level of the uneducated in the field.