Should bans be banned

Tanlic

Tanlic

Senior Jockey
Joined
Dec 6, 2011
Messages
11,758
Location
Bangkok Thailand
I just watched Julian Wilson and Jimmy Lindley discussing the disqualification of Vacarme in the 1983 Richmond Stakes Goodwood.

Jimmy Lindley strongly disagreed with the horse being thrown out and it was like he could see into the future because he said the rules should be changed and they have been.

What about these bans? Do you think they are fair.

On one hand you have someone like Hughsie on the other hand you have Simple Simon who gets 4 mounts a month.

Both get a fine for careless riding and a 10 day ban.

Simple Simon loses 150 quid Hughsie misses half a dozen winners and 150,000 pounds.

That may be exagerated but in hard cash 2 people who commited the same offence are fined overall a hugely different amount.

It doesn't even need to be Hughsie and some unknown it could be Hughsie and Moore and you would get the same result.

Surely they could have asort of league table with standard fines for group A B C etc depending on what earning bracket you were in and fines could vary from say 1000 to 20,000 pounds. That way the trainer and owners don't suffer from the loss of their jockeys as they should not be punished for saomnething a jockey has done.

In a sense it's the same except you don't get two grade 1 jockeys fined different amounts (percentages taken into consideration) and you are not affecting others who have done nothing wrong.

Maybe I am crazy but I for one would like to see bans done away with and replaced by some sort of graded fine.

Ideas ????
 
Last edited:
Watched the clip on you tube on Monday -Wilson at his best.The current system definitely has flaws particularly when it comes to missing the big meetings but what do you replace it with.
 
The bans are fair in a sense. The top jockeys will have several rides a day so they are arguably missing out on more than the less popular jockey who might struggle to get two or three rides a day.

The latter jockey might also end up being more likely to stick to the rules if he perceives it to be harsher on him, as contradictory as that might sound.

I'd still prefer something closer to the French system. I don't believe the best horse should be allowed to keep the race just because he is the best horse. In what other sport is someone who breaks the rules allowed to win?

I also think the horse and jockey should be treated as one. If the jockey breaks the rules the horse should be disqualified and placed last, and the rider should be fined or, in more serious cases, banned.
 
OK, I've just watched the youtube clip.

I don't see how anyone can argue that JW is any better than McGrath or Cunnigham, who have discussed the same issue a number of times and who have been equally clear about what the rules state.

I don't remember JL being as articulate as that. He was good in that clip, even if I disagree strongly with him. What he doesn't take into account is that race tactics and race-riding decisions also play a part in the result.

What is the difference between a jockey making the wrong decisions and getting his horse into a position from which it is impossible to win without breaking the rules and one who makes the same wrong decisions but accepts he got it wrong and goes for the best possible finishing position without breaking the rules? The stewards can't turn round and say the second horse should have won just because it was the best horse so we need to give it the race.
 
Last edited:
I've heard various people including jockeys state that they would prefer a fine system instead of bans but if you want to punish or deter people, best not to give them what they want.

Bans are the best even if it does deprive us of some jockeys for the big meetings, the sport wont grind to a halt just because one or two jockeys are missing.
 
Jockeys already have the right once or twice a season to change the date of a ban if it falls on a day when there is a Gr1 race they are riding in.

Which is fair enough for Hughesie, but not for Simple Simon, who never gets to ride in such races anyway. When his ban falls on the day of say the Chester Cup, or Northumberland Plate or some other race that might be huge in his calendar there is nothing he can do about it.
 
Grey said:
Jockeys already have the right once or twice a season to change the date of a ban if it falls on a day when there is a Gr1 race they are riding in.

Which is fair enough for Hughesie, but not for Simple Simon, who never gets to ride in such races anyway. When his ban falls on the day of say the Chester Cup, or Northumberland Plate or some other race that might be huge in his calendar there is nothing he can do about it.
Click to expand...

That's a problem in every walk of life the minute you are forced to follow the letter of the law.

It's like going to court for a traffic offence and the judge saying he sympathises with you but under the law I have to find you guilty. (Which does happen talking from 1st hand experience)

It's a no brainer as you suggest that a young jockeys big day is totally different to that of a senior jockey. In a case like that the Stwards should surely be allowed or told to use their discretion...........what is it they say."The laws an ass"
 
The disqualification of Vacarme was a scandal :mad: It was a quite brilliant ride , no interference was caused according to both Tony Ives and Graham Sexton .

The irony is of course when Wildenstein fell out with Piggott over All Along he threw him off Vacarme as well ,after they had hacked up in the Mill Reef, the horse as I recall then never won another race .

Harry Wragg was interviewed the following day and described it as one of the best rides on a two year old he had ever seen .
 
Back
Top