Tom Queally

  • Thread starter Thread starter Gearoid
  • Start date Start date
From the Stewards' Room on the BHA site:

The Stewards held an enquiry under Rule (B) 11.6 into possible interference inside the final furlong. They found that the winner HIGHLAND CASTLE, ridden by Jamie Spencer, had interfered with SWIFT ALHAARTH (IRE), ridden by Silvestre De Sousa, placed second. They considered that the interference was accidental and had not improved HIGHLAND CASTLE’s placing. They ordered the placings to remain unaltered.

The Stewards held an enquiry into possible interference approaching the one furlong marker. They found that the winner HIGHLAND CASTLE, ridden by Jamie Spencer, had interfered with REFLECT (IRE), ridden by Eddie Ahern, placed third. They considered that the interference was accidental under Rule (B) 55.

Yet he did not even attempt to switch his whip despite it being in the wrong hand throughout.
 
It was pretty funny the way that Thommo muscled his way past people to get in TQ's face in the immediate aftermath. This was obviously going to piss off the jockey, and the only justification for doing it would be to ask an insightful question. But that's not Thommo's style.
 
I think Tom Queally gets a very hard time on here.

That said, he looked like a complete twat on Saturday.

your post is the hardest time he's got up to press :lol:

he were none to pleased with Tommo..Hamm said he were close to tears in that stewards enquiry a few weeks ago..he was very close to tears walking in here as well..just muttered at tommo..who to be fair wanting decking for being such a plum to go near a jockey who was going to be gutted with an outcome like that
 
Another bloody awful ride on Solar Sky today - holding up a renowned stayer off a crawl over three furlongs shorter than his best effort.
 
Ardross, what do you do in your spare time when you're not Queally bashing? If you were to focus on most jockeys in a similar vain the findings would be very similar.
 
I have just had a look at this race.

Queally had Solar Sky in joint third for most of the race. He was 1L down about 3f out. When the race got serious shortly after, he was done for toe.

I have seen hold up rides before; this was not a hold-up ride. You could argue that he could have taken the race by the scruff of the neck like the way Fortune did, but in reality he wasn't near as good as the front two on the day.

The Racing Post comments in running perfectly sum up the way Solar Sky was ridden:

Chased leaders, ridden over 2f out, soon hung left, weakened over 1f out

Every time you criticise Queally for a normal ride like this takes away the power of any valid criticism you may give the jockey.
 
I have just had a look at this race.

Queally had Solar Sky in joint third for most of the race. He was 1L down about 3f out. When the race got serious shortly after, he was done for toe.

I have seen hold up rides before; this was not a hold-up ride. You could argue that he could have taken the race by the scruff of the neck like the way Fortune did, but in reality he wasn't near as good as the front two on the day.

The Racing Post comments in running perfectly sum up the way Solar Sky was ridden:



Every time you criticise Queally for a normal ride like this takes away the power of any valid criticism you may give the jockey.

The race was run 9 seconds outside the standard time - so even though Fortune took it up after a crawl he did not go that quickly . Solar Sky simply had no chance off that pace if he did not go on .
 
Listen all this Tom Queally bashing is getting ridiculous. Solar Sky simply was not good enough at this stage of his development. Blaming the jockey is pocket talk of the highest order.

Do you seriously think Mr B J Curley would trust and guide Tom if he thought he was a bad jock? Not a chance...enough of all this nonsense slating Queally. He'll prove EC1 and Ardross wrong yet. Come to think of it, he has done already!
 
Back
Top