Grant van Niekerk suspension!!!!!!

What a lenient sentence for the reported offence????????

more detail plse?

Ye it does seem quite lenient

did he take out a weight before the horse ran?

The National Horseracing Authority have advised that at an Inquiry held in Cape Town on 17 January 2013, Jockey Grant van Niekerk was charged with a rule in regard to committing a negligent act with regard to weighing.

As the rider of THE WHICH DOCTOR, Van Niekerk was charged with a contravention of Rule 72.1.28, in that he committed a negligent act with regard to weighing, by removing a weight bag after weighing out and failed to include this weight bag in his equipment used when riding in Race 7 at Kenilworth Racecourse on 12 January 2013.

This led to the disqualification of THE WHICH DOCTOR from Race 7.

Mr van Niekerk pleaded guilty to the charge.

The Inquiry Board found Mr van Niekerk guilty and suspended him from riding in races for a period of twelve weeks, of which four weeks is wholly suspended for a period of one year, provided that he is not found guilty of contravening Rule 72.1.28 during the period of suspension.

Van Niekerk has the Right of Appeal against the penalty imposed.

It's a flipping disgrace that you get a sentence like this. Just look at the Armstrong debacle- banned for life for cheating and how exactly is this different . This is blatant cheating !! Not to mention once again that the punters got screwed again by the disqualification of this horse. Sickening this game does not need this crap but the powers that be are bloody useless. No wonder racing has such a horrible stigma attached to it. How can this be justified?

did he cheat(for gain) or did he forget to put the weight back into the saddle bags? I think if he cheated then a way light sentence but from the words "negligent" i think he may have forgotten to put the weight into his saddle bag.

Surely its difficult to prove if he cheated or negligent?

If the Board of Inquiry concluded that this was a negligent act, but that it was unintentional - ie. Not trying to cheat nor involving any crooked betting activity- then the sentence is appropriate. 3 months is certainly not a trivial sentence.
Obviously all of us who backed this horse and included her in our PAs are rightly annoyed, but in my view justice has been served.

3 months? Tsk a joke should be 24

Excuse my ignorance but why would a jock remove... "a weight bag after weighing out"?

But again, excuse my ignorance, surely if it was a deliberate act he must have known he would get caught at the weigh-in?

He may well be guilty of negligence but to suggest that he was doing anything underhanded is disgusting...if he wanted get beaten in the race then he could have got left at the start or find trouble in the race or whatever, but to suggest that he would ride to win knowing that he was riding under weight is pathetic, as is the statement that taking away his ability to earn a salary for 25% of the season is too lenient which is an outrageous thing to say...give the kid a break!!! nobody died and he has been dealt with for his transgression