Azzie lets rip

johnnycomelately wrote: Having had nothing to gain or lose i see the picture clearly
Was there contact, objection upheld
No contact, overruled

But if i had money on the loser, I would be upset, rightely or wrongley

The stipes report confirm that there was contact.albeit slight

Over the Air wrote:

johnnycomelately wrote: Having had nothing to gain or lose i see the picture clearly
Was there contact, objection upheld
No contact, overruled

But if i had money on the loser, I would be upset, rightely or wrongley

The stipes report confirm that there was contact.albeit slight

If they agree there was conflict, and if the outside horse didn't drift in, then surely the conflict was due to the inside horse drifting out, in which case surely the result was affected taking into account the final margin?

PS - I'm talking from the neither camps (Don't know the rules properly, and had no financial interest), however Delpech does look like he would have won had the inside horse not drifted, IMO.

Been saying for years that all the rules need to be more specific and less subjective ......the NHA has wall to wall legal people so you would think they would see the merit in that and reduce controversy as much as possible!
It's the same reason they can't enforce the consistency or "racing on merit" rule!!!!!

If this race was in jurisdiction of France or USA, definitely upheld. South Africa inconsistent with objections.

naresh wrote: If this race was in jurisdiction of France or USA, definitely upheld. South Africa inconsistent with objections.

True.........but in the UK regarded as frivolous...........seen much worse there without so much as a review!

rob faux wrote:

naresh wrote: If this race was in jurisdiction of France or USA, definitely upheld. South Africa inconsistent with objections.

True.........but in the UK regarded as frivolous...........seen much worse there without so much as a review!

Surprisingly last Friday at Ascot a 3rd place runner, Irish Rookie, lodged an objection against the winner, Namhroodah, and the objection was upheld with the winner now demoted to 3rd.

naresh wrote:

rob faux wrote:

naresh wrote: If this race was in jurisdiction of France or USA, definitely upheld. South Africa inconsistent with objections.

True.........but in the UK regarded as frivolous...........seen much worse there without so much as a review!

Surprisingly last Friday at Ascot a 3rd place runner, Irish Rookie, lodged an objection against the winner, Namhroodah, and the objection was upheld with the winner now demoted to 3rd.

and rightly so

ps i`m not sure Artica would have been given the race in France and States

I am so tired of hearing that anyone in racing may object to their credibility being questioned when they cannot take the first step to remove themselves from controversy or conflict of interest. NO STIPE SHOULD BET or quite frankly own a race horse while working as a stipe, quite simple really, but in SA Horseracing we expect to have conflict of interest actions and then pretend to stand on principles. We allow the foxes to guard the chickens because that is the best option.

Wylie Halls trainer did not take the decision lightly btw and I agreed with him on the day, Legislate should never have been given that race.

The discussed objection and Mr Azzie should know this, is one of the best examples of good race riding. The second horse was intimidated not bumped and you see that happen in every second race you watch. Do you think that the experienced jocks don't close gaps, whip with wide motions to intimidate other horses? Did they both shift? Yes
Was the second horse bumped or impeded? No
Was the second horse intimidated? Yes

Anyway, that's my opinion, all disclaimers apply and I didn't have a zak on Sylvester