Greyville Wednesday

so he is the starter

Warren Laird wrote: I cant see a "False Start" all the gates opened at the same time. What I can see is the horse on the outside not jumping , should have been scratched . but not a false start. Starters flag was up .

I agree.. I saw it the same. Le Harve was slow the leave the stalls but the gate opened in time.

just my view

What a balls up

So disappointing . I had some bucks on Elegant General

Such A Rush to run a Cracker

money on eachway

Warren Laird wrote: I cant see a "False Start" all the gates opened at the same time. What I can see is the horse on the outside not jumping , should have been scratched . but not a false start. Starters flag was up .

I also couldn't see the false start Warren.All gates opened at the same time and Le Havre was slow away.Shouldn't have been a false start and Le Havre should have been a runner and not scratched either.Since when does a horse qualify to be scratched because it was slow away?Unless the handler was holding onto Le Havre the race should have gone ahead I think.That messed up plenty horses chances,the right thing to do is null and void the race in my opinion.

durbs wrote:

Warren Laird wrote: I cant see a "False Start" all the gates opened at the same time. What I can see is the horse on the outside not jumping , should have been scratched . but not a false start. Starters flag was up .

I also couldn't see the false start Warren.All gates opened at the same time and Le Havre was slow away.Shouldn't have been a false start and Le Havre should have been a runner and not scratched either.Since when does a horse qualify to be scratched because it was slow away?Unless the handler was holding onto Le Havre the race should have gone ahead I think.That messed up plenty horses chances,the right thing to do is null and void the race in my opinion.

100% DURBS

durbs wrote:

Warren Laird wrote: I cant see a "False Start" all the gates opened at the same time. What I can see is the horse on the outside not jumping , should have been scratched . but not a false start. Starters flag was up .

I also couldn't see the false start Warren.All gates opened at the same time and Le Havre was slow away.Shouldn't have been a false start and Le Havre should have been a runner and not scratched either.Since when does a horse qualify to be scratched because it was slow away?Unless the handler was holding onto Le Havre the race should have gone ahead I think.That messed up plenty horses chances,the right thing to do is null and void the race in my opinion.

i think the handler maybe had a hold on lh as his head was twisted towards him- Peters also said that

mr hawaii wrote:

durbs wrote:

Warren Laird wrote: I cant see a "False Start" all the gates opened at the same time. What I can see is the horse on the outside not jumping , should have been scratched . but not a false start. Starters flag was up .

I also couldn't see the false start Warren.All gates opened at the same time and Le Havre was slow away.Shouldn't have been a false start and Le Havre should have been a runner and not scratched either.Since when does a horse qualify to be scratched because it was slow away?Unless the handler was holding onto Le Havre the race should have gone ahead I think.That messed up plenty horses chances,the right thing to do is null and void the race in my opinion.

i think the handler maybe had a hold on lh as his head was twisted towards him- Peters also said that

Fair enough then they where right to call a false start if that happened.

Been following fonteyn for some time now so I'm hoping Kennedy can produce the goods to fire it home

durbs wrote:

mr hawaii wrote:

durbs wrote:

Warren Laird wrote: I cant see a "False Start" all the gates opened at the same time. What I can see is the horse on the outside not jumping , should have been scratched . but not a false start. Starters flag was up .

I also couldn't see the false start Warren.All gates opened at the same time and Le Havre was slow away.Shouldn't have been a false start and Le Havre should have been a runner and not scratched either.Since when does a horse qualify to be scratched because it was slow away?Unless the handler was holding onto Le Havre the race should have gone ahead I think.That messed up plenty horses chances,the right thing to do is null and void the race in my opinion.

i think the handler maybe had a hold on lh as his head was twisted towards him- Peters also said that

Fair enough then they where right to call a false start if that happened.

Even then , we have seen many races where the horse is impeded by a handler and slow , the race carries on and the review into the start is held 9/10 the horse is then scratched.

How can the who field - including first two favourites - have to start again because of a handler .

false start
noun
an invalid start to a race, usually due to a competitor beginning before the official signal has been given.

durbs wrote:

mr hawaii wrote:

durbs wrote:

Warren Laird wrote: I cant see a "False Start" all the gates opened at the same time. What I can see is the horse on the outside not jumping , should have been scratched . but not a false start. Starters flag was up .

I also couldn't see the false start Warren.All gates opened at the same time and Le Havre was slow away.Shouldn't have been a false start and Le Havre should have been a runner and not scratched either.Since when does a horse qualify to be scratched because it was slow away?Unless the handler was holding onto Le Havre the race should have gone ahead I think.That messed up plenty horses chances,the right thing to do is null and void the race in my opinion.

i think the handler maybe had a hold on lh as his head was twisted towards him- Peters also said that

Fair enough then they where right to call a false start if that happened.

but personally I think LH hates blinkers and I wonder if he passed stalls with them (and I backed him so would have loved him to run)

Centido forms the 3rd horse in my Yankee.
With Marcus stood down,,, what hope do I have though Gunter is an able substitute