Chief Stipe

As @curious pointed out they never spent enough to do it properly. Let alone fund yearly operational expenditure to keep them up to scratch. The Synthetic AWT's are a classic case of that. Large up front investment without sufficient revenue to fund operational expenses let alone the mandatory full renovation that needs to occur after 5 ro 8 years. Can't remember the exact time period. I'll give the trainers at Awapuni full credit - they were adamant they didn't want the money spent on the AWT instead on the existing racing and training tracks.

Then why would Entain in your words think that?

The Judges erred. How can removing your foot from the footrest and letting you leg hang and hit a horse be accidental? FFS why didn't they accidentally put it back immediately!

I was putting up a straw man because you were wanting consistency. If you make the penalties fixed you get nothing but consistency.

No camera on the otherside.

No camera on the other side.

How can it be Sha Tin? Ellerslie isn't a training centre and Ellerslie have gone for a customised StrathAyr with iconic bends.

Nearly all but a few could sustain consistent regular racing. How many have actually gone since the Messara Report? How many tracks do you need to support the number of horses in training?

Isn't that obvious?

That's nonsense. Given the number of horses in training there are more than ample racecourses. The issue is there are very few if any that don't have some issue. Not to mention the programming but that has nothing to do with abandonments! Unless of course you are being facetious AGAIN!

The point I was making is that the low end stakes HAVE increased. The issue is the skewing of the stakes distribution to the top end. A maiden stake in metro Victoria is $60k. Racing Victoria made the decision to reverse the trend and allocate more downwards.

What did I say that wasn't accurate?

But that has been going on since the first time Winston was made Minister For Racing. Entain are just continuing the trend albeit with the difference that the low end stakes have been uplifted.

There is a an old saying - "if you can't measure it it doesn't exist" (Lord Kelvin). How do you measure if a horse in the first 5 has been hit on their flank

Again the issue is consistency. If the Jockeys are unanimous in wanting to keep riding and or opportunity is given to any Jockey who doesn't want to continue to vacate their ride without penalty they why shouldn't a meeting progress? Haven't the Jockeys then accepted the risk? At the abandoned Hastings Guineas meeting I heard that most wanted to continue however a small number of the Jockeys said no. I doubt that NZTR or RIB have sought legal advice on workplace safety issues. Motorsport is inherently dangerous yet continues. Correct me if I'm wrong but how many serious injuries have been caused by a horse slipping? My observation is often accidents are caused by Jockey error, poor riding or a horse breaking down. However with regard to the Stipes reasoning for Matamata they felt riders couldn't rode competitively and therefore would challenge the integrity of betting. You could apply that last condition to some tracks every time they race!

Nothing to do with the Mesara Report. The issue is around consistency in the application of protocols or process in determining whether to abandon a meeting or not.

AMENDMENTS TO THE WHIP RULES (RULE 638(3)(c)) After very careful consideration, New Zealand Thoroughbred Racing has decided to make some changes to the Rules regarding the use of the whip. These changes were initiated by the International Federation of Horseracing Authorities to try to achieve consistency with the use of the whip by Jockeys over the world. As you will be aware, the use of the whip during a race is seen by many people as cruel and unless we take steps to change that perception we could face increasing opposition. The changes to the Rules are for the welfare of the horse, to demonstrate that we are serious about caring for our horses. The new Rules are intended to make sure that whips are not used in such a way that they cause unnecessary pain during a race. The changes to the Rules will come into effect next Wednesday (12th February). These changes are: The whip must not be used if you are not in contention of running in the first five placings. – The whip should only be used to get the best out of your horse when in contention. It is not a good look for horses out of contention to be getting hit with the whip. The whip must not be used on a horse’s flank. – The horse’s flank is a very sensitive area and getting hit there is painful. This area must be avoided. The whip must not be used forward of the saddle whilst it is held in the forehand position. – A horse’s shoulder, neck and head are also sensitive areas and should not be hit with any force. Tapping the shoulder using the whip in the downward position is ok. The whip must not be used in a manner which causes a welt and or injury. – Whips should be used for encouragement and not to cause injury. Injuries and welts may be seen by spectators or on television and makes racing look bad. In essence, most Jockeys will not have to make any changes to the way they use the whip currently, as it is not common for it to be used in a way which would breach the new Rules. The new Rules are to show that there is no intention to use the whip irresponsibly. The new Rules are not intended to collect more money in fines, the best outcome would be if no jockey was ever found guilty of breaking them. The rule amendments will be published shortly and will be available on the LoveRacing website. These are added to the existing rules, please check the rule book for all whip rules.

George Simon: We just want consistency trackside.co.nz The abandonment of the Matamata meeting on January 22nd after just three races, caused some controversy. Phelan The Power had won the first, In Haste, pictured above, had picked up her maiden victory in the second and then things all changed. Tempest Moon, ridden by leading apprentice Lily Sutherland, slipped free of interference with 250m to run. When I say it slipped it's probably understating the obvious. Calling the race, I was concentrating on the first few with Tempest Moon several lengths off the leaders and not really looking like a contender. However, the magnitude of the slip was enough to catch my attention. Immediately following the race, the dreaded track inspection took place. The usual delegation of jockeys, club officials and stewards were soon out inspecting the area where the slip occurred. In the meantime, I had watched several replays of the incident and was pretty sure we'd be going home. The upshot of course was the meeting was duly abandoned. As an expert Grandstand jockey, I wasn't surprised at that decision. Then the fun and games started. And it got rather interesting. The on-course Bush Telegraph soon had all sorts of rumours swirling around Matamata racecourse. I was reliably informed that the jockeys were willing to continue to ride, with the proviso that they would reassess their continued participation after each race. However, the Stewards vetoed that plan, in the interest of safety for horse and rider and pulled stumps on the day. The race day stewards report stated that the stewards were not convinced the riders would be riding competitively enough to fulfill their obligations to their owners and the betting racing public. Personally, I can see the argument for and against. Currently the Health and Safety Act ensures everyone errs on the side of caution. The ramifications of contravening those laws are obviously far reaching. My question though is all about consistency. I know that Matamata meeting was a low-key mid-week affair. But what if it was the TAB Karaka Millions night at Ellerslie? Complete with mega prize money, World Pool betting and huge International and local audience. Would the same outcome as Matamata prevail? Picture at the top of the page: In Haste powering away with her maiden victory in the Entain/NZB Insurance Pearl Series Race (1200m) at Matamata on January 22, the second of only three races that day. Photo: Kenton Wright (Race Images).

So why hasn't the Covid vaccine wizards created a vaccine for chickens? Surely a EUA could be granted that allows them to circumvent all the normal development and testing protocols. Or are Moderna and Pzifer waiting for the H1N1 pandemic in humans?

What if it isn't appealed? If the decision is appealed then stands then what?

How do you accidentally drop your foot from the foot rest and hit your horse with it?

If it isn't broken why do you keep banging on about it?

Why ask a question that you already know the answer to?

Westbury are running a business. They have high end products and low end products. Hard work being a private breeder not running it as a taxable entity. Otherwise you are relying on windfall luck.

Situation Normal Stewards video up.