curious

Yeahh, and what is quoted in the Ryan article is actually in the context of his current team. That previous team members aren't mentioned by name in what Ryan quoted,is a mis-read of the article imo. It's just a bit that Ryan chose to quote, not necessarily all that he said or was asked about in the interview.

Still doing a bloody good job too from what I saw, especially when he gets the field 2 minutes pre-race and still has all the unfamiliar colours and names nailed! A few here could take notice.

Spurious question? I don't think motor sport has any animal welfare public perception issues.

Lol. Hope they weren't my colours! I have enough trouble keeping track of them. To be fair though I've seen lesser crowds on premier days at Ellerslie and that's with a $10 gate charge which is more than most race meetings command these days. Tucker looks better too. vlc-record-2024-12-20-05h16m19s-Rural New Zealand - S02 E02_2024 12 20_05 07 10_1_245.mp4-.mp4

No, but I might have a couple of rides lined up. Should win the first (without a whip!)

Still am and still trying to make it a better sport for both horses and human participants.

Yes. I agree but after 150 years, I doubt it's under any great threat.

A Finder survey of 1,008 respondents revealed 1 in 3 Australians (33%) – equivalent to almost 7 million people – have gambled on sporting events. The research found 1 in 7 (15%) gamble on sporting events at least once a week, 7% place a bet monthly, and 12% do so once in a while. Finder analysis reveals the average Aussie gambler spends a staggering $15,269 a year on sports betting – equating to almost $98 billion annually. Of those who gamble, 61% have put money on the Melbourne Cup – with the average punter predicted to fork out $85 on the race that stops the nation. If 33% of the population gamble on sporting events and 61% of those bet on the Melbourne Cup, that's 20% of the population by my calculations but feel free to keep making up figures to support your radical opinion.

Where on earth did you get that figure from?

Anyone hear what the jockeys thought of it?

Haha. Sharrock should probably have read the legislative net bill before he summarised it as he did.

I didn't say that no-one supported whip use or racing that includes whip use, but by way of perspective and reality 97,000 is about 0.4% of the population of Australia. What do the other 99.6% think. If you want to use biased data to support your fallacious argument, then good luck to you. I'll stick with mine.

https://www.facebook.com/reel/568323512653211

From their facebook page on Monday.

Nope. More subjective observation. Pretty sure the ones I had to step over trying to get to the rail to watch a race didn't see many races though. I doubt they would have been in a fit state to fill out a formal survey.

Because I love horses and the people involved with them, and want to not only do the best for them but what I can to preserve the game that both the horses and the humans involved also love. Ignoring human and animal welfare issues and the public acceptance of those will mean it won't survive here in the longer term. Did you listen to the interview with Mr Engelbrecht-Bresges the other day? He and those in other jurisdictions get it. NZ authorities don't yet, and by the time they do it may be too late.

A lot of them probably didn't watch a race or have a bet either. They were there for an event, not the horse racing.

McGreevy, P. D., Griffiths, M. D., Ascione, F. R., & Wilson, B. (2018). Flogging tired horses: Who wants whipping and who would walk away if whipping horses were withheld?. PloS one, 13(2), e0192843.

An earlier study in Australia found similar results. Of the 1,533 respondents from across the country, only 25% (113 women and 271 men) supported the whipping of racehorses.

Many of those aren't interested anyway. And did you miss this bit? 74% say it has, or will, impact their engagement with the sport. That's about the same level of public perception that got greyhounds shut down.

They also say they don't think there is a problem with the public perception. I wonder if they've bothered to do any surveys. Wouldn't that be a reasonable task for the new welfare department? This is from the latest British (BHA) one: The latest polling report shows: 39% of adults state that concerns about horse welfare discourage them from engaging with racing. The biggest welfare concerns are (in order of impact) deaths and injuries, perception of cruelty/use of the whip, and what happens to horses when they finish racing. of these: 74% say it has, or will, impact their engagement with the sport. 42% say they have either stopped engaging with racing or will stop in the future. This is not just a barrier to our future audiences, but our existing one as well. When asked what would improve their opinion, the public response cited limiting use of the whip (35%) and ensuring strong penalties are in place (35%) as the top two requirements. The most negative perceptions of the whip come from younger audiences, particularly those aged 18-34.

Do you mean with hands returned to reins between strikes?

As I've said, it should be hands on reins between strikes. Not only stop the cheating but also significantly improve the public perception.

I don't think there's any issues with NZTR. That is a good relationship as far as I know. They certainly give them plenty of trial dates. Also, I think they can apply for a one day licence which they originally said would probably be available once everything was up to snuff. But, they probably make more money today than they would from an industry day.