Thomass Posted Sunday at 03:44 AM Share Posted Sunday at 03:44 AM JACKAROO has to go! Just as CARIGNAN goes up to w in the Jacka takes a bite out of the cheek and Cara gives up Gonnnnne 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curious Posted Sunday at 07:34 PM Share Posted Sunday at 07:34 PM JACKAROO (K Hercock) - Contacted by CARIGNAN over the final stages. Connections were advised that a warning had been placed on the gelding’s racing manners. Following the running of the race, Stewards lodged a protest alleging interference by the 1st placed JACKAROO which turned towards and made head contact with the 2nd placed CARIGNAN in an attempt to bite that runner. After hearing evidence from the Riders and Trainers of the respective horses and viewing all available footage, the Adjudicative Committee dismissed the protest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted Sunday at 07:56 PM Share Posted Sunday at 07:56 PM So it didn't 16 hours ago, Thomass said: takes a bite out of the cheek and Cara gives up ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Lane Posted Sunday at 08:59 PM Share Posted Sunday at 08:59 PM Surely blinkers on will fix the problem 😂 1 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curious Posted Sunday at 09:11 PM Share Posted Sunday at 09:11 PM Just gave it a kiss? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomass Posted Sunday at 10:52 PM Author Share Posted Sunday at 10:52 PM Absolute TRAVESTY! Lilly came from well behind and the side on shows her just moving ahead and forward of Hercock before the attack. Takes a nip and Cara with BO didn't see it coming but felt the ATTACK losing momentum I'm picking Dummy and Lilly refused to protest and that's why it was a Stewards instigated one That doesn't help at all in coming to the correct decision 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted Sunday at 11:11 PM Share Posted Sunday at 11:11 PM But didn't "take a bite out of its cheek" as you alleged. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomass Posted Sunday at 11:44 PM Author Share Posted Sunday at 11:44 PM of course it was a figurative bite its clear on the video nasty Lilly, Dummy and the owners got screwed Let's see the 'adjudicative' report but I'm betting me left Dummy told Lilly to stop reporting the truth "we dont want to be seen as sore losers" And they pleaded the 5th 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Lane Posted yesterday at 03:37 AM Share Posted yesterday at 03:37 AM 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murray Fish Posted yesterday at 04:14 AM Share Posted yesterday at 04:14 AM 4 hours ago, Thomass said: its clear on the video nasty Lilly, Dummy and the owners got screwed bollocks! 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted yesterday at 05:03 AM Share Posted yesterday at 05:03 AM 1 hour ago, Pete Lane said: Empire Rose did it in a Melbourne Cup if I recall correctly. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Lane Posted yesterday at 06:54 AM Share Posted yesterday at 06:54 AM 1 hour ago, Chief Stipe said: Empire Rose did it in a Melbourne Cup if I recall correctly. Don't remember that but likely. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomass Posted 2 hours ago Author Share Posted 2 hours ago So the 'report' is in and it makes for an INCOMPETENT read https://loveracing.nz/RaceInfo/53170/8/Race-Detail.aspx Look at the head on and judge for yourself before reading the fake news 'report' Prior to hearing submissions from the respective parties, the Stewards showed all available race films of the alleged incident and identified the runners. There was no rear view, which is often most useful. pfft, NO REAR VIEW CARIGNAN and JACKAROO were racing side by side down the home straight in a manner Mr Goodwin described as a “dog-fight”. Rubbish, C came from 1 1/2L behind down the straight... FASTEST 800, 600, 400, 200M sectionals of the race CARIGNAN was to the outside of JACKAROO and may have got slightly ahead. The side-on film showed that just prior to the finish, CARIGNAN changed stride, which was more than likely due to JACKAROO turning its head and attempting to bite. Definitely ahead, with Lilly's head advanced and visually looking to go on by, before the bite The head-on film showed the reason JACKAROO turned, and appeared to bite, was that CARIGNAN rolled in and made contact with JACKAROO. Mr Goodwin said this was a very unusual situation and a difficult decision to call. Ms Sutherland said prior to the incident, JACKAROO had moved outwards, but she admitted she had rolled inwards onto CARIGNAN. With a clear run, she thought she would have won the race. Mr Myers believed that JACKAROO had grabbed the bridle of CARIGNAN, causing him to change stride. At this point Lilly & Dummy should've pointed out JACKAROO veered out @5 widths down the straight And as John Oatham has stated 'no contact has to occur for interference to have taken place" The Rider of JACKAROO, Ms Hercock, agreed that there had been a dogfight down the straight between the two horses and explained how she was unable to use her whip, due to CARIGNAN rolling in on her horse, with about 25m to go. Poor JACKAROO, jock missed one whip strike in the last 25m after dictating C's line for the entire straight Mr Andrew explained that JACKAROO’s bridle had a cross-over noseband, which made it impossible for the horse to open its mouth and bite. He said while it turned towards the other horse, its mouth was closed and he believed that JACKAROO lost more momentum in the incident, than CARIGNAN. Ms Hercock agreed that her horse did not bite the bridle of the other horse. Who cares if it was a bite, the point being the interference sent C off stride while advanced and then behind after the attack Reasons for Decision In accordance with the requirements of the Protest Rule, the Adjudicative Committee must firstly establish that interference occurred; and secondly, if interference is established, the horse interfered with would have beaten the other runner, had such interference not occurred. After reviewing video footage and hearing submissions, the Adjudicative Committee observed that both horses deviated slightly from a straight line at different points in the home straight, prior to the incident. Absolute garbage, 5 widths is NOT slight with almost all of the interference caused by J This is not uncommon in racing and did not constitute interference. Just prior to the incident, there was adequate space between the two horses. However, while JACKAROO maintained a straight line, Pfft, J maintained a straightish line for only 25M up the entire straight! CARIGNAN rolled inward, making contact with JACKAROO. JACKAROO reacted by turning its head towards CARIGNAN, appearing to give a warning nip approximately 4 strides from the finish. Mr Andrew provided evidence that JACKAROO was wearing a crossover noseband, preventing it from opening its mouth fully. Video evidence supported that JACKAROO attempted to nip CARIGNAN when its space was invaded, but did not actually bite the face or grab CARIGNAN’s bridle. Biting/ nip irrelevant Given the mutual involvement of both horses in the incident—CARIGNAN’s inward movement preventing Ms Hercock from using the whip, and JACKAROO’s retaliation causing CARIGNAN to change stride—it is not clear that either horse was significantly disadvantaged to the extent that it affected the finishing order. More garbage, 1 strike v carting C out 5 widths down the straight while biting and behind C at the time Considering the complexity and unusual nature of the incident, as noted by Mr Goodwin, the Adjudicative Committee concluded that there were insufficient grounds to justify altering the original race result. Vastly experienced Goodwin FAILS to point out the bleedin' obvious of @ a 5 width drift and his boss's ruling "no contact needs to be made for interference to occur" Fastest 8,6,4,200M splits, comes 1 1/2L from behind, hits the lead and still loses A minor race but this rubbish could happen in vital black type racing without appeal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gammalite Posted 1 hour ago Share Posted 1 hour ago Well horses are trainable . We train our dogs, we train our staff, you can even train the bloody cat to do tricks if you're patient enough. So yes , things like Blinkers help . (whether you guys say so or not) chuck em' on the biting horse even. FOCUS is the Key. (The Focus is horse and rider getting to the winning post in the highest possible finishing position) It's why we continually have this massive Whip debate too ??? 🙄 But whips help with FOCUS . (whether you guys say so or not) I'd be giving that biting horse a 'hard as I can' Clot over the nose with the whip at that moment in time , so it 'knows' not to bite when the idea crosses it's mind next time. Dogs will fight if you let them. Stallions get quite nippy more than most . (probably why we geld a heap of the Standardbreds lol) Just like people really 😂. Have a look at this thread lol. Should just give you blokes some blinkers and whips and cut you loose. Strongest man with best FOCUS would/should win 🤣. ( but no biting please) FOCUS the key lol. 😋 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Lane Posted 1 hour ago Share Posted 1 hour ago 44 minutes ago, Thomass said: So the 'report' is in and it makes for an INCOMPETENT read https://loveracing.nz/RaceInfo/53170/8/Race-Detail.aspx Look at the head on and judge for yourself before reading the fake news 'report' Prior to hearing submissions from the respective parties, the Stewards showed all available race films of the alleged incident and identified the runners. There was no rear view, which is often most useful. pfft, NO REAR VIEW CARIGNAN and JACKAROO were racing side by side down the home straight in a manner Mr Goodwin described as a “dog-fight”. Rubbish, C came from 1 1/2L behind down the straight... FASTEST 800, 600, 400, 200M sectionals of the race CARIGNAN was to the outside of JACKAROO and may have got slightly ahead. The side-on film showed that just prior to the finish, CARIGNAN changed stride, which was more than likely due to JACKAROO turning its head and attempting to bite. Definitely ahead, with Lilly's head advanced and visually looking to go on by, before the bite The head-on film showed the reason JACKAROO turned, and appeared to bite, was that CARIGNAN rolled in and made contact with JACKAROO. Mr Goodwin said this was a very unusual situation and a difficult decision to call. Ms Sutherland said prior to the incident, JACKAROO had moved outwards, but she admitted she had rolled inwards onto CARIGNAN. With a clear run, she thought she would have won the race. Mr Myers believed that JACKAROO had grabbed the bridle of CARIGNAN, causing him to change stride. At this point Lilly & Dummy should've pointed out JACKAROO veered out @5 widths down the straight And as John Oatham has stated 'no contact has to occur for interference to have taken place" The Rider of JACKAROO, Ms Hercock, agreed that there had been a dogfight down the straight between the two horses and explained how she was unable to use her whip, due to CARIGNAN rolling in on her horse, with about 25m to go. Poor JACKAROO, jock missed one whip strike in the last 25m after dictating C's line for the entire straight Mr Andrew explained that JACKAROO’s bridle had a cross-over noseband, which made it impossible for the horse to open its mouth and bite. He said while it turned towards the other horse, its mouth was closed and he believed that JACKAROO lost more momentum in the incident, than CARIGNAN. Ms Hercock agreed that her horse did not bite the bridle of the other horse. Who cares if it was a bite, the point being the interference sent C off stride while advanced and then behind after the attack Reasons for Decision In accordance with the requirements of the Protest Rule, the Adjudicative Committee must firstly establish that interference occurred; and secondly, if interference is established, the horse interfered with would have beaten the other runner, had such interference not occurred. After reviewing video footage and hearing submissions, the Adjudicative Committee observed that both horses deviated slightly from a straight line at different points in the home straight, prior to the incident. Absolute garbage, 5 widths is NOT slight with almost all of the interference caused by J This is not uncommon in racing and did not constitute interference. Just prior to the incident, there was adequate space between the two horses. However, while JACKAROO maintained a straight line, Pfft, J maintained a straightish line for only 25M up the entire straight! CARIGNAN rolled inward, making contact with JACKAROO. JACKAROO reacted by turning its head towards CARIGNAN, appearing to give a warning nip approximately 4 strides from the finish. Mr Andrew provided evidence that JACKAROO was wearing a crossover noseband, preventing it from opening its mouth fully. Video evidence supported that JACKAROO attempted to nip CARIGNAN when its space was invaded, but did not actually bite the face or grab CARIGNAN’s bridle. Biting/ nip irrelevant Given the mutual involvement of both horses in the incident—CARIGNAN’s inward movement preventing Ms Hercock from using the whip, and JACKAROO’s retaliation causing CARIGNAN to change stride—it is not clear that either horse was significantly disadvantaged to the extent that it affected the finishing order. More garbage, 1 strike v carting C out 5 widths down the straight while biting and behind C at the time Considering the complexity and unusual nature of the incident, as noted by Mr Goodwin, the Adjudicative Committee concluded that there were insufficient grounds to justify altering the original race result. Vastly experienced Goodwin FAILS to point out the bleedin' obvious of @ a 5 width drift and his boss's ruling "no contact needs to be made for interference to occur" Fastest 8,6,4,200M splits, comes 1 1/2L from behind, hits the lead and still loses A minor race but this rubbish could happen in vital black type racing without appeal You must have way too much time on your hands. Another load of garbage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted 1 hour ago Share Posted 1 hour ago 1 hour ago, Thomass said: Who cares if it was a bite, the point being the interference sent C off stride while advanced and then behind after the attack Right so now you are saying the horses DIDN'T take a piece out of its cheek!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted 1 hour ago Share Posted 1 hour ago 42 minutes ago, Pete Lane said: You must have way too much time on your hands. Another load of garbage. Every sport needs a historian. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.