Brodie Posted August 23, 2020 Share Posted August 23, 2020 At last HRNZ have admitted the whip rule that they brought in without much thought was WRONG!! They were dickheads to have brought it in and leave it in as long as they have! Yes, everyone is saying “well done Brodie, you are on the money as per usual” No the rule isnt going to be perfect, but at this stage, it would appear to be more easily monitored and fairer! Still can not see what was wrong with the original rule though! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJ Flash Posted August 23, 2020 Share Posted August 23, 2020 (edited) 8 minutes ago, Brodie said: At last HRNZ have admitted the whip rule that they brought in without much thought was WRONG!! They were dickheads to have brought it in and leave it in as long as they have! Yes, everyone is saying “well done Brodie, you are on the money as per usual” No the rule isnt going to be perfect, but at this stage, it would appear to be more easily monitored and fairer! Still can not see what was wrong with the original rule though! I was wondering when you would see that directive from HRNZ and light up "WHIP AND REIN REGULATIONS On20thAugust 2020, the Board of Harness Racing New Zealand approved the new Whip and Rein Regulations,effective1stOctober 2020.After a number of discussions over the last 12 months with a working group comprising the North Island and South Island Trainers and Drivers’ representatives,Brodie, RIU, JCA, HRNZ management and Board members,it was decided to mirror the new Australian whip rules in our updated Whip and Rein Regulations.These Regulations take into consideration the welfare of the horse which is paramount, and reflects the need to maintain our social license. Additionally, having the same rules in both New Zealand and Australia will make the transition between countries for drivers far easier.The new Whip and Rein Regulations are attached. P Holden CEO Edited August 23, 2020 by JJ Flash 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basil Posted August 24, 2020 Share Posted August 24, 2020 11 hours ago, Brodie said: At last HRNZ have admitted the whip rule that they brought in without much thought was WRONG!! They were dickheads to have brought it in and leave it in as long as they have! Yes, everyone is saying “well done Brodie, you are on the money as per usual” No the rule isnt going to be perfect, but at this stage, it would appear to be more easily monitored and fairer! Still can not see what was wrong with the original rule though! Well yes, a horse-basher wouldn't, would he? But once again Brodie Basher, you don't seem to be agreeing with yourself. This change actually takes us closer to no use of the whip at all, which you are so vehemently against. Not only that, but if Oz is any indication we'll see far more drivers getting hit with fines and suspensions. Give it a couple of weeks and you'll be moaning more than Alison Mau. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hunterthepunter Posted August 24, 2020 Share Posted August 24, 2020 6 minutes ago, Basil said: Well yes, a horse-basher wouldn't, would he? But once again Brodie Basher, you don't seem to be agreeing with yourself. This change actually takes us closer to no use of the whip at all, which you are so vehemently against. Not only that, but if Oz is any indication we'll see far more drivers getting hit with fines and suspensions. Give it a couple of weeks and you'll be moaning more than Alison Mau. ar ar bom bom mr brush Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brodie Posted August 24, 2020 Author Share Posted August 24, 2020 1 hour ago, Basil said: Well yes, a horse-basher wouldn't, would he? But once again Brodie Basher, you don't seem to be agreeing with yourself. This change actually takes us closer to no use of the whip at all, which you are so vehemently against. Not only that, but if Oz is any indication we'll see far more drivers getting hit with fines and suspensions. Give it a couple of weeks and you'll be moaning more than Alison Mau. Basil, not that you will admit it, but HRNZ have finally seen sense! Brodie’s point the whole time was that the HRNZ rule was just plain stupid, by having a no. of taps or hits inside the final 400 metres. Nothing at all to do with bashing a horse, unless you can show me otherwise somewhere! It was ridiculous that drivers were getting fined and/or suspended for wanting to win due to tapping a horse 11 times!!!!!! This rule may not be perfect but at this stage it appears that it is a helluva lot better Than what has been in place! Basil, I am pleased that HRNZ has taken notice of Brodie and once again it has been proven that Brodie was on the money! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basil Posted August 24, 2020 Share Posted August 24, 2020 11 hours ago, Brodie said: Basil, not that you will admit it, but HRNZ have finally seen sense! Brodie’s point the whole time was that the HRNZ rule was just plain stupid, by having a no. of taps or hits inside the final 400 metres. Nothing at all to do with bashing a horse, unless you can show me otherwise somewhere! It was ridiculous that drivers were getting fined and/or suspended for wanting to win due to tapping a horse 11 times!!!!!! This rule may not be perfect but at this stage it appears that it is a helluva lot better Than what has been in place! Basil, I am pleased that HRNZ has taken notice of Brodie and once again it has been proven that Brodie was on the money! Brodie's Basher's modus operandi: (i) insist repeatedly that X is white (horses should be bashed) and (ii) when challenged, insist that X isn't really white at all (horses shouldn't really be bashed). It's like arguing with a Jansenist! What Brodie Basher wants to return us to: https://harness.hrnz.co.nz/gws/ws/r/infohorsews/wsd06x?Arg=hrnzg-Ptype&Arg=RaceVideo&Arg=hrnzg-rSite&Arg=TRUE&Arg=hrnzg-RacehdrID&Arg=216475 Arden Rooney never raced again after that week. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whiplash smile Posted August 25, 2020 Share Posted August 25, 2020 2 hours ago, Basil said: Brodie's Basher's modus operandi: (i) insist repeatedly that X is white (horses should be bashed) and (ii) when challenged, insist that X isn't really white at all (horses shouldn't really be bashed). It's like arguing with a Jansenist! What Brodie Basher wants to return us to: https://harness.hrnz.co.nz/gws/ws/r/infohorsews/wsd06x?Arg=hrnzg-Ptype&Arg=RaceVideo&Arg=hrnzg-rSite&Arg=TRUE&Arg=hrnzg-RacehdrID&Arg=216475 Arden Rooney never raced again after that week. Without rehashing this debate, Brodie has never promoted `BASHING` horses. Why do you always take someones opinion or perspective and then rephrase and exaggerate so its an extremist (black or white) point of view. People have differing opinions on this and clearly by the number of breaches by the Blue and White army would show that even the very best feel the need to exceed the limit in order to WIN THE RACE! The fact that this issues is being readdressed due to more being against it due to the consequences of the rule then for it (When it was only an appeasement to animal welfare groups who actually had no concern about this aspect of HR! ) means that to save face we endure another cryptic filled post from you filled with out of context statements and ONE example that according to should redefine the rules for all races. Well that approach has led us to this point, and I bet it wasn't Brodie who influenced this decision. Why you bother trying to appear like a scholar and of superior intelligence in your posts is beyond me when you cant even grasp the premise of the most simplest of point of views on most topics that offer a differing opinion to yours. BRODIE DOES NOT SUPPORT BASHING OF HORSES!!!! Just memorise that last line please Basil! BASIL SUFFERS FROM `DELUSIONS OF GRANDEUR!` AND SELF IMPORTANCE AND IS A SELF RENOWNED PHILOSOPHER!!!! Just remember that last line Brodie! This rule needed to be amended to ensure protection against some rouges whilst still providing a realistic base to ensure that the driver can still fulfill their obligation to win by actively encouraging their horse with whips `FLAYING THE AIR! or `HITTING THE SULKY!` Calling Brodie `Basher` really comes across as a feeble greasy weasel JJ flash like comment. Its weak like your pathetic references to anthropological figures in your posts whose ideas have nothing to do with the subject being discussed! Stop trying to hard! `Professor Plonk` , Just reading and listening at this moment might be best for you on this subject! No doubt you will reply ..aahhhhh! ...that reminds me of theAdams, Robt. Mc. 1966. The evolution of urban society. 1970. Crucifixion by power: Essays on Guatemalan national structure, 1944-1966. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noodlum Posted August 25, 2020 Share Posted August 25, 2020 I side with Brodie and Whiplash on this. Drivers got fined for hitting the sulky shaft and dust sheet FFS! 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noodlum Posted August 25, 2020 Share Posted August 25, 2020 1 hour ago, Noodlum said: I side with Brodie and Whiplash on this. Drivers got fined for hitting the sulky shaft and dust sheet FFS! Actually sorry for quoting my own post but I found with horses the THREAT of being hit was more of an inducement than Actually hitting a horse. Hence hitting the sulky shaft! Horses are no different to the rest of us most are lazy. The really good ones don't need to be hit because they have the will to win and give their best. A good driver/trainer knows that and doesn't hit those horses. BUT now they are likely to be fined for "not driving their horse out" whatever that means. The problem is that the "harness police" and the RIU have never had any hands on experience with horse's. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brodie Posted August 25, 2020 Author Share Posted August 25, 2020 Common sense has finally prevailed and not before time! The stupid rule was rushed thru by HRNZ and should not have been! They panicked when Oz banned the whip which did not happen and HRNZ have been left with egg on their faces! Great to see that it has been amended and reality is that Animal Rights have not got the harness whip use in their sights!! Basil, you have been totally wrong in everything you have said a out the whip rule, and I have never condoned a horse being bashed or injured from a whip! What I do say is that HRNZ need to sort their shite out before they lose total credibility! They now need to sort out the interference rule! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noodlum Posted August 25, 2020 Share Posted August 25, 2020 Yeah na. HRNZ are "holden, holding, Rawhide"! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basil Posted August 25, 2020 Share Posted August 25, 2020 19 hours ago, whiplash smile said: Without rehashing this debate, Brodie has never promoted `BASHING` horses. Why do you always take someones opinion or perspective and then rephrase and exaggerate so its an extremist (black or white) point of view. People have differing opinions on this and clearly by the number of breaches by the Blue and White army would show that even the very best feel the need to exceed the limit in order to WIN THE RACE! The fact that this issues is being readdressed due to more being against it due to the consequences of the rule then for it (When it was only an appeasement to animal welfare groups who actually had no concern about this aspect of HR! ) means that to save face we endure another cryptic filled post from you filled with out of context statements and ONE example that according to should redefine the rules for all races. Well that approach has led us to this point, and I bet it wasn't Brodie who influenced this decision. Why you bother trying to appear like a scholar and of superior intelligence in your posts is beyond me when you cant even grasp the premise of the most simplest of point of views on most topics that offer a differing opinion to yours. BRODIE DOES NOT SUPPORT BASHING OF HORSES!!!! Just memorise that last line please Basil! BASIL SUFFERS FROM `DELUSIONS OF GRANDEUR!` AND SELF IMPORTANCE AND IS A SELF RENOWNED PHILOSOPHER!!!! Just remember that last line Brodie! This rule needed to be amended to ensure protection against some rouges whilst still providing a realistic base to ensure that the driver can still fulfill their obligation to win by actively encouraging their horse with whips `FLAYING THE AIR! or `HITTING THE SULKY!` Calling Brodie `Basher` really comes across as a feeble greasy weasel JJ flash like comment. Its weak like your pathetic references to anthropological figures in your posts whose ideas have nothing to do with the subject being discussed! Stop trying to hard! `Professor Plonk` , Just reading and listening at this moment might be best for you on this subject! No doubt you will reply ..aahhhhh! ...that reminds me of theAdams, Robt. Mc. 1966. The evolution of urban society. 1970. Crucifixion by power: Essays on Guatemalan national structure, 1944-1966. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Ah, another one who attempts to defend the indefensible. And yet one doesn't need to have an IQ of 180 to realise that, regardless of one's own particular fetishes, the bashing of horses is one of the things that most turns other people off racing. No amount of abusing me will change that. It takes a special kind of brain to not only advocate for what's wrong, but also for what's contrary to one's own interests. No wonder racing is in such sorry shape. No mention of Arden Rooney I see... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whiplash smile Posted August 25, 2020 Share Posted August 25, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, Basil said: Ah, another one who attempts to defend the indefensible. And yet one doesn't need to have an IQ of 180 to realise that, regardless of one's own particular fetishes, the bashing of horses is one of the things that most turns other people off racing. No amount of abusing me will change that. It takes a special kind of brain to not only advocate for what's wrong, but also for what's contrary to one's own interests. No wonder racing is in such sorry shape. No mention of Arden Rooney I see... A:) He has nothing to defend B:) The whip rule was not about drivers or trainers fetishes! maybe that is why your posts are so confusing cause you are not on the same wavelength or have trouble with comprehension. C:) You will be boycotting HR again soon since its contrary to your interest. D:) As for arden rooney? should we ban every driver from using a whip cause of one specific example, Bit like Jacinda and the automatic weapons, Lets ban every driver cause of drunk drivers, Lets ban alcohol cause its responsible for %80 of all violent crime e.t.c E:) You obviously are not a classic HR fan. Rewind to mid eighties and compare the state of racing then compared to now, Why are they amending the rule? Did they not hear about arden rooney??? I doubt you watch and bet anyway, just wank and moan about anything as long as its a platform for you to pontificate and attention seek!!! Edited August 25, 2020 by whiplash smile mistake wi a,b,c,d,e 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brodie Posted August 25, 2020 Author Share Posted August 25, 2020 1 hour ago, Basil said: Ah, another one who attempts to defend the indefensible. And yet one doesn't need to have an IQ of 180 to realise that, regardless of one's own particular fetishes, the bashing of horses is one of the things that most turns other people off racing. No amount of abusing me will change that. It takes a special kind of brain to not only advocate for what's wrong, but also for what's contrary to one's own interests. No wonder racing is in such sorry shape. No mention of Arden Rooney I see... Basil, you are being blatantly ridiculous! Do you eat meat or are you Vegan? Do you watch sport? Rugby, League, Boxing, etc? All have violence involved? Do you drive a car? People killed in them! You have got no logical defense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basil Posted August 26, 2020 Share Posted August 26, 2020 23 hours ago, whiplash smile said: A:) He has nothing to defend B:) The whip rule was not about drivers or trainers fetishes! maybe that is why your posts are so confusing cause you are not on the same wavelength or have trouble with comprehension. C:) You will be boycotting HR again soon since its contrary to your interest. D:) As for arden rooney? should we ban every driver from using a whip cause of one specific example, Bit like Jacinda and the automatic weapons, Lets ban every driver cause of drunk drivers, Lets ban alcohol cause its responsible for %80 of all violent crime e.t.c E:) You obviously are not a classic HR fan. Rewind to mid eighties and compare the state of racing then compared to now, Why are they amending the rule? Did they not hear about arden rooney??? I doubt you watch and bet anyway, just wank and moan about anything as long as its a platform for you to pontificate and attention seek!!! Another hilarious little rant that manages to miss all its targets. When abuse is my only opponent, I know I've won the argument. And when I have you lecturing me on ‘comprehension’ and Basher presuming to teach me ‘logic’, I know I’m operating in a parallel universe. What’s next — HTP on grammar and spelling? Anyway, the matter is quite simple (for the nth time). All rules restricting the use of the whip are subjective. If one dislikes this subjectivity, then the only logical alternative is to get rid of the whip altogether. Anybody who rejects this and instead argues for a weakening of the rules reveals himself, ipso facto, to be a horse-basher. Just as importantly, that fact is revealed to the wider public. You obviously find this offensive, but, well, the truth is sometimes hurtful and no amount of bluster or non sequiturs is going to change it. End of. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hunterthepunter Posted August 26, 2020 Share Posted August 26, 2020 1 hour ago, Basil said: Another hilarious little rant that manages to miss all its targets. When abuse is my only opponent, I know I've won the argument. And when I have you lecturing me on ‘comprehension’ and Basher presuming to teach me ‘logic’, I know I’m operating in a parallel universe. What’s next — HTP on grammar and spelling? Anyway, the matter is quite simple (for the nth time). All rules restricting the use of the whip are subjective. If one dislikes this subjectivity, then the only logical alternative is to get rid of the whip altogether. Anybody who rejects this and instead argues for a weakening of the rules reveals himself, ipso facto, to be a horse-basher. Just as importantly, that fact is revealed to the wider public. You obviously find this offensive, but, well, the truth is sometimes hurtful and no amount of bluster or non sequiturs is going to change it. End of. your funny basil bible basher Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Sunrise Posted August 26, 2020 Share Posted August 26, 2020 What are the Australian rules on the whip? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whiplash smile Posted August 27, 2020 Share Posted August 27, 2020 5 hours ago, Basil said: Another hilarious little rant that manages to miss all its targets. When abuse is my only opponent, I know I've won the argument. And when I have you lecturing me on ‘comprehension’ and Basher presuming to teach me ‘logic’, I know I’m operating in a parallel universe. What’s next — HTP on grammar and spelling? Anyway, the matter is quite simple (for the nth time). All rules restricting the use of the whip are subjective. If one dislikes this subjectivity, then the only logical alternative is to get rid of the whip altogether. Anybody who rejects this and instead argues for a weakening of the rules reveals himself, ipso facto, to be a horse-basher. Just as importantly, that fact is revealed to the wider public. You obviously find this offensive, but, well, the truth is sometimes hurtful and no amount of bluster or non sequiturs is going to change it. End of. You can portray yourself as an intellectual but if you lack reason, common sense and logic your just a fucking idiot Basil!!! 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whiplash smile Posted August 27, 2020 Share Posted August 27, 2020 5 hours ago, Basil said: Another hilarious little rant that manages to miss all its targets. When abuse is my only opponent, I know I've won the argument. And when I have you lecturing me on ‘comprehension’ and Basher presuming to teach me ‘logic’, I know I’m operating in a parallel universe. What’s next — HTP on grammar and spelling? Anyway, the matter is quite simple (for the nth time). All rules restricting the use of the whip are subjective. If one dislikes this subjectivity, then the only logical alternative is to get rid of the whip altogether. Anybody who rejects this and instead argues for a weakening of the rules reveals himself, ipso facto, to be a horse-basher. Just as importantly, that fact is revealed to the wider public. You obviously find this offensive, but, well, the truth is sometimes hurtful and no amount of bluster or non sequiturs is going to change it. End of. The whip rule was NOT! subjective thats what the problem was! You miss the point because your obviously too excited too have an avenue to pontificate! Forget the soapbox! .. Get off the wine crate `Professor Plonk!`!!! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whiplash smile Posted August 27, 2020 Share Posted August 27, 2020 12 hours ago, Basil said: Anyway, the matter is quite simple (for the nth time). All rules restricting the use of the whip are subjective. If one dislikes this subjectivity, then the only logical alternative is to get rid of the whip altogether. Anybody who rejects this and instead argues for a weakening of the rules reveals himself, ipso facto, to be a horse-basher. Just as importantly, that fact is revealed to the wider public. You obviously find this offensive, but, well, the truth is sometimes hurtful and no amount of bluster or non sequiturs is going to change it. End of. All rules restricting the use of the whip are subjective. ??? are they??? all rules??? If one dislikes this subjectivity, then the only logical alternative is to get rid of the whip altogether. ??????? So if you dont agree the you just eliminate any debate???? DO YOU KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A FACT AND AN OPINION BASIL??? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whiplash smile Posted August 27, 2020 Share Posted August 27, 2020 (edited) 32 minutes ago, whiplash smile said: All rules restricting the use of the whip are subjective. ??? are they??? all rules??? If one dislikes this subjectivity, then the only logical alternative is to get rid of the whip altogether. ??????? So if you dont agree the you just eliminate any debate???? DO YOU KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A FACT AND AN OPINION BASIL??? Ipso facto? What facts? why quote that? It is only used by patients suffering from P.T.S.D? and medical register's! Your delusion greatly concerns me Basil!!! I am sorry Basil, all the best my friend. Edited August 27, 2020 by whiplash smile Deep Breath! 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.