Thomass Posted January 10, 2021 Author Share Posted January 10, 2021 2 hours ago, Reefton said: About six or seven weeks ago at Cromwell Mark Davidson spotted people on the track prior(and I mean about a minute before the start) to a race and held up the event while the idiots were cleared. It was top work on his part(and I told him so at Reefton) but did anyone make a big fuss? He possibly averted a tragedy unprecedented in NZ Racing by doing his job correctly(you could say the Club ought to have had an outside fence and/or security but regardless Mark did his job extremely well) Nobody is interested in that but it should be remembered. Yes I've had dealings with Davidson and agree he's very good... ...but again, checking the Track before racing is just part of the job description I'm afraid...there's often dogs on the Avondale track for example It surprises me there was no Stipe in the mounting yard in this instance...or they would have immediately sorted out Bottomley's confusion... ...and checked the brands in the ring...not at the start when it was too late Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomass Posted January 10, 2021 Author Share Posted January 10, 2021 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Thomass said: Absolutely, I often post with a positivity bent...and numerous items of interest... By it's nature chat sites are more slanted to controversy though and rigorous informed debate...and I pride myself on fact based rigour btw... As I said Harris took the rap on this...when it was a Jockey losing his mind...see bottom "Nobody died" is an awful cop out though... And so is "favouritism not justified"...that's irrelevant The overarching disgrace is the RIU rubber stamping the Vets appalling lack of professionalism in allowing a bleeding, injured horse to start... They clearly agreed with it, merely reporting the "Vet passed it fit" Which is totally against the Rules Yes mistakes happen but once recognised should be immediately ameliorated...that's the RIU's job... 'Just do their Job' should be their byline Mr Harris stated that Mr Bothamley could not swayed off the opinion that he was on the black horse, SERAPHIC, not the bay horse, WHIPPERSNAPPER. He said his insistence that he was not on the horse with the correct saddle and number on it confused everyone to the point that the horses were reweighed and resaddled with Mr Bothamley on the black horse as he insisted. He added that the right horses with the right saddles were presented initially but Mr Bothamley's insistence that he was riding the black horse led to a comedy of errors which led to further confusion and both horses being scratched at the start after being discovered that the riders, saddles and horses were incorrect. Edited January 10, 2021 by Thomass Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reefton Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 4 minutes ago, Thomass said: Yes I've had dealings with Davidson and agree he's very good... ...but again, checking the Track before racing is just part of the job description I'm afraid...there's often dogs on the Avondale track for example It surprises me there was no Stipe in the mounting yard in this instance...or they would have immediately sorted out Bottomley's confusion... ...and checked the brands in the ring...not at the start when it was too late The brands were checked and found correct in the ring(the outside parade ring/plate inspection area) you halfwit. It is quite clear the correct saddles and number cloths were initially on the right horses. If Bothamly insisted he was on the wrong horse then he ought to have been the one fined not Paul(though presumably Paul knew his two horses and who he had engaged so cannot see that as a likely excuse. In any case a quick check of the racebook would have resolved that) Of course the stipes are in the mounting yard and at the start but even at a small venue like Reefton there are a lot of horses milling about and impossible to watch everything plus you do not expect cockups like that 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freda Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 This is becoming tiresome, it's done and dusted now. However, from the horses' mouths, so to speak, as it happened; Mr Harris, having 3 runners, was assisted by two experienced horsemen to saddle up the two horses concerned. Done and all sorted. Appears a stable rep of the trainer who then insisted that the NUMBER CLOTHS were on the wrong horses. Despite the fact that the two men were positive all was kosher, they were required to swap the saddle cloths. Hence Bothamley's confusion, and then the subsequent swapping again around at the barriers. This was related to me by a close contact of the helpers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 14 minutes ago, Freda said: This is becoming tiresome, it's done and dusted now. Do you think I should ban him for the potential to incite a riot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freda Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 Just now, Chief Stipe said: Do you think I should ban him for the potential to incite a riot? Ahhh....might be entertaining though! Pissing everyone off isn't clever and destroys good debate. Less often works better... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reefton Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 2 minutes ago, Freda said: This is becoming tiresome, it's done and dusted now. However, from the horses' mouths, so to speak, as it happened; Mr Harris, having 3 runners, was assisted by two experienced horsemen to saddle up the two horses concerned. Done and all sorted. Appears a stable rep of the trainer who then insisted that the NUMBER CLOTHS were on the wrong horses. Despite the fact that the two men were positive all was kosher, they were required to swap the saddle cloths. Hence Bothamley's confusion, and then the subsequent swapping again around at the barriers. This was related to me by a close contact of the helpers. Agree it has gone on too long but that is an incorrect version. The horses presented to the brand checkers had the correct number cloths(I suppose it is possible they had the wrong saddles but that is not the story I heard). The two brand checkers are both old mates of mine and are not mugs but my initial reaction/concern was that there may have been an error in that area - they were adamant however that the brands matched the NZTR report they had. Neither of them would know the horse(s) concerned so would have relied on the brands matching the number cloth the horse was carrying. Clearly when the horses were taken away the number cloths were switched but my guys were never asked to and did not recheck the brands. A vastly more likely version is as I originally said - the wrong rider was legged up on the wrong horse then the confusion started. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 Its a classic case of one error leading to another escalating to unintended or unpredictable consequences. In this case it isnt ALL the RIU's fault. As for the Vet passing the horse fit to start that was his judgement call. Right or wrong it was his call on what he saw. You couldn't expect the RIU to override the Vet's advice. It is even conceivable that the horse wasn't even bleeding when inspected at the barrier. As you say Freda Thomass can be tiresome. FFS he is still litigating stuff that happened 3 seasons ago! Of course no positive posting of an improved protocol from him. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomass Posted January 10, 2021 Author Share Posted January 10, 2021 17 minutes ago, Reefton said: Agree it has gone on too long but that is an incorrect version. The horses presented to the brand checkers had the correct number cloths(I suppose it is possible they had the wrong saddles but that is not the story I heard). The two brand checkers are both old mates of mine and are not mugs but my initial reaction/concern was that there may have been an error in that area - they were adamant however that the brands matched the NZTR report they had. Neither of them would know the horse(s) concerned so would have relied on the brands matching the number cloth the horse was carrying. Clearly when the horses were taken away the number cloths were switched but my guys were never asked to and did not recheck the brands. A vastly more likely version is as I originally said - the wrong rider was legged up on the wrong horse then the confusion started. Haha this IS becoming tiresome! My entire point on this confusion is that the commotion that would have been obvious to EVERYONE in the mounting yard over this... ...should have caught the attention of the Stipe...OR he should have been summoned by connections to sort it out before both were unsaddled and re-weighed again...Shirley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomass Posted January 11, 2021 Author Share Posted January 11, 2021 24 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said: Its a classic case of one error leading to another escalating to unintended or unpredictable consequences. In this case it isnt ALL the RIU's fault. As for the Vet passing the horse fit to start that was his judgement call. Right or wrong it was his call on what he saw. You couldn't expect the RIU to override the Vet's advice. It is even conceivable that the horse wasn't even bleeding when inspected at the barrier. As you say Freda Thomass can be tiresome. FFS he is still litigating stuff that happened 3 seasons ago! Of course no positive posting of an improved protocol from him. Oh FFS! The report differentiated between "lacerations and cuts over the eye" A laceration is a jagged uneven slice through soft tissue...you think it wouldn't be bleeding?? Even if it wasn't....it can be read as being more substantial that a mere cut...which bleeds anyway Come in Pitty...did the horse require stitches or staples and was the cut through soft tissue or close to the facial bone unable to be stapled? FYI Horses CANNOT be raced with LACERATIONS End of.... Of course the RIU can override ANYONE's decision...especially if a Vet was too incompetent to pick up the bleeding Head wounds Which is AGAINST THE RULES ok? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reefton Posted January 11, 2021 Share Posted January 11, 2021 6 minutes ago, Thomass said: Haha this IS becoming tiresome! My entire point on this confusion is that the commotion that would have been obvious to EVERYONE in the mounting yard over this... ...should have caught the attention of the Stipe...OR he should have been summoned by connections to sort it out before both were unsaddled and re-weighed again...Shirley God you really are a bloody dick! I was there and the initial (incorrect)call was that the horses had been saddled wrongly(in fact they were mounted by the wrong riders. The riders reweighed and the saddles were then each placed on the wrong horse. The Club and the Stipes are entitled to expect that care would be taken to make sure the right gear was on the right horse the second time around. Clearly no particular check was done except that maybe it was David Wadley the Stipe at the start who identified that the riders were switched(as Matt Cross had said when they left the birdcage). The person responsible for making sure the right saddle is on the right horse is the trainer. The Stipes relied on the brand checkers to make sure the horses were correct and the brand checkers did their job correctly. Chief Stipe please terminate further posts to this thread! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted January 11, 2021 Share Posted January 11, 2021 15 minutes ago, Thomass said: Oh FFS! The report differentiated between "lacerations and cuts over the eye" Go FFS yourself. On the one hand you criticise the RIU for what you allege to be incompetence and then give them credit for knowing the medical definitions of the words laceration and cut. Which, not without some irony, you had to go Google! The Vet passed it fit - rightly or wrongly. The Stipe at the start didn't over rule - rightly or wrongly. The Starter didn't over rule - rightly or wrongly. End of story. Feel free to lodge an information or complaint yourself to the RIU. Let us know how you get on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomass Posted January 11, 2021 Author Share Posted January 11, 2021 8 minutes ago, Reefton said: God you really are a bloody dick! I was there and the initial (incorrect)call was that the horses had been saddled wrongly(in fact they were mounted by the wrong riders. The riders reweighed and the saddles were then each placed on the wrong horse. The Club and the Stipes are entitled to expect that care would be taken to make sure the right gear was on the right horse the second time around. Clearly no particular check was done except that maybe it was David Wadley the Stipe at the start who identified that the riders were switched(as Matt Cross had said when they left the birdcage). The person responsible for making sure the right saddle is on the right horse is the trainer. The Stipes relied on the brand checkers to make sure the horses were correct and the brand checkers did their job correctly. Chief Stipe please terminate further posts to this thread! Back at ya! NO Stipes are NOT entitled to expect anything! Thats why checks are done ffs... ..as soon as 'a call' went out to change saddles he should have been on the spot to sort it out before control was lost Basic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomass Posted January 11, 2021 Author Share Posted January 11, 2021 3 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said: Go FFS yourself. On the one hand you criticise the RIU for what you allege to be incompetence and then give them credit for knowing the medical definitions of the words laceration and cut. Which, not without some irony, you had to go Google! The Vet passed it fit - rightly or wrongly. The Stipe at the start didn't over rule - rightly or wrongly. The Starter didn't over rule - rightly or wrongly. End of story. Feel free to lodge an information or complaint yourself to the RIU. Let us know how you get on. I'm a HORSEMAN with over 20 years hands on experience.... I know and the RIU know what a LACERATION is ffs NO horses with fresh CUTS let alone LACERATIONS are allowed to start End of... Let it go Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted January 11, 2021 Share Posted January 11, 2021 1 minute ago, Thomass said: NO horses with fresh CUTS let alone LACERATIONS are allowed to start Which rule states that? Suggest you reference it when you file your complaint. By the way 20yrs midget pony handler at the circus doesn't really count as being a Horseman. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts