race 4. auckland

[the galah]

Did that not look like a clear case of the horse that ran 2nd knocking over two thirds of the field. An inquiry,yet no change of placings,yet the 3rd,4th,and 5th horses all suffered bad interference.

Now,if the the dunn horse was not at fault, they must stand down and make the purdon runner trial before racing again,as that was a very bad incident. Of course we all know that won't happen,because there is no way anyone could say it wasn't the dunn runners fault.

[Richie]

1 hour ago, the galah said:

Did that not look like a clear case of the horse that ran 2nd knocking over two thirds of the field. An inquiry,yet no change of placings,yet the 3rd,4th,and 5th horses all suffered bad interference.

Now,if the the dunn horse was not at fault, they must stand down and make the purdon runner trial before racing again,as that was a very bad incident. Of course we all know that won't happen,because there is no way anyone could say it wasn't the dunn runners fault.

Unfortunately that's the way racing is going now.Can knock half the field out of the race and the stipes have to prove they would have beaten him.

[the galah]

28 minutes ago, Richie said:

Unfortunately that's the way racing is going now.Can knock half the field out of the race and the stipes have to prove they would have beaten him.

But it was so obvious that the horses interfered with lost so much ground,and all 3 were  within 1 length of the dunn horse at the finish. I think its more likely to be a case of either an incompetent jca or drivers saying the opposite of what the video evidence clearly shows. Thats generally how it works.

[Brodie]

Just a blatant stupid rule that needs addressing!

[the galah]

2 hours ago, Brodie said:

Just a blatant stupid rule that needs addressing!

Thats where you are wrong. The horse placed 5th could have been promoted to 4th,which is a dividend bearing placing.And what about the 3rd and 4th placed horses who lost significant ground because of the interference.

The stipes report says after speaking to S.phelan and B purdon they took the inquiry no further.

This stipes report is a total farce. An absolute joke.

It states they are to speak to B mangos about the interference he caused.

So the stipes say B mangos caused two thirds of the field to have their chances effected,including the 3rd,4th and 5th placed runners yet they only speak to brent mangos's good mates in scott phelan and barry purdon,who surprise ,surprise say don't worry about it.

Mickey Mouse would do a better job running the stipes up there.

Edited March 5, 2021 by the galah

[Brodie]

7 hours ago, the galah said:

Thats where you are wrong. The horse placed 5th could have been promoted to 4th,which is a dividend bearing placing.And what about the 3rd and 4th placed horses who lost significant ground because of the interference.

The stipes report says after speaking to S.phelan and B purdon they took the inquiry no further.

This stipes report is a total farce. An absolute joke.

It states they are to speak to B mangos about the interference he caused.

So the stipes say B mangos caused two thirds of the field to have their chances effected,including the 3rd,4th and 5th placed runners yet they only speak to brent mangos's good mates in scott phelan and barry purdon,who surprise ,surprise say don't worry about it.

Mickey Mouse would do a better job running the stipes up there.

Galah, where am I wrong?

The rule that you have to prove that you wouldve unquestionably beaten the horse that checked  you is blatantly dumb!

The Stipes just can not ge bothered having enquiries because it holds up racing, never mind getting the right answer!

[the galah]

52 minutes ago, Brodie said:

Galah, where am I wrong?

The rule that you have to prove that you wouldve unquestionably beaten the horse that checked  you is blatantly dumb!

The Stipes just can not ge bothered having enquiries because it holds up racing, never mind getting the right answer!

Well i guessed you would be referring to needing to be in a dividend bearing placing before you could protest.

What is truly ridiculous about the stipes report is they noted the 3rd and 4th horses suffered interference,yet didn't even bother to ask their drivers.

The stipes report noted 5th placed artisan lost  6 lengths. It also lost position and obviously took a knock,and only got beaten less than a length at the finish.

Who was  in charge,the stipes or B purdon and s phelan,who as i have stated are great mates of mangos. 

They just ignored all the video evidence.  

The point is it undermines the confidence connections and punters can have in the stipes who officiated  and highlights inconsistency based on who you are.

[eljay]

Due to covid restrictions it was a fairly inexperienced stipendiary panel harnesswise considering it was a premier meeting.     Only one of them a regular harness stipe and he fairly new to stiping.   

 

 

 

[the galah]

So the conclusion of the inquiry was the purdon trained horse artisan ran in and locked wheels. Well  a half wit would have realised that the reason it ran in was because the horse outside it was boring in badly on it,but somehow this seemed to have slipped past the stipes and those hearing this case. 

So what we have here is yet another bungled inquiry into driving tactics where the video evidence is ignored and they base their decision on what the drivers say. And the said drivers protect their mates. 

Do all those invoved in this decision really think those who follow harness racing are that stupid.  Well obviously they do. To me its stinks of dishonesty.

Edited March 13, 2021 by the galah

[eljay]

From this weeks report

 

Auckland TC - Friday, 5th March 2021
Race 4 - CROMBIE LOCKWOOD BL'STOCK DELIGHTFUL LADY CLASSIC MOB PACE
Stewards concluded the adjourned investigation into the incident entering the first turn. After hearing the relative evidence of S Phelan (ARTISAN), T Macfarlane (KACHING KACHING), B Mangos (DANCE TILL DAWN) and viewing the replays, it was established that ARTISAN had shifted inwards when racing to the inside of DANCE TILL DAWN and locked sulky stays with KACHING KACHING resulting in both these runners breaking. Blame could not be solely attributed to any individual driver or horse and no further action was taken other than to note the circumstances.
Trainer T Macfarlane advised Stewards on 11 March that KACHING KACHING had recovered well and would be continuing with its preparation.

[Gammalite]

17 hours ago, the galah said:

So the conclusion of the inquiry was the purdon trained horse artisan ran in and locked wheels. Well  a half wit would have realised that the reason it ran in was because the horse outside it was boring in badly on it,but somehow this seemed to have slipped past the stipes and those hearing this case. 

So what we have here is yet another bungled inquiry into driving tactics where the video evidence is ignored and they base their decision on what the drivers say. And the said drivers protect their mates. 

Do all those invoved in this decision really think those who follow harness racing are that stupid.  Well obviously they do. To me its stinks of dishonesty.

Is great that you want action for a , well it was a massive incident. 

But Eljays steward report above, is laying the blame on Artisan , which could be right. A two year old can race greenly anytime let alone while barrelling along, and  with Mangos pressuring and racing tight from the outside. Could very well of ducked in on KachingKaching.

And you answered the question yourself, about the tactics, i.e Because they are 'mates' you think covering the truth, why would he be squeezing them into a gallop DELIBERATELY anyway?  . because he probably wasn't. 

Very very few drivers would that , even to someone they 'Don't Like' to tell the truth. 

If you want to see some foul driving , check out the Tasmanian Cup last night , where the winner used tactics to knock Anthony Butt on the hot favourite out of the race at the start. Bloody disgrace. standing starts. pffffhhh

 

[the galah]

1 hour ago, Gammalite said:

Is great that you want action for a , well it was a massive incident. 

But Eljays steward report above, is laying the blame on Artisan , which could be right. A two year old can race greenly anytime let alone while barrelling along, and  with Mangos pressuring and racing tight from the outside. Could very well of ducked in on KachingKaching.

And you answered the question yourself, about the tactics, i.e Because they are 'mates' you think covering the truth, why would he be squeezing them into a gallop DELIBERATELY anyway?  . because he probably wasn't. 

Very very few drivers would that , even to someone they 'Don't Like' to tell the truth. 

If you want to see some foul driving , check out the Tasmanian Cup last night , where the winner used tactics to knock Anthony Butt on the hot favourite out of the race at the start. Bloody disgrace. standing starts. pffffhhh

 

Well the obvious answer to them saying it was a result of artisan hanging in is they should have stood that horse down,but of course they didn't because they never believed it was its fault.

You seem to be arguing mangos would not squeeze up his mates. Well you pointed out last month you thought A herlihy should have been dealt with when he came across on krug,checking those inside him. Using the "drivers wouldn't check their mates"  as a reason for justifying the decision is a weak argument.

 Drivers make errors of judgment,whether they be mates driving other horses is only relevant when it comes to giving evidence against mates. Like i said,those making these decisions take everyone who watched that race for being a mug,and that is why ones faith in those involved is undermined.

[Gammalite]

38 minutes ago, the galah said:

Well the obvious answer to them saying it was a result of artisan hanging in is they should have stood that horse down,but of course they didn't because they never believed it was its fault.

You seem to be arguing mangos would not squeeze up his mates. Well you pointed out last month you thought A herlihy should have been dealt with when he came across on krug,checking those inside him. Using the "drivers wouldn't check their mates"  as a reason for justifying the decision is a weak argument.

 Drivers make errors of judgment,whether they be mates driving other horses is only relevant when it comes to giving evidence against mates. Like i said,those making these decisions take everyone who watched that race for being a mug,and that is why ones faith in those involved is undermined.

Perhaps that's why they spoke to Barry? to ask about the horses progress, (already a proven winner Artisan) , I agree a trial wouldn't hurt before another raceday , as you don't want them going field-shy.

Of course Mangos was racing tight as still out 4 wide. He's driven a lot of races. He was driving a favoured runner from an awkward draw and was looking to press forward. Some were pushing through from the second row. No one there not trying to get a 'prominent' position with horse. Good on them. Still learning 2 year olds so Not surprised these things can happen? are you?

Herlihy was forced into the 'wrong' not by the horse, but the bloke who drew One was shoving his front legs up the inside of a horse inside Krug, to try and keep the trail . (sorry forget blokes name now but he went for a gallop) . Possibly AGH did technically cause it by tightening so should of got a penalty. The rules clearly state you have to be clear of horses legs inside you before crossing over. 

Of course you Don't bag your mates in the Stewards room? Just tell stewards it's horses fault . All good.

Of course yes, there are 'errors of judgement' as you said. only one can win. I've been impressed with the tactics lately. Esp. TELFER stable with multiple runners , getting them into positions to be best chance of winning, along with defeating "The Main opponent' everytime. 4 out of 4 wins last 2 Auckland meetings ! perfect !