G'day Punter!

In this Discussion

Who's Online

0 Members & 27 Non Members

Comments

  • LuckyLongshotsLuckyLongshots    4,270 posts
    said:

    I'm under no illusions that our carnival could ever surpass the Melbourne or Sydney carnivals, but I think it would be a damn shame if one controversial decision was to undo all the hard work put in by everyone connected with racing in WA.

    It won't - money is too good for anyone not to come with a half decent horse!

    Ortensia has won two Winterbottoms, and doesn't seem to get to top gear here - if you're good enough you'll take home a nice cheque!
  • DamienWyerDamienWyer    8,014 posts
    couple of the comments on here are actually qutie funny

    http://twitter.com/#!/rtralphy
  • DarkDark    909 posts
    said:

    said:

    said:

    said:

    no way that could logically be upheld, even if there was doubt.
    but it's wa so you have to expect these sorts of things.
    absolutely ridiculous.

    and how can one back it up with fact??
    fact of what?

    watch the race again

    well the idiot had it on computer as soon as it was run.
    the idiot can watch it frame by frame.
    speed it up.
    slow it down.
    do whatever he wishes to do with it, and after all that and watching it a zillion times, then the idiot still says it should not have been upheld.

    it's a perfect example of why relegation should happen, and i would have been perfectly happy for it have been relegated, but those rules don't apply to australia.
    so using what we have.....it was a farcical decision.
    are you calling yourself an idiot?

    Fact is McEvoy moved out when not 2 lengths clear
    Fact is W S stumbled badly
    Fact McEvoy clearly looks around after the interference
    Fact is WS causes interference to Ranger and then L G
    Fact is McEvoy Pleads GUILTY

    what did you not see?
    Facy is McEvoy pleaded GUILTY
    It took a while but finally an intelligent post on this thread.

    WD P_B - some facts to support your argument.
  • careycarey    6,424 posts
    you've lost me forever smart arse.

    the only footage that goes close to showing it was shown after chui entered the room, and yes i have it all on computer.
    before ws checked hr was half a horse off the rail, after ws was checked it was still a half horse off the rail.
    sure mcevoy shifted out a long way, but it was AFTER the event.
    if he did cause it it was only minor, and it's inconclusive.
  • PieManPieMan    271 posts
    I honestly believe that Kerrin McEvoy received such a harsh penalty to back up their terrible decision.
    I'm all for wanting a West Australian horse winning our big one, but on his own merits.
    There was no visual evidence that it was caused by McEvoy. It was all assumption. That decision will stain Perth Racing.
    It's a shame, because they put on a great meet, it was just ruined by that it will only be remembered by that decision.

    By the way, Load Up, that was a great post.
  • careycarey    6,424 posts
    said:

    I honestly believe that Kerrin McEvoy received such a harsh penalty to back up their terrible decision.
    I'm all for wanting a West Australian horse winning our big one, but on his own merits.
    There was no visual evidence that it was caused by McEvoy. It was all assumption. That decision will stain Perth Racing.
    It's a shame, because they put on a great meet, it was just ruined by that it will only be remembered by that decision.

    By the way, Load Up, that was a great post.

    and i could say to pie man......finally......an intelligent post. :roll:
  • DarkDark    909 posts
    said:

    you've lost me forever smart arse.

    the only footage that goes close to showing it was shown after chui entered the room, and yes i have it all on computer.
    before ws checked hr was half a horse off the rail, after ws was checked it was still a half horse off the rail.
    sure mcevoy shifted out a long way, but it was AFTER the event.
    if he did cause it it was only minor, and it's inconclusive.


    Im not saying which way the protest should have gone, what im saying is, P_B is the only one who has turned up to this debate with some facts to support his argument.
  • ChesterChester    76 posts
    I bumped in to the Pie Man in the mounting yard yesterday.
    I think he mistook our jockey for his.
    He was very excited to meet Kerrin McEvoy and greeted him with "Hi my name is Kerrin too"
    The Pie Man will now forever be known as "Fan Boy"

    Controversy aside (that will be short lived) it was a great day at the track.
  • HotJulesHotJules    236 posts
    I backed HR and was spewing when the protest was upheld - don't we always.
    That said I think the stewards got it right and looking at the pics it is amazing to see HR suddenly in clear galloping room on the outside of them ready to rock'n'roll.
    No jockey can endanger those around them and cost another horse its true winning chance. McKevoy has pleaded guilty to this and I think that speaks volumes. Not this rubbish he pleaded guilty to lighten the penalty.
    Good decidion by the WA stewards because as I see it LG would have given HR windburn without the interference.
  • TheDivaTheDiva    13,248 posts
    this from thoroughbred village. not sure who wrote it but was listening to racing radio this morning and the announcer mentioned it. It is well written:

    By jcinque, 20 Nov 2011 jcinque is a Roar Guru


    It could?ve been a hallmark day in the history of Perth Racing but instead the reversal of the Railway Stakes result has marred the inaugural Super Saturday at Ascot and reminded everyone of racing?s place in the Australian sporting spectrum.

    The Railway Stakes is the most prestigious horse race in Western Australia. And it headlines a truly wonderful race meeting; easily the best day?s racing in the West. But yesterday?s meeting at Ascot turned out to be a horrible momentum killer for racing in Perth.

    Instead of being remembered as the crowning glory for up-and-coming miler He?s Remarkable and his kiwi trainer Roger James, yesterdays star-studded Super Saturday meeting will be remembered for one of the worst decisions in Australian horse racing history ? and it happened in front of a record crowd of over 20000 people.

    Luckygray won the Railway Stakes in the stewards room.

    His jockey, Shaun O?Donnell argued like a seasoned barrister to have the result of the 1600 metre handicap over-turned and after 45 minutes of deliberations and the calling of evidence from a number of jockeys, O?Donnell?s successful protest was upheld.

    The decision was greeted with an elated clap of the hands from the successful jockey.

    But as a bemused Kerrin McEvoy looked on, having just realised that the one million dollar race had eluded him, the outrage at the reversal of the result was far-reaching.

    In fact, so unbelievable was it, many people that backed eventual winner Luckygray were more bemused than happy when learning of the result.

    You see, in upholding the protest the Racing and Wagering Western Australia stewards were attributing a series of at least five events to the reckless riding of McEvoy aboard the relegated He?s Remarkable.

    When the Marco Chui steered Big Ted knuckled at the 600 metre mark it sparked a series of events that occurred in a domino effect.

    Waratah?s Secret almost fell before recovering, quite unbelievably, to finish fourth. The pre-race favourite Ranger was badly inconvienced, as was Luckygray.

    Luckygray eventually got clear before steaming home into a closing second-place finish.

    Both O?Donnell aboard Luckygray and Paul Harvey (Waratah?s Secret) fired in protests against McEvoy and He?s Remarkable.

    It is quite rare for the basis of a protest to be formed around alleged, indirect interference and therefore it seemed unlikely that either protest would be upheld because, in any case, most protests are dismissed.

    Both O?Donnell and Harvey had to prove the interference was caused completely by He?s Remarkable and cost both mounts at least the margin they were defeated by.

    Video footage of the race proved inconclusive when it was time to determine whether McEvoy was responsible for the initial interference.

    Vision also showed another runner voluntarily shifted into the path of Waratah?s Secret, seemingly contributing significantly to the interference suffered by both Waratah?s Secret and Luckygray.

    The protest from the fourth-placegetter was never going to be upheld ? the margin between first and fourth too great.

    But it seemed it would be incredibly difficult to award the race to Luckygray as well.

    Because on the patrol footage available what became clear was a series of circumstances, all of them not necessarily caused by McEvoy, contributed to the interference suffered by Luckygray.

    But alas the decision was announced and Luckygray was awarded the race.

    If race-goers were completely confused by those happenings then they would?ve been bemused at the amateurism of what happened next.

    As the runners for the Group 1 Winterbottom Stakes ? a race which Black Caviar was to contest before a decision was made to spell ? headed to barriers some 15 minutes after the advertised starting time, jockeys were asked to dismount from their horses and mill around behind the barriers while the presentation of the Railway took place.

    Absolutely perplexing. Not to mention, embarrassing.

    Here we have a Group 1 race running several minutes behind time, delayed at the eleventh hour by a presentation that no doubt would?ve contained some very boring speeches ?because in racing all post-race presentations do.

    Surely the Railway presentation could?ve been shortened or, better still, conducted after the running of the Winterbottom.

    So with some of the runners melting in the heat (the McEvoy ridden Rarefied sweating up the worst before the start), the formalities for the infamous Railway concluded.

    Ortensia won the Winterbottom for Craig Williams and Paul Messara in stunning fashion but her breakthrough Group 1 win was overshadowed by the continued debate about the result of the Railway ? again putting a dampener on proceedings.

    The final event was postponed too. Those hardy souls that stayed for all ten races were there for the first event at 11am and would?ve left the racecourse at close to 6pm after the last.

    Good luck getting the first-time racegoers back next time.

    If they weren?t confused or offended by the result of the Railway, then having to wait ten minutes for the Winterbottom while a presentation concluded will keep them away next time.

    And if that isn?t enough to make them think twice, perhaps the seven hours it, unnecessarily I might add, takes to conduct a meeting will.

    So after shaping up as a major building block for racing in Western Australia, Perth?s first Super Saturday was soddened by the Railway Stakes decision and at the same time everyone was reminded that racing is the same, poorly-administrated sport that it always has been.

    30 years behind them 30 years ago, 30 years behind them now.
  • careycarey    6,424 posts
    said:

    said:

    you've lost me forever smart arse.

    the only footage that goes close to showing it was shown after chui entered the room, and yes i have it all on computer.
    before ws checked hr was half a horse off the rail, after ws was checked it was still a half horse off the rail.
    sure mcevoy shifted out a long way, but it was AFTER the event.
    if he did cause it it was only minor, and it's inconclusive.


    Im not saying which way the protest should have gone, what im saying is, P_B is the only one who has turned up to this debate with some facts to support his argument.
    he didn't offer fact. when he said that chui looked around he brushed it off.
    then he come around and says that mc evoy looked around ....well he didn't look around at all.
    so the facts are not fact at all.
    and you have still lost me forever
    i don't mind a good debate, but you go the person.
  • DarkDark    909 posts
    Carey - on reflection there was one post i made in pure frustration (that you couldn't understand the point of the thread) which was a touch out of line, for that post I apologize.
  • motivatedmotivated    334 posts
    said:

    I backed HR and was spewing when the protest was upheld - don't we always.
    That said I think the stewards got it right and looking at the pics it is amazing to see HR suddenly in clear galloping room on the outside of them ready to rock'n'roll.
    No jockey can endanger those around them and cost another horse its true winning chance. McKevoy has pleaded guilty to this and I think that speaks volumes. Not this rubbish he pleaded guilty to lighten the penalty.
    Good decidion by the WA stewards because as I see it LG would have given HR windburn without the interference.

    Your kidding yourself in regards to the guilty plea.
  • lets_elopelets_elope    299 posts
    The whole point of the argument is that there is no way known the steward could conclusively prove that McEvoy was

    A)entirely responsible for the severity of the interference to Waratah's Secret which he clearly wasnt as there was pressure from his outside at the time

    B)they also have to be able to conclusively prove that Luckygray was going to get past He's Remarkable.

    They were able to prove neither and yet incredibly had the audacity to uphold the protest in Group 1 with millions riding on the outcome based upon an assumption supported by no facts whatsoever.

    If Luckygray was going to rush past He's Remarkable as some claim, his momentum would have carried him past He's Remarkable after the line yet at no stage did he get past He's Remarkable after the line.

    They've opened up a massive can of worms that they won't be able to put the lid back on easily if at all.

    Just wait until the first incident of a jockey dramatically slowing the field in front and causing a chain reaction back through the field causing severe interference to a heavily backed runner who then charges homes into second place, on paper a certainty btn by interference caused by the leader and winner so logically the rider will lodge a protest and then watch it be just as quickly dismissed for the usual reasons namely that it is put in the too hard basket.

    Lets add another degree of difficulty to this scenario what happens if the rider on the leader call it horse A which now doesn't win the race crosses and slightly tightens the previous leader Horse B which over reacts badly causing a chain reaction which the horse racing in fifth position Horse C is flattened.
    Horse C loses three or four lengths in the process, it picks itself up as does Horse B the previous leader and starts to work back into the race.

    The prior leader Horse B in the straight gradually works past horse A that crossed a fraction too tightly and sets up a margin and holds the fast finishing and luckless second placed Horse C the one that was flattened by the winner overreacting badly, that's still referred or indirect interference that has materially affected the result and a number of horses chances in the race what on earth happens then geniuses.
  • said:

    The whole point of the argument is that there is no way known the steward could conclusively prove that McEvoy was

    A)entirely responsible for the severity of the interference to Waratah's Secret which he clearly wasnt as there was pressure from his outside at the time

    B)they also have to be able to conclusively prove that Luckygray was going to get past He's Remarkable.

    They were able to prove neither and yet incredibly had the audacity to uphold the protest in Group 1 with millions riding on the outcome based upon an assumption supported by no facts whatsoever.

    If Luckygray was going to rush past He's Remarkable as some claim, his momentum would have carried him past He's Remarkable after the line yet at no stage did he get past He's Remarkable after the line.

    They've opened up a massive can of worms that they won't be able to put the lid back on easily if at all.

    Just wait until the first incident of a jockey dramatically slowing the field in front and causing a chain reaction back through the field causing severe interference to a heavily backed runner who then charges homes into second place, on paper a certainty btn by interference caused by the leader and winner so logically the rider will lodge a protest and then watch it be just as quickly dismissed for the usual reasons namely that it is put in the too hard basket.

    Lets add another degree of difficulty to this scenario what happens if the rider on the leader call it horse A which now doesn't win the race crosses and slightly tightens the previous leader Horse B which over reacts badly causing a chain reaction which the horse racing in fifth position Horse C is flattened.
    Horse C loses three or four lengths in the process, it picks itself up as does Horse B the previous leader and starts to work back into the race.

    The prior leader Horse B in the straight gradually works past horse A that crossed a fraction too tightly and sets up a margin and holds the fast finishing and luckless second placed Horse C the one that was flattened by the winner overreacting badly, that's still referred or indirect interference that has materially affected the result and a number of horses chances in the race what on earth happens then geniuses.

    After the line has nothing to do with anything, the race stops at the winning post
  • ICEICE    683 posts
    The best horse won on the day tote Fav end of story would love a rematch with the Kiwi a match race set weights would blow it away by 5 lengths
  • thefalconthefalcon    20,505 posts
    who would blow who away, ice. your comment was a bit confusing. :?
  • TheFunksterTheFunkster    3,840 posts
    Thank god these stewards don't preside over charges in a court of law.
    Circumstantial, inconclusive evidence to say the least. Benefit of doubt should remain with the first horse past the post.
    Of course Chui is going to say he didn't shift it - he doesn't want to get a 4 week holiday too!
  • TheDivaTheDiva    13,248 posts
    This article from the West.

    What I dont understand is why isnt Paul Harvey's evidence crucial here? If the patrol film didnt show enough footage, surely Harvey could have given evidence as to whether Big Ted contributed to the interference? No one has said anything about the Pontiff's evidence?

    Kiwi trainer says He's Remarkable was robbed

    New Zealand trainer Roger James believes there was insufficient patrol film evidence for stewards to strip He's Remarkable of the Railway Stakes.

    He's Remarkable lost the $1 million feature in the stewards room after jockeys Shaun O'Donnell, rider of initial runner-up Luckygray, and Paul Harvey, who was aboard fourth-placed Waratah's Secret, fired in protests alleging indirect and direct interference at the 600m.

    Stewards dismissed Harvey's objection but controversially upheld O'Donnell's protest, agreeing that He's Remarkable had shifted out approaching the home turn and his actions had caused interference to several runners.

    Jockey Kerrin McEvoy pleaded guilty to careless riding and was banned for 28 days.

    Rogers claimed the evidence from the patrol film was inconclusive as to whether He's Remarkable or Big Ted, who was on his horse's outside, were to blame for the severe interference which saw several runners shunted back through the field in a chain reaction.

    McEvoy claimed Big Ted shifted in at the same time as he shifted out on He's Remarkable, but when questioned by stewards, Marco Chui denied his horse had shifted any ground.

    "It was pretty cutting," James said yesterday. "Everybody in this type of circumstance tries to defend their own bit of territory.

    "In this case there was very little evidence to suggest that it was our horse shifting out that caused Waratah's Secret to clip heels.

    "I would have thought in a Group 1 race it has to be compelling evidence to take away the race from the winner.

    "There was no evidence on the film that showed it was our horse who that horse clipped. They stewards didn't seem to want to know Big Ted shifted in, too.

    "Also, the rider of Waratah's Secret was riding hard to hold his position.

    "As we know when you are throwing the reins at a horse that horse can go offline itself and maybe he caused his own interference.

    "The patrol film quality in other places is much superior to what I saw on Saturday."

    He's Remarkable will now fly home for a well-earned rest and be prepared for the Doncaster Handicap (1600m) on April 21.

    "I feel sorry for the horse more than anything," James said.

    He's Remarkable lost the 2000 Guineas in NZ by a nose after trailing by four lengths when the jockey's whip broke. The winner, Jimmy Choux, won horse of the year in NZ.

    The Pentire four-year-old didn't get into the Emirates Stakes but in an earlier race, ran almost identical sectionals to the winner, who carried 6kg less.

    Now "he comes here and gets this Group 1 taken off him," James said.
  • H-BOMBERH-BOMBER    10,567 posts
    Ive had a look finally at the replay a few times, and I have to say that Luckygrey was fortunate to be given the race. Yes, he was checked but not as bad as Waratahs, or to a greater extent Ranger. Unfortunately I was on Ranger and have only today seen the extent of the interference, and it is quite annoying but thats racing I suppose. In my opinion, the suspension of McEvoy was completely waranted, but that should have been as far as it went, Luckygrey was gallant in still running second, and while the loss of momentum was a factor, I would argue that both Waratahs and Ranger were inconvenienced to a much greater degree and their margins, while substantial, were indicative of the interference, the same as luckygrey.

    Anyway, it is all done and dusted, what I do know is that Waratahs Secret was a massive run, considering the interference, the WEIGHT and being untried or unable to run astrong 1600m, I have a new found respect for this horse, I thought that was huge!
  • RIORIO    14,902 posts
    said:

    Ive had a look finally at the replay a few times, and I have to say that Luckygrey was fortunate to be given the race. Yes, he was checked but not as bad as Waratahs, or to a greater extent Ranger. Unfortunately I was on Ranger and have only today seen the extent of the interference, and it is quite annoying but thats racing I suppose. In my opinion, the suspension of McEvoy was completely waranted, but that should have been as far as it went, Luckygrey was gallant in still running second, and while the loss of momentum was a factor, I would argue that both Waratahs and Ranger were inconvenienced to a much greater degree and their margins, while substantial, were indicative of the interference, the same as luckygrey.

    Anyway, it is all done and dusted, what I do know is that Waratahs Secret was a massive run, considering the interference, the WEIGHT and being untried or unable to run astrong 1600m, I have a new found respect for this horse, I thought that was huge!

    Agree totally...Lucky Gray got a lucky break..tough decision to be made and it appears as though a lot of trust went into the decision to uphold the protest...As stated on racing radio this morning by Waratah's trainer(what an effort!!!)..it may be time to upgrade the placing and number of cameras on the track to allow the stewards more conclusive footage...
  • lets_elopelets_elope    299 posts
    How about at least admitting the possibility that you are incorrect Piston, Roger James is a class act and has never been one to whinge.

    Try reading his quotes in the paper and elsewhere, the patrol vision was nowhere near up to scratch and as previously stated by myself and others there was nothing in the vision that indicated it was He's Remarkable that clipped Waratah's Secret, there was definite pressure from the outside at the time and seemingly, on the word of a jockey trying to avoid suspension himself, the stewards have taken it as gospel that Big Ted didn't shift in.

    The question one could well ask does this come down to the ego's of those involved after having publicly stated they would put riders on the spot prior to the two Group 1's about the consequences of any interference which affects other runners chances, having done this did they then feel compelled to act, otherwise, their authority could be perceived to have been undermined.

    How come McEvoy's still exactly where he was prior to and after the interference and it is a number of strides after the interference that he takes up that position, no doubt he half shunts a beaten horse in Big Ted out of the way but that happens in virtually every race and was of little consequence to anyone.

    To attribute the interference solely to He's Remarkable and McEvoy based on the available vision which is totally inconclusive and uphold that protest in a Group 1 in which so much hinges on the result is grossly unprofessional and an embarrassment to the sport in WA.

    This also begs the questions maybe if the Turf club and RWWA actually had their priorities correct and weren't needlessly throwing away industry money like it was water on other matters, we might have been provided with quality vision that ensured that any decision made was the correct one and just as importantly could be conclusively shown to be the correct one.
  • lets_elopelets_elope    299 posts
    From the NZ Herald

    http//www.nzherald.co.nz/racing/news/article.cfm?c_id=53&objectid=10767566


    Racing Remarkable reversal of James' fortunes
    By Mike Dillon
    530 AM Monday Nov 21, 2011

    "Disgraceful" and "Home-town decision" are just two of the comments around New Zealand star galloper He's Remarkable being relegated from first to second in Saturday's A$1 million ($1.3 million) Railway Stakes in Perth on Saturday.

    And those are from Australia, not New Zealand.

    Astute race readers on both sides of the Tasman cannot believe He's Remarkable was rubbed out in favour of local West Australian galloper, the $4 favourite Luckygray, after alleged interference 600m from the finish.

    The controversial relegation has implications much wider than simply the considerable winning stakemoney.

    He's Remarkable is a magnificent individual with a stallion's pedigree.

    If he fails to win another group one race in Australia, the loss from this decision will be in the ballpark of many millions of dollars.

    You need to listen to impartial opinions in such matters.

    Brian Taylor, of Melbourne-based bookmaking agency DoubleBet, slated the inquiry decision despite it saving his agency considerable money.

    "I just cannot believe that. They're talking about indirect interference 600m from the finish of a race. You're kidding.

    "Poetic Prince losing the Caulfield Guineas in the inquiry room was an obscenity and this is close to that."

    New Zealand trainer John Wheeler says he will hold his disappointment over that decision for the rest of his life.

    He's Remarkable's trainer Roger James, ever the conservative, was obviously devastated when the Herald spoke to him in Perth yesterday and also surprised. "There are a lot of aspects here, but for mine the over-riding one is the principle that to take a group one off a horse there has to be absolutely no doubt about the winner's culpability.

    "Not only is there doubt, there was not one piece of evidence produced by stewards that showed it was even He's Remarkable that caused any interference at all.

    "That alone should have been sufficient to have the protest dismissed."

    Australian jockey Kerrin McEvoy looked as though he was attempting to ease He's Remarkable off the rails for a short distance before the interference occurred.

    McEvoy had managed to get the stallion half a width away from the rail and the horse outside him, Waratah's Secret, was getting pressure from on its outer from a runner three deep.

    The rider of that three-deep horse, Marco Hui, told the inquiry he was riding his mount to hold his position.

    "In my evidence, I told the stewards that horse had its head turned sideways and even its rider declared the horse had a tendency to hang in.

    "I alleged that horse that copped the interference almost certainly created its own problems.

    "I pointed out that when you're riding to hold your position horses have a tendency to run around."

    He's Remarkable got clear in the home straight and held out Luckygray by a long neck.

    "I told the inquiry we had to get away from the emotion of a horse [second horse] flashing home and make a decision solely on evidence of who caused the interference. There was no evidence." James was given plenty of confidence when he and the other participants were asked to leave the inquiry room and await the decision.

    "A Sydney journalist said to me 'Which law school did you attend? You nailed it in there, you'll have no problems.'

    "Unfortunately, stewards saw it differently."

    There is no right of appeal on this decision.

    "I later asked about that and although the chairman of stewards contradicted himself, the only appeal can be if there was procedural issues."

    If there was a best and fairest award in racing James would have a couple of them. He states his opinion devoid of emotion. Like his summation of McEvoy's performance in the inquiry room. "Without being critical I've had better jockeys on my side in the [inquiry] room.

    "I've had more eloquent jockeys. Kerrin is such a gentleman; he doesn't say a great deal with any force.

    "I felt he could have shown a bit more killer instinct."

    He's Remarkable was an expensive yearling purchase and should now have two group one victories alongside his name. He almost certainly would have won the 2000 Guineas had his rider's whip not broken.

    "I feel sorry for the owners. I told them last night that the winning stake might have been A$450,000, but losing the race has cost them between $4 million and $5 million.

    "I also feel sorry for the horse."

    Excuse us if we also feel sorry for Roger James.
  • Rogue_GreenRogue_Green    294 posts
    Roger James comes out and whinges to the NZ media, and they take his few comments as gospel.

    Has anyone thought that if the interference was not substantial enough, then Kerrin McEvoy would have pleaded "not guilty". If he had done nothing wrong then why did he plead guilty?
    The jockey taking responsibility for his actions, proving the interference affected several runners.

    Im pretty sure if the margin had of been a length, then the final standings would have stayed at He's Remarkable being the winner. The shorter margin proved to the stewards that the momentum lost back at the 600m mark was enough to make Luckygray lose sufficient ground. Not to say Ranger and WS, very unlucky horses but it could have ended worse than it did.
  • thefalconthefalcon    20,505 posts
    had a long chat with paul harvey in bunnings this morning.
    guess what? never mentioned the race..talked about golf, his renovations, price of a bottle of wine in restaurants etc.
    the way it should be... :wink:
  • DamienWyerDamienWyer    8,014 posts
    I know why he was at Bunnings, someone should tell him that you can't carry a chainsaw in your bag
  • RadmanRadman    1,992 posts
    Hehe, you really need to give it up Lets_Elope, they aint going to change the decision. In my honest and completely unbiased opinion it was the correct decision and good on the stewards for having the guts to make it. I just haven't got all day to write a novel about it like you. :lol:
  • lets_elopelets_elope    299 posts
    Radman
    You and others are completely missing the point the result itself is irrelevant here, if the situation was reversed between the two horses I would still be mounting the same argument, the fact remain that they had no factual basis whatsoever to uphold that protest as the vision was totally inconclusive therefore the benefit of the doubt goes to the horse first past the post.

    You might be fine with the incompetence and lack of professionalism displayed by those in charge but I'm not and nor should any thinking industry person and this decision will come back to haunt them time and time again over the years and you can take that one to the bank.

    It's all fine and good to say it was a local win and the people involved are good people etc but if the shoe was on the other foot you and others on here would be screaming blue bloody murder and rightly so, as you cannot possible make a decision such as this without conclusive vision supporting your verdict and they have made that decision without any conclusive vision and as result they now have zero credibility.
  • SuburbanPunkSuburbanPunk    199 posts
    LE, have you seen all the camera angles ?

    In a court of law they would have found McEvoy guilty with the evidence provided.

    You have a major gripe with Perth Racing, and rightly so, but it appears that any time there is a controversial issue you will take a stance.


    Have a discussion with a wide range of industry participants and you will find that views are very different with the protest.

    I would have been very happy with He's Remarkable winning as I had a decent investment on him at $9 but after seeing the vision I had no doubt the protest should have been upheld, but in honesty, I didn't think the stewards would go down that path as it was a decision that required a serious set of balls.

    I think Ranger was the horse most affected and in my opinion he should have won the race but Luckygray got closest and the interference was enough for me to see the objection entertained and as I have stated I would have rather had $3600 in my wallet.

    It is all opinion but we need not go down the path of total negativity. We have stewards who make decisions and we must abide by those decisions. Sure there are times we won't like those decisions but move on.
  • TheDivaTheDiva    13,248 posts
    I wasnt going to chime in here....but we dont need visual evidence necessarily.

    This is why we interview the participants, to gather more evidence.

    So, the burning question for me is....what did P Harvey have to say about what happened? Did McEvoy shift out OR did Chui shift in OR was it both?

    The stewards may well have decided based on Harvey's evidence, which to this point, nobody knows what he said?
Sign In or Register to comment.