Andy
|
BHA to introduce remounting banFrom SLife
The British Horseracing Authority has confirmed that from November 2nd 2009 the remounting of horses after the start shall be banned.
The ban does not apply to unseatings at or on the way to the start where the attending doctor and veterinary officer are able to confirm that no injury has been sustained by horse or rider.
The issue of remounting was last considered in 2005 by the Horseracing Regulatory Authority, which was responsible for regulation before the creation of the Authority.
This followed on from the high profile incident of Kauto Star being remounted in a Novices' Chase at Exeter, after which he was found to be injured.
At the time the HRA did not introduce an outright ban on remounting but strengthened the existing Rules relating to it.
Since then, the instances of remounting have reduced significantly, dropping from 40 in 2004 to just nine in 2008. Of those nine that were remounted in 2008, five won prize money totalling just over £7,000.
Paul Struthers, Media Relations Manager for the Authority, said: "This rule change is the result of a recommendation from our Welfare and Training Group, which was approved by our Board, because of the indisputable risk to both horse and jockey.
"It seemed perverse that a jockey who had fallen in a race needed to be cleared by the Racecourse Medical Officer before riding again that day but could remount a horse having fallen without being given the same clearance.
"Of course there are possible consequences to racing if no result is returned in a high profile race, coupled with the potential loss of prize money earnings. However, the risks of allowing remounting to continue far outweigh the possible downsides, particularly given that all bets are void if there are no finishers in a race and that there are few instances of remounting anyway."
On the whole I think this is a sensible decision.
|
geordie_racer
|
as long as the horse and jockey are uninjured why not remount?
If as a result of a horse stopping at a fance a following horse has to come to a sudden halt and ships the jock, why not let them remount?
Remounting after a fall may be adifferent issue but I dont see that this rule is differentiating.
It would also prevent a remount if a horse whipped round at the start and shipped the jockey.
Can't see it is either needed or well thought out, but thats just me being an old git probably
|
Andy
|
| geordie_racer wrote: |
If as a result of a horse stopping at a fance a following horse has to come to a sudden halt and ships the jock, why not let them remount?
|
I guess the point is that if a horse refuses at a fence it could be doing so because it is injured/feels something is amiss, and then we come back to the argument that in the heat of the moment the jockey does not have time to fully ascertain whether the or not the horse has picked up an injury, hence shouldn't be allowed to remount. Same applies to a horse that's hampered - if it has had to slam the brakes on/change direction very quickly it may have done itself some damage.
|
lewijay
|
Just out of interest is there any figures to show how often this actually happens! I have never actually seen it live but have sen some of the more famous clips of it happening.
You can see the logic though.
|
geordie_racer
|
| lewijay wrote: | Just out of interest is there any figures to show how often this actually happens! I have never actually seen it live but have sen some of the more famous clips of it happening.
You can see the logic though. |
according to the quote at the start 9 times in 2008, of which 5 horses finished in the prize money.
I have a recollection of Ap remounting a horse and ging on to win not so long ago....perhaps I just made that up though?
|
Machiavellian
|
| geordie_racer wrote: | | lewijay wrote: | Just out of interest is there any figures to show how often this actually happens! I have never actually seen it live but have sen some of the more famous clips of it happening.
You can see the logic though. |
according to the quote at the start 9 times in 2008, of which 5 horses finished in the prize money.
I have a recollection of Ap remounting a horse and ging on to win not so long ago....perhaps I just made that up though? |
He did it at Southwell quite some time ago and of course in Red Maruader's National on Blowing Wind along with Ruby Walsh on Papillon.
|
geordie_racer
|
| Machiavellian wrote: | | geordie_racer wrote: | | lewijay wrote: | Just out of interest is there any figures to show how often this actually happens! I have never actually seen it live but have sen some of the more famous clips of it happening.
You can see the logic though. |
according to the quote at the start 9 times in 2008, of which 5 horses finished in the prize money.
I have a recollection of Ap remounting a horse and ging on to win not so long ago....perhaps I just made that up though? |
He did it at Southwell quite some time ago and of course in Red Maruader's National on Blowing Wind along with Ruby Walsh on Papillon. |
thanks Macch.
I think this is a bit OTT as a rule.
|
Tagalie
|
Sensible decision- horse and jockey welfare has to be prioritised above all. It may not happen that often, but it would only take one incident with a horse very publicly breaking down after being remounted to sour public opinion.
|
LongJ0n
|
Here is the McCoy race in question. Family Business, christ ill never forget this one.
|
YAIYAM
|
It would also prevent a remount if a horse whipped round at the start and shipped the jockey.
If you actually mean before the start then they can actually remount it only applies after the tape has gone up.
Personally I think if the horse has fallen then it is a good Idea but if the Jockey has been unseated I do not see why he cannot remount as there has been no ill effect to the horse from a Jockey falling off
|
Gorg_George
|
Makes sense to me.
|
geordie_racer
|
| YAIYAM wrote: | It would also prevent a remount if a horse whipped round at the start and shipped the jockey.
If you actually mean before the start then they can actually remount it only applies after the tape has gone up.
Personally I think if the horse has fallen then it is a good Idea but if the Jockey has been unseated I do not see why he cannot remount as there has been no ill effect to the horse from a Jockey falling off |
thanks YY
i meant as the tape went up so the race would have started
i agree with you on neating, thats wy i made the point about a horse following one whosimply stopped/refused. the horse might stop and unseat the jock, but no reason to me why they cant get back into the race
i think youhave to rely on the jock to be alert to welfare issues,
|
jennywales
|
| geordie_racer wrote: | | [i think youhave to rely on the jock to be alert to welfare issues, |
Good rule, and not before time, in my opinion.
"Relying on the jock to be alert to welfare issues" is surely unfair to both jockey and horse. A jockey isn't a vet, or a qualified equine practitioner of any sort. To rely on his judgement to assess welfare considerations after a fall or unseating in the heat of a race is unfair to him, never mind his horse.
Clearly jockeys do take such responsibility when they pull up feeling that the horse is injured, but that doesn't involve remounting. Taking a grey area out of the jockey's responsibility is sensible.
|
Cath_EVN
|
I think this is a good rule for horse falls as adrenaline acts as a painkiller. Quite often damage doesn't show up until the horse cools down. didn't a horse win Champion hurdle and was then found to have a fracture? eventing and showjumping now have elimination after horse or rider fall.
i think it is hard on the unseated jockey and in case of AP race all the horses had fallen / unseated or refused which was how he was able to still win.
The ones that are hard to call are the horses that do the splits or leave their back legs behind / belly flop. I don't like seeing them continue as you just can't tell what damage has occurred.
|
Owl of Minerva
|
Always remember Ruby doing it on Kauto in just his second chase start (I think) at something like 1/6. I think it turned out that Kauto was injured afterwards
|
jennywales
|
| Owl of Minerva wrote: | | Always remember Ruby doing it on Kauto in just his second chase start (I think) at something like 1/6. I think it turned out that Kauto was injured afterwards |
Yes, at Exeter in a 3-runner race in January 2005. Kauto was indeed found to be injured afterwards, although the nature of the injury meant that it was impossible for Ruby to tell at the time.
|
Rowan
|
| Owl of Minerva wrote: | | Always remember Ruby doing it on Kauto in just his second chase start (I think) at something like 1/6. I think it turned out that Kauto was injured afterwards |
Yep, he was out for 9 months after that.
I think this is a good thing. Geordie says it would be ok to remount after unseating but if a horse smacks a fence hard enough to unseat, there'll be muscular stress. From a practical view, how often do jockeys catch horses after they've been unseated?
|
Andy
|
| YAIYAM wrote: | [b]
Personally I think if the horse has fallen then it is a good Idea but if the Jockey has been unseated I do not see why he cannot remount as there has been no ill effect to the horse from a Jockey falling off |
I think one of the reasons behind the new rule is that this is such a grey area Where is the dividing line between an unseat and a fall? It isn't always clear-cut.
|
BurntFingers
|
Interesting that the likes of AP and Tom Scu have hit out at this rule being introduced in the Racing Post.
Think they need to be careful that the public does not view this as disregarding a horses welfare ...
|
Andy
|
| BurntFingers wrote: | Interesting that the likes of AP and Tom Scu have hit out at this rule being introduced in the Racing Post.
Think they need to be careful that the public does not view this as disregarding a horses welfare ... |
Indeed. This is from the original article:
Of those nine that were remounted in 2008, five won prize money totalling just over £7,000.
It's not something that is going to have a massive impact on the number of winners a jockey rides or the money that they earn so I don't really know what AP and Scu whining about. At the end of the day, even if they do care about horse welfare (and i'm sure most do) they are not vets and as we have seen with Kauto Star, even a horse that feels fine to ride can by carrying an injury.
|
Pieman
|
I think it's probably a good thing at least everyone know what the deal is (I still remember Barton Bank falling at the last in the King George and the jockey deparately trying to get back on).
I suppose at the start it's not much different to the flat when a horse stays in the stalls compare to it whipping around and unshipping it's jocky in terms of uncertainty.
What I do wonder is what is there general rules on prize money. Over the jumps there does then to be a lot of races with only a few runners so if for example only one finished the races, what happens to the prize money for 2nd, 3rd, etc? As I think this is the main reason a jockey has remounted in the past.
|
YAIYAM
|
I noticed yesterday a horse out in front fell 2 out was remounted and still mangaed to finish 2nd.
This is Just one crazy rule made up by people who need to Justify there salary
|
jennywales
|
I think that this has actually been carefully thought out and not brought in before quite a lot of consideration. I was at Ffos Las when the incident you mentioned happened, the race wasn't exactly a rich one in terms of prize money and a surprising number of people commented afterwards that they were in favour of the new rule - and I don't mean just any old Joe Soap; the Director of Racing for Northern Racing (who is also a permit holder) is very much pro, for example.
Yes, the circumstances in which the rule might operate are very rare; which doesn't make it a bad rule. What it does do is eliminate doubt, which is helpful for the jockey as well as the horse. See above on Ruby and Kauto Star - if it had been any worse Kauto might not still be with us, and in that case it certainly wasn't Ruby's fault that he failed to identify the injury at the time.
|
YAIYAM
|
You cannot make up rules in racing becuase in the last 5 years one horse was remounted that was found to be Injured afterwards If you did this in racing and any other sport for that matter we would not have any competative sports left.
They brought up a good point yesterday on ATR that If a horse fell at the Canal Turn in the GN and stopped Just after the fence the Jockey would now not be allowed to remount, hence he would have to now walk the horse back to the stables approx 1 mile away resulting in him probably missing his next ride in the following race.
Have they really thought it through for all occasions?
|
Tagalie
|
Oh come on, Aintree on GN Day is swarming with vehicles carrying medical, veterinary and support staff for the high number of runners and loose horses in the big race. Of course there are provisions for jockeys to get back in time for the next race.
The rule is for the benefit of horses and jockeys and the public image of racing. I don't really see how anyone can argue with this.
|
YAIYAM
|
| Tagalie wrote: | Oh come on, Aintree on GN Day is swarming with vehicles carrying medical, veterinary and support staff for the high number of runners and loose horses in the big race. Of course there are provisions for jockeys to get back in time for the next race.
The rule is for the benefit of horses and jockeys and the public image of racing. I don't really see how anyone can argue with this. |
Other people may no more than me but as far as i am aware the only way to get a horse back on the Grand Nationl course is to come back around the track on the outside of the fences as it is fenced off on the outside the whole way round so yes there are provisions for the Jockey or Jockeys to get back but what happens if there are 20 fallers all those horses have to be now walked back by someone even if it is not the Jockey.
Its also not Just Aintree you will have the same problem at courses like Newbury, Chepstow, Wincanton, the list is endless
|
Cath_EVN
|
i don't think suggesting a rule is a bad one just becaues jockeys will have to walk back is a very valid argument. races can get delayed for all sorts of reasons, no doctor, ambulance left course, horse needed re-shoeing etc. i have already put my view that for falls it is a good decision. ironically in the race this week at Ffos Las where the remounted horse got 2nd, the winner actually finished lame and was put down.
i think we have to accept that there are lots of people who think any sort of competition with horses is cruel and even though we are racing fans we are in the minority. whilst we don't want to bow down to these people completely surely it is better to be seen to be doing as much as posiible to keep horses safe. Racing would only need 1 case of a remounted horse being serioulsy injured to hit the front page of the 'red tops' and we would be fighting to keep it completely. remember the ridiculous outrage in popular press and TV when that stall handler smacked a horse on the nose.
|
YAIYAM
|
| Cath_EVN wrote: | | i don't think suggesting a rule is a bad one just becaues jockeys will have to walk back is a very valid argument. |
I don't think people are getting the point.
Here's an example of what happens now
16 horses set off on a chase and say 7 of them may fall the horses that do not go that far past the fence will be caught by the Jockey remounted and he Just rides that horse back to the stables, the ones that run off down the track are either caught some where around the track or maybe back near the stables, again those horses that are caught out on track are generally remounted and rode back to the stables.
Now with this new rule you could effectively have 7 horses out around the track that have to be lead back to the stables If the Jockeys want to get into the nearest vehicle rather than have a 1 mile walk
|
geordie_racer
|
| Tagalie wrote: |
The rule is for the benefit of horses and jockeys and the public image of racing. I don't really see how anyone can argue with this. |
I can.
If the horse has simply unshipped the jockey, has not been injured at all, and in the opinon of the jock can be remounted.....why not?
imagine Ap 25 lengths cleaar coming to thelast hurdle, the horse clips it and stumpbles, he slideds off the abck door, desnt lose hold of reins or horse. he would have time to brush the horse, pick its hooves andstill win but in the interests of "image" he can't
why not?
and how is it for is or the horses benefit to have to walk in rather than get him back on board and trot over the line to win.
equally, tape goes up, they all set off, horse rears, jock falls off, why cant he get back on and take part?
what image is thereby protected?
th
|
YAIYAM
|
You Imagine the time when Blowing Wind and Papillon were not remounted in the GN you would not have had the thrilling race for 3rd place and there would have only been 2 finishers in that years Grand National we would have been laughed at all around the world
|
Tagalie
|
| geordie_racer wrote: | | Tagalie wrote: |
The rule is for the benefit of horses and jockeys and the public image of racing. I don't really see how anyone can argue with this. |
I can.
If the horse has simply unshipped the jockey, has not been injured at all, and in the opinon of the jock can be remounted.....why not?
imagine Ap 25 lengths cleaar coming to thelast hurdle, the horse clips it and stumpbles, he slideds off the abck door, desnt lose hold of reins or horse. he would have time to brush the horse, pick its hooves andstill win but in the interests of "image" he can't
why not?
and how is it for is or the horses benefit to have to walk in rather than get him back on board and trot over the line to win.
equally, tape goes up, they all set off, horse rears, jock falls off, why cant he get back on and take part?
what image is thereby protected?
th |
It states that it does not include "unseatings", presumably in the event of pecking, stumbling, clumsy flat-footed landing, rearing at the start etc rather than actual belly-to-turf falls. I assume common sense will be applied to any disputed cases as there are clear differences between crashing falls and jockeys getting booted out of the side door if their horse is bumped slightly.
If a horse has sustained a possible injury, then of course it's in its benefit for it to be led (or driven) back rather than mounted and ridden to finish. Would you have preferred to have seen Denman remounted and shoved over the line in that awful Aintree race to claw back some prize money, rather than being ambulanced off track?
Showjumpers and eventers have to retire if their horse falls. Why should racehorses get reduced welfare just because people bet on them?
|
Tagalie
|
| YAIYAM wrote: | | You imagine the time when Blowing Wind and Papillon were not remounted in the GN; you would not have had the thrilling race for 3rd place and there would have only been 2 finishers in that year's Grand National. We would have been laughed at all around the world. |
Do you want to rethink that for a moment; I have added some punctuation so it makes more sense. Can you really envisage crowds of viewers across the globe clutching their aching sides and wiping the tears from their eyes as they watch the raucous comedy spectacle of a race famed for thrills and spills having......lots of spills. What a gag!
|
YAIYAM
|
You might have added some punctuation to my thread but i have no Idea at all what you are trying to say.
English please
|
Tagalie
|
| YAIYAM wrote: | You might have added some punctuation to my thread but i have no Idea at all what you are trying to say.
English please |
The people who watch one race a year and bet £2 on a horse with a nice name or pretty colours expect to see falls, unseatings and hard luck stories. If only two horses finish that makes it more of an entertaining spectacle, not less.
|
YAIYAM
|
I was thinking more on the betting side in that lots of people back each way hoping for there horse to be placed in top 4/5 so for only 2 to finish people would be asking who benefits the most out of 2 finishers and of course the answer is bookmakers.
|
|
|
