Reply With QuoteSpot on VVV
...and further to the above, I simply can't comprehend why a horse such as Beef City Beau, a 7yo veteran of some 122 starts and with well & truly exposed form as far as its preferred racing pattern is concerned can be driven in a manner that is totally in contradiction of that racing pattern and nothing is said in that regard...while at the other end of the spectrum the driver of a current 2yo with 7 or 8 starts lifetime is the subject of Steward commentary with regard to Change of Tactics. The way this rule is being applied and not applied here in NSW is just absurd, it is absolutely bloody absurd.
Spot on VVV
some people just don't learn
L McCarthy (Roman Stride) was fined $200 under rule 44(1) for failing to notify the Stewards that the gelding would be driven contrary to its usual racing pattern.
That's unfair Smithy. In Luke's defense, that ruling is more than just a reactionary, IMO.
The fact that the Stewards have zero'd in on him and fined him for the drive on Roman Stride but 6 weeks or so ago they initially let Ben Sarina skip for that drive on Beef City Beau and then completely missed the point when they subsequently re-opened the Inquiry a week or so later by way of a focus on the wagering instead of the drive... underlines what I have been banging on about for some time now.
Perhaps it is a largely NSW thing as we've only just come out of the Fog of so many years of a Labor State Government directed by Tim Gartrell/Karl Bitar & the rest of the Sussex St. Machine monsters that I do not care to remember, a situation whereby essentially the place operated under a 'rule of the week' come manage by crisis approach. Of course, I don't think this fits in the manage by crisis category...but by geeze, it's sure looking like 'rule of the week'.
Ultimately, nobody in the Industry asks for anything more and nor do they expect anything less of the Stewards than a consistent approach. Given recent rulings, I don't think jamming Luke for $200 is consistent. If I was Emilio, I'm paying that $200 in a heartbeat. I didn't think the drive was bad at all. That was his 5th start for Luke, his first being May 14th. He has gone from an M0 to an M3-M5 in 5 starts. After a change of stable and 5 starts the horse has a usual racing pattern????? That's not what I believed to be the reason why the Change Of Tactics rule was instituted. That's not what I understood it was brought in to to iron out. IMO that is not the spirit of the rule.
i think after 5 starts with a metro grade horse then yes it has an established racing pattern
The horse WON the race and they still fined Luke.
Honestly, wtf is that? It's nothing short of absurd. If that is in any way, shape or form in keeping with the spirit of the rule...if it is in any way, shape or form in keeping with the reason/s why the Change Of Tactics rule was put in place...then I'm King Farouk.
he blatantly ignored a well known rule.
i hear thats not the only rule being pushed to it's limits, apparently not all horses are on track 2 hours prior to race.
intriguing, what have you heard?
That's just as bloody-minded and as incorrect a view as the Stewards have taken.Originally Posted by smithy
Instead of using the Change Of Tactics rule to do what it was instituted to do...it is being applied incorrectly & unfairly.
Luke still won the race in question, he didn't dud the horse or the Punters who backed it, yet he was fined anyway. For what??? How can anyone reasonably turn around & fine him under those circumstances? A-B-S-U-R-D!
Posting Permissions
