Printable View
http://www.harness.org.au/news-artic...?news_id=23342
This rule which was introduced to harness racing a few years ago ( 2005?), has to go a bloody shambles of a rule if ever I saw one, needs to be challenged in a higher court and dispensed with. In our game, it is not only irrelevant it makes a mockery of the image our game needs to fix.
Yes Agree, My dad always had something on his horses if he thought they had a good chance.....Mum put it on.
I do not think much will ever change, I always put money on for Mark if he drove, it was his money!
Same mum always had something on when dad raced and said always have at least 5 each way whenever you go round , wish I heeded that advice last week at penrith :s
Does seem crazy Danno - rule should read 'not bet on or against any other runner'
IMHO, for the image of the sport the rule has to stay. Certainly not suggesting anything untoward if the rule was changed and drivers didn't back all of their drives but the general betting public have concerns about selective bets. Steward's enquiries into performance indifferences would nearly always have to start with questioning a driver's betting record on that race. Would need to be made public via Steward's reports in every instance. "Yes Sir/Madam, I did back that drive". "No Sir/Madam" I didn't back that one". How does the public interpret that? So I guess until the Greyhound authorities employ a Dr Dolittle "place your right paw on the bible and swear..."
Would be even more disturbing, and confronting, if a new rule needed to incorporate parameters regarding a driver laying their horse!
Totally agree with Wayne on this one, Our great sport is trying to clean up it's image and it's not a great look from a public perspective if a driver/trainer is punting his own horse. There are many ways to skin a cat with this topic and Trish mentioned the obvious choice, Get a friend or relative to place the bet. People who are connected to the camp would have had a pretty good idea on how the horse in question would have been performing on the training track and they could have placed the bet for the trainer/driver so he didn't have to stick his neck out.
You have just about swayed me with this argument Wayne. I do believe however that if it does stay, then it has to be enforced properly ie you cannot have 'mum' putting the bet on for you which then follows that drivers families' betting may come into question and it all starts to get ridiculous (a la AFL) SO I think we are better off not pretending and should change the rule to - you can only bet on the horse you are driving. If this becomes a standard question in investigating driving tactics then so be it. If drivers made us much as AFL players, I would be all for enforcing the rule strictlyQuote:
Originally Posted by arlington
Quote:
SO I think we are better off not pretending and should change the rule to - you can only bet on the horse you are driving. If this becomes a standard question in investigating driving tactics then so be it. If drivers made us much as AFL players, I would be all for enforcing the rule strictly
Imagine going to the trots with your mate/missus, they put the cabbage on at the giddy-goat, who knows whose money it is? There have been times I've needed tp put my wife's bets on, can I be "done" for putting her money on??? Will we have stewards patrolling our homes looking for evidence of punt money transfers??? It's all a bit ridiculous IMO,
Before this rule was introduced it WAS a standard question in an investigation "did the stable support he horse in the betting" and sometimes people were asked to furnish evidence that in fact they had. The stewards became familiar with betting habits of individual stables and this ASSISTED them in their investigations by providing another layer of evidence.
This rule should be as Kevin suggested, you can only bet on your own drive, pretty simple really.
I can see the point Wayne and Richard are making but honestly we have bigger more visible issues worrying our image at the moment than whether a driver has or has not had a bet on the horse he/she is driving and if it were an issue I believe the betting public would be more in favour of a driver betting on their horse than not.
cheers,
Dan.
The rule is obviously a good one to stop a driver betting on the opposition.
As for backing your own drive? As mentioned there is plenty of ways of around that (and for backing opposition mind you). So I'm not going to bother defending that part of the rule because it would be a wasted effort.
I'm fence sitting on this one, but would just like to put forward one idea. I've heard of quite a few horses being set up (and have suspected many more). Hold them up for a few starts, wait for the price to drift than bet up and give it your all. This isn't just drivers, but the stable as well. Is it a case of these few rorts spoiling it for honest blokes when Danno draws the pole and reckons with a nice run he can win this week? I don't know, just putting forward an idea.
I'm happy for drivers to bet on what they're driving but not for them to be betting on trifectas and first 4's etc.
I'd suggest punting on your own horse would be the only way you could make any money from harness racing in South Australia at the moment. I honestly dont know how the proffesionals make a living. But thats another disscussion.
when i was a junior 2001 -2005, this rule wasnt in place , i used to have 100 e/w on all my drives (50 odd), and i got up on a few occasions at over 10-1. the horses i drove were mainly the ones i trained and owned so the prize money was about $1800 for winning and i was getting extra for betting lol....
I think they should put the drivers fee on the TAB for each of the drivers horse in each race. Make them try a little harder.