Pathetic Vic Stewards

tic
Anyone (with commonsense) who knows racing, would have been disgusted by the Stewards room performance, in dismissing the protest today in Sandown R3. You should watch the race.

I am referring to the first interference in the straight, particularly.

If the second horse wasn't inconvenienced at least a length by being forced to change course--and then go AROUND another one, well I'll give up. The racing commentators agreed.

Even the Steward said it was severe interference --and then dismissed the protest!!

What the ?

You need to Login to Post a Answer in the Forum

I also thought this was a strange decision.

Eminent Son hangs out all the way up the straight and in my opinion the jockey does not seriously attempt to straighten the horse which would have to account for more than 0.1L.

Luke Nolen on Eat Desert First was going in a straight line and sensed the horse on the inside hanging out and took evasive action. This resulted in him going in behind and around the leader at that time. That must have cost is more than the winning margin.

Eat Dessert First then accelerated to the front and was run down in the dying stages of the race when the leader again hung out. I know EDF was getting tired and also probably hung out because of that.

The argument that the ES came from behind to pass EDF is beside the point in my opinion. The race is contested over the entire distance and is not judged or awarded by who finishes the best over the last part of the race. To my mind, EDF lost ground and lost momentum earlier in the straight and should have been further ahead than where it finished.

Melbourne stewards ... I still remember Our Poetic Prince having the Caulfield Guineas taken away from him for even less interference than this.

Certainly a contrast to the Sydney stewards decision in the autumn to give Craig Williams the win on Big Duke over Our Century for being taken off his running line. On that occasion I think CW has actually happy to be drifting off the track by OC to the better going, but he wasn't going to say as much.

"The race is contested over the entire distance and is not judged or awarded by who finishes the best over the last part of the race."

WOF, the wheat is separated from the chaff in the last 300m.

Brendan Stockdale (winning jockey)

"He should have won by lengths..if he went straight" but "jeez he was hanging so hard"

The wayward winner was very impressive, tic and I have to agree with the jockey and the stewards.

Copy and paste the link below to see the head-on replay:
https://www.racing.com/videos/2017-06-28/ladbrokes-park-hillside-race-3--28617

tic

I'm not saying he wasn't impressive.

But the winner forced the R/U to change his straight course dramatically, costing at least a length. It should have been upheld.

Had the runnerup (Eat Dessert First) been gaining ground on the winner (Eminent Son), the stewards would have determined that Eat Dessert First would have won, but for the interference. I'm confident the protest would have been upheld.

But that didn't happen. "Eat Dessert First" hit the front with around 100m to go and was claimed by Eminent Son just before the line.

Eminent Son came from behind and the stewards rightly ignored what happened quite a distance from the post. and that makes sense to me.

Its not all black and white, and the jockey's debating skills can sway the judges. I think the Tivaci/Palentino protest of 20th Feb, 2016 is a classic example.


Talkback Forum

Racing And Sports offers our users the chance to get involved with spirited discussion about major racing issues on your Talkback Forum. They may include chatter about racing matters, issues relating to the website, sporting conversation, betting matters and more. Please be aware that Racing And Sports now moderates Talkback to ensure posting guidelines are adhered to. The views expressed on Talkback are those of the writer and not necessarily those of Racing And Sports. You must be a registered user to write postings or send messages to other users.

Latest Posts