RaceCafe..#1...Tipsters Thread.... Share Your Fancies For Fun...Lets See Who The Best Tipsters Here Are.
Guest

GET RID OF THE STUPID 10 HIT RULE NOW!!!!

Recommended Posts

Guest

I am not getting at the Stipes as they have a job to police the stupid 10 hits with the whip inside the last 400 metres.

But FFS it has to be overturned as it is blatantly ridiculous and there is no common sense from whoever passed the stupid rule.

Today at Rangiora Adam White, Bob Butt, Terry Chmiel and Robbie Close all got done for excess use of the whip the 3 professionals getting 3 days holiday and Adam White the amateur getting a $400 fine.

I have viewed the 4 incidences and to my unbiased mind all the drivers have been done for wanting to do best for the oqwners and the punters who keep the Stipes employed.

To my mind it does not appear that the 3 professional Horsemen drivers have been overly zealous with the whip at all and if I had backed them I would be disappointed if the driver drove with any less vigour.

Yes there will be some on here that will say it is the rule and needs to be followed, but to my mind it is doing nothing for the industry except filling the coffers when drivers are fined!

How about fining the drivers who aren't trying as that is more frustrating than seeing drivers getting punished for wanting to win!

I beleive that this rule needs to be overturned with a commonsense rule being brought in without a number Being attached to hits with the whip.

Robbie, Terry and Bob have been harshly treated and all have to sit on the sidelines for a week for trying to do best for owners and trainers and punters!

Where is the justice in that??????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

$400 is actually quite a lot of money.

The amount of fines being dished out for excessive use of the whip is worrying. It must be annoying and depressing to have to fork out this kind of money each time for a driver. Not every driver is raking in Group 1 winnings.

The rule is well-intentioned but on the other end of it must be drivers who wonder why they bother.

I wonder where this will end up in the long run .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a damned if you do damned if you dont situation.    I think for necessity of consistency a "number" of strikes is preferable, but those who have framed the rule obviously ran scared, and not of the industry but of the do gooders, most of whom have probably never been up close and patted a horse, let alone know how pampered most of them are.     And surely those who framed and authorised this rule change, and presumably this includes most of the administrators who you would imagine should know better never gave a thought to the consequences to not only the drivers but to the industry as a whole.    Quite simply - ten is far too few to be dealing out large fines or worse depriving people of their income.     These same persons (administrators) are always talking of how to attract young persons to the industry - would you under the present restraints.  

And to make things worse, the Aussies are going to banish whips altogether - and our leaders just sit back without blinking.    I think we all know what devastating effect this will have on the NZ industry.

Okay, if you need such a rule (the NZ one) then the first urgent tinkering needs to  be done to the number of strikes.    Either lengthen the permissible number of strikes to (say) 15 or even more, or/and introduce a graduated scale of seriousness - say 10 - 15 fine $50 15 to 20 fine $200 over this number $300 or 1 day on the sideline.    Repeated offending could also have further penalty.    And such actions as hitting the sulky, hitting the dustsheet, etc. should NOT be classed as using the whip!    Next thing they will outlaw whistling for god's sake.    Administrators who  support these restrictions are plainly showing a complete lack of knowledge of the Industry and should hand in their ticket and let someone who is switched on take over.   In some cases that phrase "used by date" springs to mind.    

And finally, to blame people such as Stipes and JCA panels while they are only doing as they are employed to do is of course erroneous.     I do wonder however whether they really enjoy administering  such a law?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

$400 for an amateur who earns nothing from the race does hurt. Well it would hurt me anyway !

Mr White looks like he got the extra $100 thrown in for a repeat offender.Plus Mr White would've taken the fine this time as the NZ amateur champs are the next driving opportunity and the alternative of a 3 - 4 month stand down would have meant him sitting out the remainder of the season.   

The rule is there now, rightly or wrongly, just keep the rein in the whip hand and you'll be OK.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, TheHorseman said:

$400 for an amateur who earns nothing from the race does hurt. Well it would hurt me anyway !

Mr White looks like he got the extra $100 thrown in for a repeat offender.Plus Mr White would've taken the fine this time as the NZ amateur champs are the next driving opportunity and the alternative of a 3 - 4 month stand down would have meant him sitting out the remainder of the season.   

The rule is there now, rightly or wrongly, just keep the rein in the whip hand and you'll be OK.

 

 

Your last para - looks like you need to change too.     Wonder how many don't realise!!


 
Rules:
869(2)(a)
Committee:
GHall (chair) 
PKnowles 
 
Name(s):
Mr A Kyle - Open Horseman
Informant
Mr L Tidmarsh - Stipendiary Steward
Information Number
A9362
Plea:
Admitted
Charge:
Excessive use of the whip
Evidence:

Mr Tidmarsh, Stipendiary Steward, alleged that Mr Kyle (MAN I’M GOOD) used his whip excessively inside the final 400 metres of race 8, the OSBORNE ROCK SUPPLIES MOBILE PACE.

Rule 869 provides as follows:
(2) No horseman shall during any race:
(a) use his whip in an unnecessary, excessive or improper manner.

The Use of Whip Guidelines (effective from 1 December 2016) provide:
The whip shall not be used more than 10 times in the last 400 metres of a race, otherwise this will be deemed excessive use pursuant to these Guidelines.

Mr Tidmarsh demonstrated on the videos that the respondent used his whip 28 times from when the field rounded the home bend until the winning post. He said Mr Kyle’s whip motion was continuous and thus in breach of the guidelines despite the fact Mr Kyle had his hands on the reins.

Mr Kyle stated he was confused by the guidelines and believed he was able to use the whip in this manner provided it was with the reins.

Decision:

As Mr Kyle has admitted the breach, we find the breach proved.

Submission For Penalty:

Mr Kyle has had 23 drives this season and 43 last season. He explained he primarily drove his own team.

Mr Tidmarsh stated the respondent’s record was clear under this rule for the past 12 months and recommended a fine of $400 and, in so doing, emphasised the number of strikes.

Reasons For Penalty:

We have had regard to the starting point in the JCA Penalty Guide of $500. We do not increase the starting point for the number of strikes, principally because the respondent believed, as have a number of drivers charged with a breach of this rule, that he was driving in accordance with the guidelines, as he had his hands on the reins. We give a $100 discount for each of the mitigating factors of admission of the breach and good record.

Penalty:

Mr Kyle is fined the sum of $300.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest

The rule is stupid, end of storey.

What the heck is the difference if the whip is in the same hand as the reigns are, if the horse is being hit with the whip.

There are different extremes of hitting, the count is the same whether you whack the hell out of the horse or are not hitting it very hard!

I don't agree that any horse deserves to be bludgeoned by the whip at all, but to be handing down heavy fines or suspending licenses of extremely experienced horseman shows that there is definitely something wrong with this rule and needs altering.

The rule was brought in without any serious consideration of the consequences by the affected parties overnight.

Sometimes rules are brought in that are STUPID and this is one of them.

Why should Horsemen that are genuinely trying to do their best end up being out of pocket from drives and also have the possibility that they will lose future drives?????

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, eljay said:

Your last para - looks like you need to change too.     Wonder how many don't realise!!

 
 
Rules:
869(2)(a)
Committee:
GHall (chair) 
PKnowles 
 
Name(s):
Mr A Kyle - Open Horseman
Informant
Mr L Tidmarsh - Stipendiary Steward
Information Number
A9362
Plea:
Admitted
Charge:
Excessive use of the whip
Evidence:

Mr Tidmarsh, Stipendiary Steward, alleged that Mr Kyle (MAN I’M GOOD) used his whip excessively inside the final 400 metres of race 8, the OSBORNE ROCK SUPPLIES MOBILE PACE.

Rule 869 provides as follows:
(2) No horseman shall during any race:
(a) use his whip in an unnecessary, excessive or improper manner.

The Use of Whip Guidelines (effective from 1 December 2016) provide:
The whip shall not be used more than 10 times in the last 400 metres of a race, otherwise this will be deemed excessive use pursuant to these Guidelines.

Mr Tidmarsh demonstrated on the videos that the respondent used his whip 28 times from when the field rounded the home bend until the winning post. He said Mr Kyle’s whip motion was continuous and thus in breach of the guidelines despite the fact Mr Kyle had his hands on the reins.

Mr Kyle stated he was confused by the guidelines and believed he was able to use the whip in this manner provided it was with the reins.

Decision:

As Mr Kyle has admitted the breach, we find the breach proved.

Submission For Penalty:

Mr Kyle has had 23 drives this season and 43 last season. He explained he primarily drove his own team.

Mr Tidmarsh stated the respondent’s record was clear under this rule for the past 12 months and recommended a fine of $400 and, in so doing, emphasised the number of strikes.

Reasons For Penalty:

We have had regard to the starting point in the JCA Penalty Guide of $500. We do not increase the starting point for the number of strikes, principally because the respondent believed, as have a number of drivers charged with a breach of this rule, that he was driving in accordance with the guidelines, as he had his hands on the reins. We give a $100 discount for each of the mitigating factors of admission of the breach and good record.

Penalty:

Mr Kyle is fined the sum of $300.

 

 

"Continuous" appears to be the issue here, a pause here and there might've saved the day for Mr Kyle in this case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally don't have any problem with there being such a  rule, but I do agree the butt, chimel and close drives all looked like they were within what I thought the rules were and they did not over drive their horses with the whip in any way. There obviously is some grey area as to what constitutes a strike with the whip  and maybe needs negotiated between the authorities and the horsemen as it does appear unfair to punish the 3 horsenen for their actions yesterday.  I'm all for the 10 whip rule, just believe that what defines a strike needs clarification.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

does this work both ways?

if a driver doesn't hit the horse at all or without vigour?

I do not have a problem if they go over 10, I recall in the 70's they  the commentator would tell you

soso is coming down the out side under a punishing drive...if  you had $20 e/w on soso, you would be thinking good driver

he is doing what my money wants.. but when you do see a horse that is waiting for a gap and needs to have a flick or two not even having that done.

and finishes the race full of running  without being touched with the whip.. something is wrong and should be done

as they are in my view not trying.

fining these blokes as much as they do is just driving people away from harness racing and may I say it t, galloping races.

I for one , want my driver and jockey to at least try...if they can't they shouldn't be there.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole lot of you miss the point . The stipes don't make the rules they enact them for the JCA to make the final ruling on guilt and penalties.

In this instance the rule says how and how many times you can hit the horse. All the drivers know the rules and they were all found guilty. Nobody to blame but themselves. If they don't want to learn then double or triple the suspension until they do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alan Beck got 3 days back in November at Wyndham  for not driving Don Sebastion out -  RobbieClose / Bob Butt/ Terry Chmiel get 3 days for doing their utmost to win for owners  and punters. Where is the justice in this ?  This is  absolute Bull***

This rule was sneaked in by HRNZ and should never have been bought in without consultation and approval by all licence holders. A telephone conference amongst reps does not cut it for something as important as this -  it should have gone back to all members for votes and submissions.  It is now  time it is reviewed - and just because the Australians are banning whips this does not mean NZ has to follow like a brainless mob of sheep.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
1 hour ago, Newmarket said:

The whole lot of you miss the point . The stipes don't make the rules they enact them for the JCA to make the final ruling on guilt and penalties.

In this instance the rule says how and how many times you can hit the horse. All the drivers know the rules and they were all found guilty. Nobody to blame but themselves. If they don't want to learn then double or triple the suspension until they do.

Newmarket, we haven't missed the point at all!!!

the point is that the rule is blatantly stupid and should never have been brought in as there was no pressure from any group to have it brought in!

The rule needs to be changed and whoever brought it in needs to reassess the logic in it!

Yes the drivers know the rule but it is ridiculous that they need to be counting how many times from the 400m that they have used the whip and what constituted whether each hit is to be counted.

Where is the logic of being fined for hitting 11 times with moderate force compared to 10 times with maximum force and not being fined?

The Punters need to be protected as well don't they?

Why aren't the Stipes and JCA disqualifying the horses if the drivers have cheated and had an advantage over the horses that haven't been hit over the 10 times then?

Why because it is nothing to do with pandering to the animal rights people at all!

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are all getting used to this and there will be inconsistency and teething problems.

Hopefully the stipes/jca etc can end up with a somewhat workable system.

Yes this is pandering to animal rights etc - but if we aren't proactive on this I am afraid it will be a bad look. HRNZ got that bit right IMO.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
38 minutes ago, chelseacol said:

We are all getting used to this and there will be inconsistency and teething problems.

Hopefully the stipes/jca etc can end up with a somewhat workable system.

Yes this is pandering to animal rights etc - but if we aren't proactive on this I am afraid it will be a bad look. HRNZ got that bit right IMO.

 

 

Col, I don't think we are getting used to it, otherwise there wouldn't be senior Horsemen getting fined.

It is an anomaly that a horse retains its placing when the driver gets fined for excessive use of the whip when it has has an unfair advantage over horses that have barely been touched!! 

The animal rights brigade were not at harness racing at all to make them put a number of hits on the horse!!! !

I think it is a worse look by fining drivers for supposed excess whip when it wasn't even in the limelight in the first place.

Would you be happy if they totally banned the whip on the gallopers?

I think the industry would be totally stuffed if this ever came in.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Newmarket said:

The whole lot of you miss the point . The stipes don't make the rules they enact them for the JCA to make the final ruling on guilt and penalties.

In this instance the rule says how and how many times you can hit the horse. All the drivers know the rules and they were all found guilty. Nobody to blame but themselves. If they don't want to learn then double or triple the suspension until they do.

well the JCA   are a lot of soft cocks.i think they listen to PC wankers that think hitting horses is shameful.. they for get. with out owners and the punter they wouldn't be needed.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Danny Boy said:

 

Alan Beck got 3 days back in November at Wyndham  for not driving Don Sebastion out -  RobbieClose / Bob Butt/ Terry Chmiel get 3 days for doing their utmost to win for owners  and punters. Where is the justice in this ?  This is  absolute Bull***

This rule was sneaked in by HRNZ and should never have been bought in without consultation and approval by all licence holders. A telephone conference amongst reps does not cut it for something as important as this -  it should have gone back to all members for votes and submissions.  It is now  time it is reviewed - and just because the Australians are banning whips this does not mean NZ has to follow like a brainless mob of sheep.

You have just illustrated the double standards in penalties by some jcas. With mr beck they included a forbury meeting as well, despite mr beck apparently only  driving at forbury meetings twice in the previous  9 months. He got a small fine as well. When you compare the 2 like you have it does make you wonder whether the jca consider flicking a horse with the whip a couple of extra times is just as bad as not driving a horse on its merits.  On a whole their penalties seem to indicate that.   In reality  we are probably just highlighting the southern jca are out of touch with the rest of nz.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, chelseacol said:

We are all getting used to this and there will be inconsistency and teething problems.

Hopefully the stipes/jca etc can end up with a somewhat workable system.

Yes this is pandering to animal rights etc - but if we aren't proactive on this I am afraid it will be a bad look. HRNZ got that bit right IMO.

 

 

You get this whole concept  alas the simpletons dont.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Brodie said:

Newmarket, we haven't missed the point at all!!!

the point is that the rule is blatantly stupid and should never have been brought in as there was no pressure from any group to have it brought in!

The rule needs to be changed and whoever brought it in needs to reassess the logic in it!

Yes the drivers know the rule but it is ridiculous that they need to be counting how many times from the 400m that they have used the whip and what constituted whether each hit is to be counted.

Where is the logic of being fined for hitting 11 times with moderate force compared to 10 times with maximum force and not being fined?

The Punters need to be protected as well don't they?

Why aren't the Stipes and JCA disqualifying the horses if the drivers have cheated and had an advantage over the horses that haven't been hit over the 10 times then?

Why because it is nothing to do with pandering to the animal rights people at all!

 

 

 

In your view sums this whole thing up and your entitled to that opinion on here.

I'm with HRNZ who introduced the rule pro actively. The dark ages are over and i suggest you move on or leave the sport as this rule is here to stay whether you like it or not

PS. Its not if but when a horse in either code is disqualified re whip use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Newmarket said:

In your view sums this whole thing up and your entitled to that opinion on here.

I'm with HRNZ who introduced the rule pro actively. The dark ages are over and i suggest you move on or leave the sport as this rule is here to stay whether you like it or not

 

are you saying your with HRNZ as in agree or with HRNZ as  in one of them? either way your attitude sucks whether you like it or not. :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
13 minutes ago, Newmarket said:

In your view sums this whole thing up and your entitled to that opinion on here.

I'm with HRNZ who introduced the rule pro actively. The dark ages are over and i suggest you move on or leave the sport as this rule is here to stay whether you like it or not

PS. Its not if but when a horse in either code is disqualified re whip use.

Newmarket, you call anyone who doesn't like the 10 hit rule and all the drivers that get fined SIMPLETONS?

How on earth is bringing in a rule that most harness drivers don't agree with as being Proactive?

If the horse is disqualified for a driver using the whip 11 times from the 400m then all you are going to do is turn the punters off, and you do realise that is not required in this day and age.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In harness theres is a Claus or condtion of the rule that says a horse can't be disqualified because the driver breached the whip rule . Which makes a mockery of the system as almost all other rules that if you can gain you an advantage by breaking the rules  you can be disqualified / relegated . 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
8 minutes ago, Basil said:

I agree.  The rule is causing problems (at least for drivers who can't count).  There's a simple solution.  Make it zero.

Basil, do you think that drivers should have to concentrate on manouvreing the horse in the straight as well as having to count exactly the number of times the horse has been touched with the whip.

The other thing is that there is bugger all difference with the horse being touched with the whip if it is in the same hand that the reigns are in.

Basil, ask all the drivers that have been fined for trying their best for the important people in harness racing, that is owners and punters their opinion of the rule.

Basil, please advise us all why you brought the rule in, and for whose benefit??????

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Brodie said:

How on earth is bringing in a rule that most harness drivers don't agree with as being Proactive?

 

Earth to Brodie --- that's precisely what being proactive means!  Most people didn't agree with slavery or capital punishment being outlawed either, but governments went ahead anyway because to do so was proactive

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.