Zabeel Classic

[scooby3051 10,935]

8 hours ago, Leggy said:

Quite agree but it didn't affect the result.

Sense at last.

[Leggy 4,089]

And the stewards did have a look by the way. "when attempting to improve into a tight run to the inside of IN A TWINKLING was placed in restricted room when that runner lay in near the 100 metres. O Bosson was advised to exercise care in a similar circumstance."

[Blue 1,099]

Elliot did have to check his mount but if we hark back 50-odd years ago and without cameras, the jockey would have stood up in the stirrups and reefed the horse's head in the air making interference so obvious the outcome would have been a fait accompli. Bottom line as has been said, if there's no protest, there's no protest.

[berzerk 107]

That isn't correct. And here are a few examples of why.

1. Jockey's knowledge of the rules. Elliot is quoted on Weigh In saying something like "OP squeezed me out with competitive riding". So what of being the prescribed distance clear when shifting ground?

2. Possibly intimidating situation. Elliot and mum against OP Bosson and J. Richards.

3. Jockey's head space. Having made a series of errors which probably cost winning, is he really going to go to war for chancing a tight run which might gain him 3rd?

4. Not relevant in this situation, but maybe they are content with 4th.

 

[chevy86 2,710]

1 hour ago, berzerk said:

That isn't correct. And here are a few examples of why.

 

 

 chancing a tight run 

 

 

 Tight run my arse.As I said previously the gap was massive by racing standards, probably 3 horse widths, until Bosson closed it by not steering a straight path but agree Elliot MIA re protest. Surprising really as he learnt his trade under the enquiry room master.