Censorship- right or wrong

This comment was posted on another racing site :

“Is there any information on who selects the July final field. I’m confident that their AntePost wagers will not influence their decision making, but I just want to be sure.

This mischievous comment was censored to remove the second sentence.
What do you guys think. Right or wrong ?

My thoughts :
If there was transparency from the panel there would not be conspiracy theories. The panel may be men of integrity, but surely it’s worth questioning if they are conflicted in any way. Unconscious bias perhaps.
Why should certain people in this industry not be subjected to scrutiny. Why are some untouchable ?
Should the panel be restricted to NHA employees only?

There should be no panel...the criteria should be the highest mr over 1800m to 2400m in the last 7 months with a provision that any horse nominated has to have run 6-10 points off its rating in the last 3 months over 1600m to 2400m... if you want the best horses in the race then make them qualify...

There are no ante-post books big enough to worry about having to influence the July Panel

Certain trainers have influenced panels over the years by gaining favours from the press

Interesting post

From my side not sure who the panel consists off?

Let's say Graeme Hawkins, Ali Cohen, Mathew Lips, Craig Peter's etc
I have every confidence the best call will be made.

I think any owner or trainer with an interest should not be considered.

Going forward we might want to consider a field of 20 where 16 are confirmed runners and we have let's say 8 trying for the 4 places .
A lucky draw would be my suggestion.
Put the names in the hat and the first 4 get in the final field.

There will be some happy and some unhappy owners and punters whatever the outcome 😉

The NHA and GC are yet to explain why the final field selection criteria is deliberately subjective, requiring the intervention of a panel to justify!!

Wrt the censorship question, is SP an independent media platform free of the influence of GC and HWB? Their actions suggest otherwise.

Would the industry be better served if SP left the message uncensored and rather solicited responses from HWB, GC and or NHA than censor a comment.

The insinuation of conflicts of interest and improprietary in the original comment will not dissipate through censorship. HWB's involvement and influence is horse racing is not a figment and at some point it will threathen sustainability, if not regulated.

mr hawaii wrote:

There should be no panel...the criteria should be the highest mr over 1800m to 2400m in the last 7 months with a provision that any horse nominated has to have run 6-10 points off its rating in the last 3 months over 1600m to 2400m... if you want the best horses in the race then make them qualify...

I agree in principle that there should not be a Panel, as this leads to all sorts of personal opinions - at worst as in the example where panel member(s) might have an ulterior motive (A/P wagers, pressure from relevant owners / trainers / jocks) to push their view on whether a specific horse should get into the final field (or not)

However I suggest that to make up the 'conditions' would not be that straight-forward - what about a horse that 'almost' qualifies by (for example) having not run to its rating in the last 3 months - but it ran to a rating of 11 points off its rating - or it ran within the suggested 6-10 points off its rating, but that run was 1 week outside the suggested 3 month period ?

What should happen to a horse like Trip of Fortune ? He has never been proven (also has never been given the opportunity) over a trip further than 1600 - yes most would THINK that he would not stay, but there is no PROOF :dry: yet he is the highest rated runner in the potential final field; we will all have our personal opinions on whether he should be included in the final field - but these would not be based on FACT

As an added complication, should ToF run or not would have an effect on the weights of the opposition - for example - if ToF makes the final field, Winchester Mansion will come in at 53kg (0.5kg over his 'correct' weight according to his rating), but if ToF for some reason does not make the final field, WM (if my sums are right) will carry 54.5 kgs - but then he would be weighted 'correctly' according to his rating

As it stands, the 'Panel' will have the final say - and imo there has to be a better way - not sure what it is though