I agree with the last part only because, whilst riding a horse, it must be very difficult for a jockey to keep count whilst also trying to obtain the best possible outcome for his mount...there seem to be far more fines for too many strikes with the whip than for not obtaining best possible outcome for horse...
It's as if the rule has been designed for jockeys to be in contravention thereof so that they can be fined...my solution would be to not even allow the whips on a trial period of 1-3 months and see what the racing authorities dream up to fine the jockeys...
Problem is there is a maximum of 12 and he went well over. 4 days before Sunday he got 2 weeks suspension for the tripi silk incident in December. Now they have opened a enquiry. Absolutely the correct thing to do. What I can never understand is how everyone will come to their defence. The rule is 12. Overseas in Uk they having heavy penalty’s. It’s the way the world is going.
Imagine in that finish Strydom had to slaughter his horse, different result. Veale chose it and deserves what he gets. Must have been worthwhile for him to make that decision.
Problem is there is a maximum of 12 and he went well over. 4 days before Sunday he got 2 weeks suspension for the tripi silk incident in December. Now they have opened a enquiry. Absolutely the correct thing to do. What I can never understand is how everyone will come to their defence. The rule is 12. Overseas in Uk they having heavy penalty’s. It’s the way the world is going.
Imagine in that finish Strydom had to slaughter his horse, different result. Veale chose it and deserves what he gets. Must have been worthwhile for him to make that decision.
Cannot disagree with your points. My concern is the result was already done and clear.
Who is most impacted after this? Plenty punters who probably bankered that favorite.
