SA Footy

well here goes with the queries regarding what happened/happens at gawler, as told to me by the astute punter (rd), he travelled up there last night & firstly there are no price flucuations coming through from interstate races from meetings that do have bookies, rd said it doesn't matter whether dammarrell bets on them or not he'd like to know the markets just like he gets on a saturday night

his other complaint was that the on track announcer would talk all through races that were coming in from interstate where as most times it could have waited for a few minutes

my 'beef'
this protest tonight in race 5, we get told over the air it was brother moon protesting over getting a fair start, then they uphold it, and 3rd v 2nd change spots, which to me defies logic for these reasons
1, seeing it was upheld, they are saying he was denied a fair start & it was caused by top of the kew & swapped positions but if he was denied a fair start why wasn't he a late scratching ?

2, if the protest was 3rd v 2nd why weren't we told that ?

3, everyone i spoke with tonight agreed that if the interference denied him a fair start & the stewards have said it did, then it should have been scratched

4, speaking with centreman he agreed with what i & others said but did say that perhaps jimmy got the wrong message from whoever rang him with the DETAILS of the protest & it was just a 3rd v 2nd protest in the first place

One reason why Brother Moon should not be scratched
I backed it for a place and it paid $1-40
I get a collect either way 2nd or 3rd
If its scratched it costs me $$$$$

If you scratch Brother Moon it misses out on placed monies as well for its connections

ps, not talking through the pocket as i had brother moon place in an allup that eventually lost when lend us a score ran 2nd

mal wrote:One reason why Brother Moon should not be scratched
I backed it for a place and it paid $1-40
I get a collect either way 2nd or 3rd
If its scratched it costs me $$$$$

If you scratch Brother Moon it misses out on placed monies as well for its connections

i think you'll find that the connections would have been happy to have been declared a non-runner because the prizemoney wouldn't have covered (by a long way) what they lost on it on course

bayman wrote:well here goes with the queries regarding what happened/happens at gawler, as told to me by the astute punter (rd), he travelled up there last night & firstly there are no price flucuations coming through from interstate races from meetings that do have bookies, rd said it doesn't matter whether dammarrell bets on them or not he'd like to know the markets just like he gets on a saturday night

The call service isnt free someone has to pay for it (usually the bookmaker betting the venue or the club) so that would be why no call service at gawler. I think it comes for free on Saturdays because an apn rep is their sending the globe calls out to other venues.

As for brothermoon should of been a false start therefore should of been Non runner.
(not talking out of pocket good result it running for me)
I must be missing something obvious but being a starter cant be as hard as these clowns make it look.

Ive viewed the race several times
I could not tell how Brother Moon was interfered with the mobile gate was in the way.
Obviously in the wash up Top Of The Far Kew caused BM to lose ground

HOWEVER
There is no shadow of doubt the starter ****** up
It should have been a false start

Thats racing.

mal wrote:Ive viewed the race several times
I could not tell how Brother Moon was interfered with the mobile gate was in the way.
Obviously in the wash up Top Of The Far Kew caused BM to lose ground

HOWEVER
There is no shadow of doubt the starter F***** up
It should have been a false start

Thats racing.

off course you cant tell how brother moon was interfered with (none of us from a side on view can) but the stewards who have the advantage of a front on view can & did decide it was enough to uphold a protest, so i'll ask again with being told that it was a protest for being denied a fair start why is it not declared a non-runner but they changed the position of the horses

to me it was either dismissed or it was a non-runner given what we told the protest was for over air, i'll acknowledge that centreman could be right that jimmy got the wrong info but with what we were told it has to be a non-runner, because if your denied a fair start you are denied a fair start in a race & that means against ALL YOUR OPPOSITION

The starter ****** up
Should have been a false start.
But they ran the race to completion.

Thinking cap, and is this what MAY have happened after the race.
The stewards realised it should have been a false start
BUT
they cannot call it a no race[or a restart], there is now a point of no return.
The next best logical thing for the stewards to do is at least ping Top Of The FAR Kew for
causing Brother Moon to lose ground.

So the starter ****** up
The stewards had thier hands tied
Brother Moon was stiff as were the punters who backed it

mal wrote:The starter F***** up
Should have been a false start.
But they ran the race to completion.

Thinking cap, and is this what MAY have happened after the race.
The stewards realised it should have been a false start
BUT
they cannot call it a no race[or a restart], there is now a point of no return.
The next best logical thing for the stewards to do is at least ping Top Of The FAR Kew for
causing Brother Moon to lose ground.

So the starter F***** up
The stewards had thier hands tied
Brother Moon was stiff as were the punters who backed it

just on that you tell me why they can not make any race a no race after it has started ? i'm very confident that has happened in the past....have you ever seen FALLS

hands tied is just bs,

just read this
the protest was brother moon being denied a fair start (this is what was announced)
the protest was UPHELD
therefore if (& it was) denied a fair start it should be a non runner
these are the facts as we know them to be
if top of the kew weakened & missed money & the same protest was upheld what happens then ?
the decision is WRONG & you can not justify it

BAYMAN
My previous post was speculative hence the word MAY.

Lets try and get things into perspective
They race at GDP and we have horses, drivers and a race for prizemoney.
Lets pretend BAYMAN/MAL are the owners of Brother Moon.
We are both very very angry at the starter for his absolute shamozzle.
But its happened and we got dealt a bad hand.
The stewards have made a decision whether its right, wrong, moralistic, or unfair
Would we want Brother Moon to be declared a non runner?
OR
Would we prefer the 2nd or 3rd prizemoney pending the protest ?
I would prefer the money without a shadow of doubt.

I do understand the real connections frustration on the matter.
But what can the stewards do ?
Call it a non runner and cost the owners prizemoney
Make it a no race and deprive the winner MENDACITY the win
There is no 100% definitive rightful decision on the matter

Have viewed the race again
I have found what caused the problem.
As the horses were scoring up Jimmiah Jaques was announcing the
70th birthday of the Bad Samaritan
The starter was distracted .....

Dont Agree MAL.

If a Horse is interfered with and DENIED a FAIR start BEFORE the Starter says' GO, It Should Be Declared a NON-RUNNER unless it WINS the Race.

Running 2nd, 3rd, 4th or whatever placing, shouldn't matter whether the connections are happy to have the prizemoney or not. The Name of the Game is to WIN and if the horse doesn't and was Denied a FAIR START in doing so, it HAS to be a NON-RUNNER surely.

THe Punter HAS to be Looked after in these situations Because the industry would be completely **** without the Punting $$$$$$$$$$$ invested on it.

I know how to fix the problem up at Gawler, bomb the joint up??????? Be a sensational start to 2008

STRUTTER wrote:I know how to fix the problem up at Gawler, bomb the joint up??????? Be a sensational start to 2008

osama bin strutter

Just need to clarify on this bewildering occurence.
Im as perplexed as all as to why Brother Moon was not declared a non runner.
But one thing I will stick by is the irrelevance of who backed who.
If you were an owner who backed it to win, you would be understandably upset
If you were an owner who did not have a bet, you would be upset BUT would
take the prizemoney for running 2nd in a feature race.
What happens in the betting ring + TABs should not be on the agenda on
a ruling to BM being a non starter.

ANOTHER SCENARIO
If this was a non TAB meeting with no Bookie would you want BM to be a non runner ?
As I have said there is prizemoney to be considered.

STEWARDS
Having adjourned on the matter after the race was completed are they allowed to
make a decision based on a starters blunder ?
Perhaps there is a rule that we are not aware of ?

TAB
They would want BM as a runner and no refunds, more commission, greed.

CONTACT THE CLUB

82582522
PO BOX 271 SALISBURY 5108
SAHRC@CHARIOT.COM.AU

The only thing left is an explanation to the public by the SAHRC.
Then I can make an opinion

ONE MORE SCENARIO
What if BM still won the race?

the prizemoney for this race was

2nd $1155.00
3rd $770.00

hardly life changing prizemoney & as for sending an e-mail or snail mail to the sahrc, well we all know scaffidi can't drive sent one with NO REPLY (unprofessional), so we wouldn't get one either & mal this isn't to do with who backed what it is to do with fairness for ALL runners

$1155 PRIZEMONEY for running 2nd.
thats a lot of $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
I guess the connections of the 4th horse MISTER ALBERT would have wanted BM a non runner

BAYMAN
You used a word FAIRNESS
You are a 100% right BM was unfairly treated
BUT
$1155 PRIZEMONEY its unfair to ditch that as well

mal wrote:$1155 PRIZEMONEY for running 2nd.
thats a lot of $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
I guess the connections of the 4th horse MISTER ALBERT would have wanted BM a non runner

BAYMNA
You used a word FAIRNESS
You are a 100% right BM was unfairly treated
BUT
$1155 PRIZEMONEY its unfair to ditch that as well

well 4th got $231.00

BAYMAN if you owned the horse and did not have a bet in the race
would you take the $1155
or
want it to be a non runner ?

mal wrote:BAYMAN if you owned the horse and did not have a bet in the race
would you take the $1155
or
want it to be a non runner ?

i would as they all do accept the umpires decision but that doesn't mean we can't discuss the problem, last night had the biggest crowd for almost 12 months out there (no surprise) now if someone had backed it that doesn't understand the whole concept what would he/she think of it ? they'd think 'my horse didn't get a fair go which isn't acceptable (isn't the australian way to have a fair go ?) & i wont come out here again'

ITS RAFFERTY'S RULES