Jamie Spencer

What's he riding with, 2 broken wrists?

A shocking show of horsemanship nearly injurying 2 horses, the bloke is an absolute liablity and should get a 40 day ban for that.

I was more concerned that he wasn't riding for his main retainer - considering how the race was set up for him, I may now know the answer.

duplicated

[Posts: 3324Joined: 20 May 2009, 03:40]

I don't know if any action has been taken, but if he's not thrown out then something is seriously wrong with this game. A similar thing happened at Brighton over 2 months ago that was even worse and no action was taken. Ridiculous.

[Posts: 3324Joined: 20 May 2009, 03:40]

'Stewards Inquiry - Result Stands'

What's the point of it all? I really feel like giving all this rubbish up and just betting on French stuff. Non-corrupt, fair racing.

[Posts: 3957Joined: 03 Feb 2006, 11:39Location: Sacramento,CA.]

Incredible performance.Took everything out of the race from his outside position including the fav.who he bumped into the rail in the final drive.Unbelievable.Stewards were perfectly happy to let him keep the race.What does Spencer have to do to lose a race?

[Posts: 1433Joined: 01 Oct 2007, 01:52Location: Solitary confinement, east London.]

I think the result being allowed to stand somehow manages to overshadow Jamies psychotic performance in the saddle.

After Ascot I thought the stewarding in this country was at an all-time low (De Sousa vs Queally) - I'm now sure it doesn't exist.

[Posts: 12272Joined: 22 Dec 2007, 19:24]

On what grounds should the winner be disqualified?

I've only seen the head on once (so reserve the right to change my mind) but seemed to me the winner on merit, and won with quite a bit in hand.

You could see the horse was unbalanced. From what I saw: Spencer did not ride in to the others, the horse took him there against his wishes. OK once alongside the runner up should have changed the whip hand. But again, the horse did not wander when immediately hit with the whip, seemed only to go accross afterwards. So could be argued the whip had nothing to do with it either.

[Posts: 3957Joined: 03 Feb 2006, 11:39Location: Sacramento,CA.]

Since according to one reader the horse,not Jamie was responsible for what happened then just go ahead and adjust the placing leaving the horse behind those he interferedn with. No problem.I don't care who is to blame just do the right thing.

[Posts: 1610Joined: 11 May 2010, 14:41]

Couldnt believe that a) he was allowed to keep it and b) the stewards made up their minds so quickly. He completely took out the 2nd and 3rd.

Stewards are terribly inconsistent in this country - I keep thinking of poor old Noel Martin losing the 1,000 Guineas when JQ caused SO much less interference.

[Posts: 10785Joined: 10 Feb 2003, 15:43Location: Scotland]

Agree Jonibake re 1'000 Guineas.

Look at that race today then that Guineas. Then tell me which caused worse interference.

No wonder Elsworth didn't want his jockey talking to the media.

Well done Derek T for standing up to bullying tactics. #goneupinmyestimation

[Posts: 3324Joined: 20 May 2009, 03:40]

I think the result being allowed to stand somehow manages to overshadow Jamies psychotic performance in the saddle.

After Ascot I thought the stewarding in this country was at an all-time low (De Sousa vs Queally) - I'm now sure it doesn't exist.

http://www.theracingforum.co.uk/horse-r ... 86710.html

Watch the replay of that race. It's utterly pathetic that that hasn't been thrown out either. Our game is so bent it's untrue.

[Posts: 1610Joined: 11 May 2010, 14:41]

I went on Betfair to lay off but the price never went beyond 1.05! Everyone knew the stewards would bottle it.