What really annoys me is that anybody who dares question the race is branded as being anti-racing or some sort of tree hugger or animal rights activist.
There is a significant number of people involved in the sport who do have genuine concerns about the National and the National course.
Those with genuine concerns have produced evidence to highlight the increased risks but they tend to be summarily dismissed by those who blindly support the race.
Having concerns about the National and the National course does nor correlate with calling for an abolition of NH racing or racing in general.
To bracket all with concerns as with the extremists does little to promote healthy debate.
Very well said.
Those who make accusations of lily-livered and all the other tripe against EVERYONE who has any negative opinion on the race are just as wrong as those who campaign that all racing is cruel.
My own opinion is that the national and its fences are unnecessarily difficult and I really don’t like the spectacle of so many horses falling and being injured. So I would prefer the fences completely changed and just cosmetic dressing applied. I believe the vast majority of once-a-year race watchers really don’t know or care much about the exact nature of the fences or the race. They are far more likely to care about animal cruelty stores is the press. I also fear this one race will encourage mounting criticism of all NH racing.
Cars are dangerous but it’s not reasonable to ban driving them. Instead we wear seatbelts and have speed limits. It’s all about balance.