Quote:
Originally Posted by Witton Park
I think we should be realistic about horse racing as well. Most race horses will end up in the knackers yard once they have finished racing not spending their retirement years in a quiet pasture somewhere.
Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by Witton Park
I think we should be realistic about horse racing as well. Most race horses will end up in the knackers yard once they have finished racing not spending their retirement years in a quiet pasture somewhere.
The race was indeed marred by these fatallities. But these animals are bred to race and are well looked after during their life time, it is just unfortunate some are fatally injured on the race course and die in veiw of the public. Where would these horses be without racing though? They wouldnt, they would be long gone. Racing generates a massive income to the treasury also, this needs to be taken into account by all the anti racing crowd.
If I was told I would die running somewhere, Id take that over getn humanely destroyed after being deemed of no use anymore :p
That is the most ridiculous argument I have heard!Quote:
Originally Posted by TheReverand
The horses don't get a choice about death. To say that they wouldn't be alive in the first place if it weren't for horse racing and therefore it's acceptable for them to die racing is just an outrageous statement. It's as outrageous as the breeders and owners that put them to sleep when they are injured or can longher race on the basis that they 'wouldn't be happy if they weren't racing'. It's also the same ridiculous and selfish bull that some greyhound breeders and owners come out with.
The GN causes horse deaths almost every time it;s run and that;s what makes it stand out, for all the wrong reasons, against other horse races.
Fuel duty genereates an enoromous amount of revenue for the treasury doesn't make it right though does it!!
The GN is a race that tests horse and rider to the max that is what makes it exciting! Are we to go through life dumming everything down(would'nt it be boring) People have died doing marathons, does that mean we have to ban them! We run our fell races knowing that there is a element of danger, I for one find that exciting.Quote:
Originally Posted by Flopsy
Horse racing - hate it.
Dog racing - hate it.
As has been previously mentioned, sport can be dangerous and these are all part of the risks and to an element the fun involved but - Senna died doing a sport he loved and chose to do, fell races could be dangerous - but we love and choose to do them, rock climbing is dangerous - but we choose to do it. The GN is dangerous but the horses do not get a choice to do it - if it was the jockey that was killed each time then that is acceptable as he has chose to do it, just like Peter Toole recently (although he is only in a coma).
It is very sad that two horses died during their runs at the GN, but unfortunately that is the nature of the sport. The effect is amplified countless times due to the media attention placed on this one race. The course, trainers and everyone involved have taken giant strides in recent years to mitigate much of the danger previously associated with the race. Unfortunate as it is when this happens people’s knee jerk reaction is centred on the 'cruelty' of the race: the demands of the high fences and the length of the race etc., this is something of a fallacy. During any race horses are tested to their limits, how many people have mentioned the horse that died at Doncaster on Saturday, racing a little over half a mile on the flat? It's a risky sport, people involved with it understand this, once a year punters don't hence the overreaction.
Whilst I appreciate the distinction between humans choosing and horses 'being forced' I don't think you can disagree that these animals are bred to jump and race and if you've spent any time around horses will know that they love to do so. If a horse didn't want to go round it wouldn't, as you'll know if you've seen horses refusing to enter stalls or unseating riders at the first fence - it's pretty difficult for a 9 stone jockey to stop a horse weighing around 70 stone doing what it wants to do.
There is a possible argument to have stricter entry requirements for the race. It could easily be argued that the two horses that died were not of a sufficient standard to even merit entry to the race.
People die in cars on motorways and urban roads, should we ban all driving?
Of course not.
So if you don't like racing don't watch it. The media and press is a pain in our country.
Any of you heard of Vodkatini? - He was a classy chaser that once went to post as favourite over Desert Orchid but refused to start.
It was a regular trait - if he didn't want to race, he didn't race. If he wanted to pull out during a race he would, once when in the lead with only 1 to jump.
He twice refused to start, gave the other horses 10 seconds, decided to set off after all and the won.
An amazing horse, a frustrating but fascinating character.
Animals cannot be forced. They have to get something out of it and generally you can see they enjoy it.
My Senna comparison was not on the topic of choice - it was to demonstrate the difficulty that broadcasters have when faced with live tragedy. Senna, Hillsborough, the Twin Towers etc - how do you handle these type of events as they unfold before you?Quote:
Originally Posted by sore legs
I would argue that the horses did love what they did and of course they don't make the race entries, but they enjoy the excitement and exhilaration of the race.
Of course you are fully entitled to your opinion and I doubt it is likely to change.
But horse racing is not barbaric. It has a risk element to it that can lead to tragedy - the question is at what point is the line drawn. I am sure that the racing industry will continue to do what it can to improve the safety for the horses and jockeys as it has done over the years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flopsy
I tend to agree with you Flopsy, I've always felt that the National is a shocker of a race, especially on a warm day like it was on Saturday.