Grand National

I don't follow horse racing these days - but I used to do back in the 80s and 90s.

Yes it is a little about gambling - but for many it's just a sport like F1 or athletics. It's a race, entertaining to watch and we all have our favourites.

The horses become household names - especially the jumpers. Everyone knows Red Rum, Desert Orchid, Party Politics, West Tip... and I go back to Night Nurse and Sea Pigeon who had some epic tussles over the hurdles.
They are much more popular than the flat horses, who do have a higher value.

The people in the sport and fans of the sport love the horses - that is without doubt. The horses are part of the family. No one could compare them to humans, but they are well treated, well looked after and the horses love to race - there have been many examples of race horses that have refused to race and eventually been retired - you cannot make them race.

Of course horses do not mountaineer, but the comparison is a fair one as sport and life are not without risk. The question is, has the sport done all it can reasonably be expected to do to mitigate the risk?
How many of us with off our kids on school coach trips, to go skiing, or on outward bounds trips? They are not without risk as we unfortunately see too often.

There is a fair argument to say that the measures taken to make the National safer have perhaps made it more dangerous. The fences are not as big, the ditches not as deep and therefore the speed of the horses is higher than it typically was 30 years ago.

I would like to see a smaller field - 40 makes it more of a spectacle, but it also makes it more congested and many of the horses that fall are brought down by others that have hampered them.
I think a field of 30 would make a difference.

I also think they should have an entry criteria. In a way like some fell races do. There are at times horses in the field that have never won over more than 2.5 miles and may be doubtful stayers.
Also look at some of the form and you see horses with UFUF in their form which clearly suggest they have jumping problems.

1. All horses must have completed a race in excess of 3 miles during the season as a qualifier.
2. Any horse with more than one fall, unseated rider or refused in the last 6 races should be barred from entry.

The horses have not been given the choice to race, if YOU decide to climb a mountain that's YOUR choice. And you suffer the consequences if you fall off said mountain.

OK they don't physically enter themselves in to the races, but how many of us take the dogs up on the fells, or down the park? The dogs don't actually put in a written request to go do they?
They all have the choice and if you follow the sport you know that they do quite often refuse to start, or refuse to jump.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superflyguy

wow, you should apply for a column on the Daily Mail they'd love your ill informed view and sweeping misconceptions !

---

and what is your informed view exactly ? forcing horses to kill themselves ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Danbert Nocurry

Bloody hell Alf - you want to get on ebay to buy a club, so that you can give it those seals big time :w00t:

---

i·ro·ny
Noun:
The expression of one's meaning by using language that normally signifies the opposite, typically for emphatic effect.

In all seriousness I guess it's all about what the moral boundaries are to man's use and abuse of animals.

Gradually abuse of animals for entertainment has been eradicated e.g. circuses, fox hunting, bull fighting etc. So if the death of horses continues then the Grand National will go the same way and good ridance to it say I.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Witton Park

OK they don't physically enter themselves in to the races, but how many of us take the dogs up on the fells, or down the park? The dogs don't actually put in a written request to go do they?
They all have the choice and if you follow the sport you know that they do quite often refuse to start, or refuse to jump.

---

One of the things that I dont like about the racing is the 'thrashing' of the horses by the riders using their whips. I know there is supposed to be legislation in place to prevent excessive hitting but after watching the news of the GN finish the grey horse that won had had his arse thrashed for the last 60 seconds or so - in fact was he even bleeding on his rump?

When I take my dogs for runs or on the hills I dont beat them with a cane to make them do it or go faster - you can not dress this up as 'encouragement'.

A barbaric sport in my opinion by people who certainly do not care about the animals other than to keep them running so that they can make profit. Worse than fox hunting - but hey what do I know.

Barbaric seems a little OTT. You may not like it but I can't see how it can be perceived as such.

The use of the whip has come under a lot of scrutiny over the years and as I say I do not follow the sport like I used to, but even 20 years ago if a jockey left marks on the rump of a horse he would be disciplined.

There are rules about the manner and frequency of use. There is also pressure to get rid of the whip altogether and I believe they had a whip free meeting last year.

I don't ride, so I don't know how much use a whip is, and what the level of need is. I imagine there are some horse riders on the forum who can advise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alf

and what is your informed view exactly ? forcing horses to kill themselves ?

---

if you really believe, as 'ironicly' stated that any owner would race a horse and be ambivalent with regard to its welfare you are ill-informed. My informed view is that all owners care a great deal about there animals, I believe this is borne out by the reactions on Saturday. Your knee jerk ramblings are neither accurate nor helpful to any debate on a subject which you clearly feel strongly about but haven't really bothered to delve into the facts of (a common problem and not just with this issue)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sore legs

.... in fact was he even bleeding on his rump? .....

---

highly unlikely. a modern racing whip is nothing like the CANE you allude to, it's more like a very flexible padded ruler (with a handle). it's even debatable how effective it is given the toughness of a horses hind quarters, hence rumours of it being removed from racing all together.
having said that I do agree that Daryl Jacobs used his whip excessively and wouldn't be surprised if he was fined or banned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Witton Park

Barbaric seems a little OTT. You may not like it but I can't see how it can be perceived as such.

---

Perhaps we should have a race called the GRAND FINALE NATIONAL. Basically it would be a 40 horse race but full of all horses that are on their last season and heading for the dog bowl or to becoming a pritt stick.

They would all race and those that don't place could be executed on the spot, those that do place could get to live happily ever after in butlins giving toddlers and fat Daily Mail readers rides.



Get it banned it's bloody barbaric alright.