October
FebruaryStipes were right
What is so hard to grasp for those punters that feel they were wronged by the Tivaci/Palentino protest decision?
The thinking that the interference happened too far from the post, and that the second-placed horse “had enough time to balance up again and run the winner down” is just rubbish.
Interference is interference. Craig Williams on Tivaci had a right to his running (three wide with cover). That running was taken away by Mark Zahra on Palentino. Mark Zahra checking off heels is not Craig Williams’ problem.
Tivaci went from three wide with cover to six wide with no cover.
The one and only thing stewards need to do is decide whether Tivaci would have beaten Palentino without the interference, and the answer is a resounding yes.
Protest upheld.
I challenge any aggrieved punter to a lap of Flemington versus me, on foot.
Let me kick you in the shins at the top of the straight, then I’ll tell you when we get to the post that “you had 500m to pick yourself up again and run me down”.
Give me a spell.
Carnegie (Vic)