DIFFERENCE IN RULES
In New Zealand, Australia, and India, if an objection or protest for interference lodged on behalf of. a horse who has finished second be upheld; the positions of first and second are merely reversed. It is not so in England. There the horse who has been successfully objected against is placed last. Rule 173 of . the-;' English Jockey Club's rules :of racing reads: —"If an objection to a horse which' has won or been, placed in a race be declared valid, the., horse shall be regarded as having been last in Ithe'.race, and shall not be entitled to'any prize; the.other horses shall take positions accordingly." ■■ I ■ ■ ■'" ' ■ ■■ '~ • ' • ■ The subject came .up. again owing to an-incident at th& Doncaster Spring Meeting. Probus II and' jßed ■ Hot Poker had a keen.duel for first, and Probus II just won. An objection-for interference Was sustained, . and the race awarded to .Red Hot Poker. Although there had been a margin of four-lengths between second and third, Probus II was placed last. This provoked many; complaints. .The growth of place and machine betting in Eng-. Land1 may cause the Jockey Club to revise the existing rule.
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/EP19350701.2.32.2
Bibliographic details
Evening Post, Volume CXX, Issue 1, 1 July 1935, Page 6
Word Count
192DIFFERENCE IN RULES Evening Post, Volume CXX, Issue 1, 1 July 1935, Page 6
Using This Item
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Evening Post. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 3.0 New Zealand licence. This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.