Ban the Grand National?

[Marc1901]

In the papers today there are people who are calling for the race to be banned as viewers seem the event has become too dangerous after 2 horses were killed and a jockey was seriously injured.

Do you feel it would be a great loss if the race was to be banned OR you agree it just is not safe anymore.

 

[Nathan]

The jockey that was injured fell in one of the races before the grand national.

 

[Curious Orange]

I think there should be a ban on banning things.

If people were really concerned about race horse welfare they'd be busy buying up the ones currently heading for the slaughter house in Ireland.

 

[Scotty Mac]

what a load of bollocks

 

[Napper]

National aside , there have been over 100 deaths to horses racing since 2000 alone. Think the National is on about 30 but unsure if that is the total.

Pretty sad and stats quite shocking.

I expect they will change the course again as seems quite a lot of opinion behind this.

I'm undecided. Such a big day for families up and down the country, 70k enjoy a day out there. Billions made and many people depend on it. Tone down the course and it just wouldnt be the same surely

 

[Hotchilidog]

Horses die at Aintree every year, these are not accidents, they are the inevitable consequence of a race that is designed to put the maximium strain on the horses who take part. It is total disgrace that the BBC website did not acknowledge the deaths on the front page of their National Coverage on sunday.

Hundreds of horses die on the track each year yet the industry doesn't keep the statistics. This doesn't even take into account what happens to the thousands of horses who are bred for racing but don't make the grade. Still as long as people get to make their bets everything is just dandy isn't it.

Horse Race Deathwatch

 

[Normal Rob]

I've copied and pasted my comment from a previous thread...


Sorry but I've been a betting man and a horse racing fan for 20 years + now and i think that it's time that the National was put to history. It's a bad race, a donkey derby if you will, that results in the deaths of noble horses so that the bookies can line their pockets with the money of the ignorant. Seeing the remaining field run past the covered corpse of the first fallen horse, and the vets putting the gun to the second horse, just brought it home to me. I think that the national should go. I don't think it will, but from today it will be a different race. And, as much as that surprises me given my previous feelings, I think that that will be for the good of racing.

 

[beorhthelm]

Horses die at Aintree every year, these are not accidents....

and there the argument should end, as this is bollocks. they are accidents, not a single incident is intended or predictable, therefore by definition it is an accident.

no horses died in teh race last year. i dont recall many deaths, the focus this year is because its unusual. hourse die in other races, so should we ban all racing? horses can and presumably do sustain fatal injuries while trotting around the countryside, over a few barrels in a field etc. shall we ban keeping of horses, just in case?

 

[Djmiles]

164 years and 600 million viewers would suggest not many people care about the horses well-being.

Funny how the same newspapers who are whining about it, were the same ones that were bigging up their Grand National betting promotions with betting shops/websites to help sell more newspapers. *CoughTheSunCough*

 

[Left Footer]

ban driving as well then as people are always dying in crashes, ban flying as well , ban life.

 

[New Carpet?]

In the papers today there are people who are calling for the race to be banned as viewers seem the event has become too dangerous after 2 horses were killed and a jockey was seriously injured.

Do you feel it would be a great loss if the race was to be banned OR you agree it just is not safe anymore.

Believe it or not, the race is probably actually safer than it ever has been. Aintree have worked really hard making the racecourse still a challenge but far less harmful - reducing the drop from some fences, watering the fast course and for the first time this year unfortunately, bypassing fences. Honestly, you go back and look at some Nationals from decades gone by and how devastating it used to look then.

The main reason why there were two fatalities this year was down to the run of the race more than anything - they went off at a breakneck pace on still pretty quick ground, and as a result were always running the risk of more error in judgement with the jumping. Ballabriggs was the second-quickest ever winner of the race, which goes to show how fast they were going.

It's very sad that there were two fatalities in this year's race - it's very understandable why so many people are upset with what happened this year (especially as there were explanations as to why the fences were bypassed) and it was inevitable that this debate has come up again.

I can see both sides of the argument, but personally I think racing should continue with this time-honoured tradition and let Aintree do what they can in making the race safer so that what happened to Ornais and Dooneys Gate becomes less of a rarity in future runnings of the race. After all, the clerk of the course must feel more disappointed about how Saturday turned out than anybody and will do his utmost to ensure next year all forty horses are unharmed.

 

[Left Footer]

they are just about to discuss it on jeremy vine so lets hear all the do gooders on that whining

 

[Hotchilidog]

and there the argument should end, as this is bollocks. they are accidents, not a single incident is intended or predictable, therefore by definition it is an accident.

no horses died in teh race last year. i dont recall many deaths, the focus this year is because its unusual. hourse die in other races, so should we ban all racing? horses can and presumably do sustain fatal injuries while trotting around the countryside, over a few barrels in a field etc. shall we ban keeping of horses, just in case?

Sorry mate deaths at the national meeting are entirely predictable, they happen every year as a result of the difficulty of the course. It's the freakish nature of the course that makes the race so popular. Check my previous link and see what is just a tip of the iceberg in this industry that only exists so people can bet on it. Race horses are exploited for the benefit of those people who make money out of them. Personally I am in favour of a ban on racing, in particular jump racing which places an extra strain on the horses. One of the horses broke it's neck for the edification of the watching public on saturday, and very few people actually give a shit. It's a disgrace.

There's a difference between keeping horses and looking after them and taking them out for a run etc and deliberately putting them in a perilous environment such as the Grand National.

 

[Bold Seagull]

ban driving as well then as people are always dying in crashes, ban flying as well , ban life.

Are deaths through driving or flight an acceptable consequence in your opinion then, or should we continue to try to make them safer!?

 

[Lincoln Imp]

and there the argument should end, as this is bollocks. they are accidents, not a single incident is intended or predictable, therefore by definition it is an accident.

no horses died in teh race last year. i dont recall many deaths, the focus this year is because its unusual. hourse die in other races, so should we ban all racing? horses can and presumably do sustain fatal injuries while trotting around the countryside, over a few barrels in a field etc. shall we ban keeping of horses, just in case?

It can be predicted that horses will die in the Grand National because they often do. I agree that none of the deaths is intended but that is no defence - if it was we wouldn't have needed to change Formula One racing since the bloodbath sixties.

I'm against the Grand National for the same reason I'm against foxhunting - it seems to me to be wrong to take pleasure from anything that involves the death and suffering of innocent animals. It's immoral by my book but that's just an opinion. In my perfect world people would be more sensitive but they're not and there are plenty of other things we should be worrying about first.

 

[beorhthelm]

Sorry mate deaths at the national meeting are entirely predictable,

statistically predictable that one or two will occur, but not the actual incident. no owner or trainer puts out a horse they consider unable to make the course, therfore any incident is an accident. if you are against racing at the National, fair enough, but it should follow that the same applies to any hunt race and flat racing have injuries so should be banned too. theres no logic or reason to focus on one race and not the whole industry. once racing is gone (and all those horses put down or exported to race on elsewhere), you'll have to then look at the injuries and mis-treatment of all other horses. they are only kept for the benefit of peoples enjoyment, any injury or death is apparently for the edification of those horse lovers and so they are better off not being kept at all in the first place.

 

[narly101]

One of the reasons why I don't bet on it. I wouldn't advocate its banning, but for me its a barbaric race.

 

[Scotty Mac]

164 years and 600 million viewers would suggest not many people care about the horses well-being.

Funny how the same newspapers who are whining about it, were the same ones that were bigging up their Grand National betting promotions with betting shops/websites to help sell more newspapers. *CoughTheSunCough*

thats typical sun isnt it

 

[Waynflete]

I don't think it's helpful to turn this into a polarised debate about whether a particular race should be banned or not. Unless you ban horse-racing entirely there will always be a risk that horses (and riders) will be injured or killed. The question should be where do you set the limits of acceptable risk and what actions do you take to reduce risk down to that level? In Formula One, for example, there are hundreds of regulations that attempt to reduce risk to the drivers and some of those are detrimental to racing in the view of some.

In my opinion the risks associated with the Grand National are too great and they need to make further changes to reduce them. But it's not quite the same as saying 'ban this' or 'ban that' as that's a much too simplistic argument.

 

[withdeanwombat]

what a load of bollocks

Nicely put.

This rubbish surfaces every time a horse dies in the National,but nobody gives a schmitt if Dobby Dogfood falls in a hurdle at Southwell and gets put down.