Hey there Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

should the grand national be banned? POLL

Announcements Posted on
Post on TSR and win a prize! Find out more... 10-04-2014
  • View Poll Results: Should the Grand National be made illegal?
    Yes Its cruel
    45
    19.91%
    No its fun and these things just happen
    51
    22.57%
    I dont care either way
    20
    8.85%
    It shouldnt be illegal but should be improved
    110
    48.67%

    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Biggest load of codswallop i've ever heard! The sport entertains, the horses enjoy it, yes there is risk and jockeys and horses may die but it is on the whole enjoyed by all. If the horses did not enjoy it, why do they get back up and get back involved? More ******** from those who have no respect for how other people live. If it is so upsetting, don't watch it! The Grand National is the most spectacular of it's kind in the world, keep your bull**** in Westminster!
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Arbolus)
    What I don't understand is, why did the horses have to be put down? All they did was break a leg. If a footballer did the same then it might well mean the end of his career, but there's just as good a chance that he'll be back on the pitch after a few months for healing and extra training. Even if the horses injuries were severe enough that they'd never race again, why could they not have been used for breeding or sold for some other purpose? Retired greyhounds are commonly adopted as pets; why could something similar not happen for retired racehorses?

    I don't know much about horses, but it seems to me that the main reason for deaths is because the owners don't want to have to pay for the upkeep while the animal recovers. If that's the case then it should be the owners being denounced by animal rights groups, not the sport.
    Someone will probably beat me to posting this reply, but I'll do it anyway! Fractures are much more complicated in horses than in humans, which is why euthanasia is often the best option. A horse's instinct tells it to try and stand, which would worsen any damage, putting the house in further pain and reducing the chance of recovery. Sadly, it is actually very difficult to treat serious fractures in horses. As for your point about owners not caring, this isn't really true. If the horse could be kept alive, it would be either raced again, or put to stud for breeding, which both bring in a lot of money for the owner, particularly if it was a good horse.
    • 12 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Arbolus)
    What I don't understand is, why did the horses have to be put down? All they did was break a leg. If a footballer did the same then it might well mean the end of his career, but there's just as good a chance that he'll be back on the pitch after a few months for healing and extra training. Even if the horses injuries were severe enough that they'd never race again, why could they not have been used for breeding or sold for some other purpose? Retired greyhounds are commonly adopted as pets; why could something similar not happen for retired racehorses?

    I don't know much about horses, but it seems to me that the main reason for deaths is because the owners don't want to have to pay for the upkeep while the animal recovers. If that's the case then it should be the owners being denounced by animal rights groups, not the sport.
    A fracture to the leg for a horse would mean weeks probably months of box rest and it's just no possible to keep a horse confined for that amount of time.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Phillipsherman)
    Fabrice Muamba could've died earlier this year - but no one suggests banning football
    Fabrice Muamba did not have a heart attack because of football. He had a heart attack because he had a heart attack. Should we ban public transport because someone had a heart attack on a bus? No. This is such a ridiculous and ignorant comparsion.
    • 6 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Millyshyn)
    Did any die this year? I only saw them falling over and then getting back up again. Didn't seem too bad. Although out of 40 only 15 seemed to have finished the race :/

    I just read up a bit more and 2 horses got put down because they fractured a leg? They shouldn't have been put down because of that! That hardly seems like a 'fatal' injury, what the hell. I don't think they should be banning the race, but the owners should be a bit more responsible and instead of putting down the horses that are injured, just look after them. Seems really inhumane to put them down because they are unable to race again. Synchronised carried on running after falling so I don't believe he would have died had be not been 'put down'. They didn't just die in the race, they were killed. That's what I think anyway.
    (Original post by Arbolus)
    What I don't understand is, why did the horses have to be put down? All they did was break a leg. If a footballer did the same then it might well mean the end of his career, but there's just as good a chance that he'll be back on the pitch after a few months for healing and extra training. Even if the horses injuries were severe enough that they'd never race again, why could they not have been used for breeding or sold for some other purpose? Retired greyhounds are commonly adopted as pets; why could something similar not happen for retired racehorses?

    I don't know much about horses, but it seems to me that the main reason for deaths is because the owners don't want to have to pay for the upkeep while the animal recovers. If that's the case then it should be the owners being denounced by animal rights groups, not the sport.
    Leg fractures for horses are basically fatal.
    They're nearly impossible to treat, and a horse can't just support itself on three legs (while the other one was in a cast or something) the way cats or dogs can. It really is kinder in the long run to put them down.
    One of the most infamous horses that they tried to save was Barbaro. Read through the section on his six surgeries.

    As for the owners 'not wanting to pay for them', a lot of racehorses, if they recover, are kept or sold on to loving homes, for breeding or just for fun. I used to ride an ex-racehorse who was retired after he got a hairline fracture on one of his front legs. It healed up and he's living a long and happy life.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Two horses have been put down due to injury, so should the whole thing be cancelled next year?

    In the times of austerity and high unemployment rates surely sheer the number of jobs and lively hoods that the GN, and horse racing in general provide both directly (people working at Aintree) and indirectly (your local bookies) outweighs the price of the horses deaths.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    No banning the national would be stupid! If anyones complaining about the wlefare of the animals, why not start by complaining about Bullfighting or something, where the welfare of the animals is terrible. The horses that die are a minority, you can't just ban it. This is going down the same road as all the 'Health and Safety' B0LL0CKS.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hobo389)
    Biggest load of codswallop i've ever heard! The sport entertains, the horses enjoy it, yes there is risk and jockeys and horses may die but it is on the whole enjoyed by all. If the horses did not enjoy it, why do they get back up and get back involved? More ******** from those who have no respect for how other people live. If it is so upsetting, don't watch it! The Grand National is the most spectacular of it's kind in the world, keep your bull**** in Westminster!
    I totally agree with you 100%!
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I hate animals. Especially horses

    Die, die, die horsies.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	beating_a_dead_horse.jpg 
Views:	38 
Size:	28.5 KB 
ID:	142023
    • 14 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NeuralGroove)
    I hate animals. Especially horses

    Die, die, die horsies.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	beating_a_dead_horse.jpg 
Views:	38 
Size:	28.5 KB 
ID:	142023
    errrr...
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BusheSCFC)
    No banning the national would be stupid! If anyones complaining about the wlefare of the animals, why not start by complaining about Bullfighting or something, where the welfare of the animals is terrible. The horses that die are a minority, you can't just ban it. This is going down the same road as all the 'Health and Safety' B0LL0CKS.
    What an utterly ****e argument.

    First of all, bull-fighting doesn't happen in this country, so why would people here give a damn?

    Secondly, telling people to go and complain about something else is awfully childish and a pathetic attempt to turn attention away from something which clearly needs better safety measures in place.

    Thirdly, this "Healthy and Safety *******s" that you're having a go at, do you think it's put in place just to piss people off? I'd like to see you living in a world where health and safety measures don't exist and I guarantee you'll be pleading for people to introduce them after a few days.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cl_steele)
    errrr...
    Neigh.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cl_steele)
    this may sound calous but you cant treat an animal the same as a human by the logic of what youre saying we can no longer eat meat as it involves 'murdering' an animal as they have no choice in the matter?
    I believe there is a difference to killing out of necessity and risking their lives for nothing more than sport. We can't survive without food. We can survive without getting horses to race each other.

    (again I want to make it clear I don't think an outright ban is right, I think they deserve the chance to improve safety)

    (Original post by cl_steele)
    well if we think about this both these animals [this year at least] died because of humans killing them neither one died from the race as they were euphanised.
    Directly due to the events that happened during the race itself.

    (Original post by cl_steele)
    what changes are you proposing that wouldnt compromise the race?
    I'm no expert in horse biology or the exact course layout so I have no idea, I just know more can be done to improve safety. If some concessions need to be made in the courses layout then so be it. It's for the greater good.

    (Original post by cl_steele)
    hmmm that may be but again these are animals not people and as such they arent afforded the same rights.
    This is another debate altogether and one which will never end!
    • 14 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tahooper)
    What an utterly ****e argument.

    First of all, bull-fighting doesn't happen in this country, so why would people here give a damn?

    Secondly, telling people to go and complain about something else is awfully childish and a pathetic attempt to turn attention away from something which clearly needs better safety measures in place.

    Thirdly, this "Healthy and Safety *******s" that you're having a go at, do you think it's put in place just to piss people off? I'd like to see you living in a world where health and safety measures don't exist and I guarantee you'll be pleading for people to introduce them after a few days.
    i think what the poster was trying to convey is how H&S has gone so far in recent years that many formaly perfectly acceptable activities that are relatively low risk have still been dumped all over by the mothers brigade because of one or two incidents that have been made high profile but are in the severe minority
    • 21 followers
    Online

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sternumator)
    I think they should keep it going as it is. They shouldn't 'improve' it because the reason the Grand National is good is because there are big jumps and loads of jockeys come off which is exciting. I don't think the horses suffer much, they are put down quickly after they get injured. Loads of animals get killed everyday for meat and most people aren't concerned about that, I don't see why horses dieing in the Grand National is any different.
    This. You could argue we don't need to have the grand national but we dont need to eat meat either..
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cl_steele)
    i think what the poster was trying to convey is how H&S has gone so far in recent years that many formaly perfectly acceptable activities that are relatively low risk have still been dumped all over by the mothers brigade because of one or two incidents that have been made high profile but are in the severe minority
    But in horse racing, it is not relatively low risk (15 of the 40 horses made it to the end without something going wrong) and horse deaths are commonplace so today's event are certainly not in the "severe minority".
    • 14 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cakefish)
    I believe there is a difference to killing out of necessity and risking their lives for nothing more than sport. We can't survive without food. We can survive without getting horses to race each other.

    we cant survive without food, true. we can happily survive without meat though, its not a necessity, after all dont vegans and vegetarians get by perfectly well without it? but i beieve this does relate back to your last point about animals being awarded the same rights as humans as choice is a human right, no? but on that note many would argue that humans place on this earth be it through nature or just our evolution is to tame animals and that is has been done with horses whether you want to call it 'tamed' or 'enslaved' is another matter but the same conclusion.


    (again I want to make it clear I don't think an outright ban is right, I think they deserve the chance to improve safety)



    Directly due to the events that happened during the race itself.

    yes but these events could occur at any event be it the GN, a standard horse race or just taking your pony for a walk


    I'm no expert in horse biology or the exact course layout so I have no idea, I just know more can be done to improve safety. If some concessions need to be made in the courses layout then so be it. It's for the greater good.

    but if we think about it theres not really much that can be changed? grass is about as soft as you can get without making the horses run on bubble wrap and if the jumps are made any smaller many would argue it would encourage the horses to hit them at higher speed thus increasing the liklihood of them tripping over.

    This is another debate altogether and one which will never end!
    true say there :rolleyes:
    this is aninteresting arguement :rolleyes:
    • 6 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by james1211)
    This. You could argue we don't need to have the grand national but we dont need to eat meat either..
    So are you supporting that argument or not? All the above quoter has (putatively) shown is that it is inconsistent to eat meat and not support banning the Grand National. Thus you could either argue that no-one should eat meat and support banning the Grand National or argue that eating meat is fine and so is the Grand National.
    • 10 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cakefish)
    I believe there is a difference to killing out of necessity and risking their lives for nothing more than sport.
    I don't. Makes damn-all difference to the animal. If I was walking down the street, I'd be equally pissed off at being bludgeoned to death by a stranger regardless of whether he wanted to, say, eat me or just kill me for fun.

    Human beings can also certainly survive without eating meat. We eat animals primarily because they're tasty.
    • 14 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tahooper)
    But in horse racing, it is not relatively low risk (15 of the 40 horses made it to the end without something going wrong) and horse deaths are commonplace so today's event are certainly not in the "severe minority".
    yes but the vast majority of these falls didnt result in any meaningful harm to the horses with only two suffering severe injuries and having to be euphanized. its comaprable to cycling races where there are often falls and many of the cyclists then dont make it to the end, wouldnt you say?
    i wouldnt say theyre that common, one maybe two deaths a year with a fair few years not having any deaths either.

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?

    this is what you'll be called on TSR

  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?

    never shared and never spammed

  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. By completing the slider below you agree to The Student Room's terms & conditions and site rules

  2. Slide the button to the right to create your account

    Slide to join now Processing…

    You don't slide that way? No problem.

Updated: April 17, 2012
Article updates
Useful resources
Reputation gems:
You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.