Now i like Richard Hannon a lot but he just said on TV " i am sure its the racecourse" now that is a man in deniel. What a performance....
Bluesky, it depends on how you look at it. If you read the form literally you would say he ran under form, he finished a good deal further ahead of RDLP at Ascot for instance. However, you have to acknowledge the reason for that, and its because he got slaughtered from a fair distance from home by Frankel who just ran him ragged. I said before the race that the course wouldn't suit either, and I stand by that. However the best horses don't need excuses. I would love him to meet Frankel again just to see if he could get closer, but on that performance Frankel is in a different league and then some.
Someone I work with told me, 30 seconds before they jumped off, that she had heard a rumour that CC was not delivering the goods at home and the team were worried. I don't know how much truth there is in the rumour, but it could well have been right.
Can't be the course, he won this very race last year in what was probably his 2nd- best career performance (after the Queen Anne).
I agree Nass that course would not be the one you would choose for either but Canford won very well on it last year. I know everyone will use all the superlatives under the sun but it was truely exceptional.
POssible its cause he's ran his heart out he's hung.he as had to run faster then ever to catch a superior horse and in doing so cause he Is a top horse in his own right as tried his hardest and resulted him in hanging .its a testiment to the horse who seems to have a never say die attitude even when beaten .frankle it a freak no doubt about it .
The racecourse was the reason Canford Cliffs got beat? Have to agree that's a strange thing to say when he's won there before? His horse was beaten - simple as!
Like I said on the other board, Frankel would win by 5 lengths, and CC would be burnt out trying to match strides with him by the furlong pole. That's the reason RDLP got so close to CC, because CC tried to go with Frankel and was taken out of his comfort zone, were as RDLP ran a more balanced race. CC was hanging because he was taken out of his comfort zone by a better horse, the same as Workforce on Saturday, hanging is not an excuse
King Shergar: Please change your nickname to Albert Pierrepoint..................... (Yeah, you're quite right though, CC hung simply because he was completely knackered trying to keep in touch with Frankel?).
I haven't seen the race yet but by the sounds of things it was pretty amazing. I like Hannon a lot - I shouldn't really comment on the interview having not seen it but it sounds like someone who's just in shock after what he's seen happen to his stable superstar.
I agree there were no excuses for CC and I always feel using the course as an excuse is a bit lame. It seems RH has been taking lessons in losing graciously from AOB! But I don't think this lowers CC's colours - history will show that it was no disgrace to take on Frankel and to be found wanting. CC is the best miler of his year and he has been trounced by a remarkable horse - simple as that.
Nice - most exhilarating race in years and soemone has to have a pop at AoB who didn't even have a horse involved. If someone had said a similar thing about the blessd Sir Michael people would have been issuing death threats.. Well done. Anwyay, I watched it last night and could not believe what i was seeing. I would struggle to be able to recall a more visually impressive winner in a group 1 race of that quality - yes the 2000 Guineas was awesome but this was against an animal we all knew was top class.
Some of the comments coming from the Hannon camp are ridiculous. "He is not himself, he was off the bridle before halfway and CC has never been off the bridle in his life." CC has never before faced a horse who has such a high crusing speed and the ability to pour it on from 8f to 1f out. Is it too difficult or hurtful for them to comprehend the simple fact that CC was off the bridle because he tried to go with Frankel who simply galloped him and the others into the ground.
Being in the minority that agrees with Richard Hannon that the downhill course at Goodwood does not suit Canford Cliffs, I do not have any problem with his comments. The fact that Canford Cliffs hung left across the track – something that he did at Newbury as a three-year-old – tells me that he was running on empty. Frankel had set a pace that suited himself and quickened it up steadily, which Canford Cliffs was not able to live with once Tom Queally pressed the button at the furlong pole. Those people that think that Canford Cliffs won the 2010 Sussex Stakes easily should go and watch the race again. He did not travel for most of the race but once they got to the flat final furlong, Richard Hughes was able to get him balanced out and then he collared the inferior Rip Van Winkle to win back on the bridle. Before the race yesterday, whether Frankel would travel on the course was an unknown, but we now know that it presented no obstacle.
The course may not suit Canford but it was the fact he could not handle the pace set by Frankel that had him running on empty and well beaten, not the course. I have no problem with Richard Hannon and Canford Cliffs is an exceptional horse and one of my favs but I would have liked to have seen a bit more dignity from the Hannon team. A simple "My horse was beaten by a superior, superb horse" would have done They did sort of give Frankel some underhand compliments but nothing more than that whilst clutching at straws trying to make excuses for their own horse.
I hate when ****ers like Richard Hannon lose big races, and there stable stats get beat, he can't just accept that his horse was beaten by a better one, the man is in total denial. All this "I'm not making excuses, but my horse wasn't 100%" realy winds me up. Hes making excuses then saying hes not making excuses, completely contradicting himself. Hughes was the same in his interview, saying he's not making excuses then he starts making them. Just **** off no one wants to hear them. Take defeat on the chin and give Frankel the credit he deserves, had the shoe been on the other foot and Frankel was beat, there would be no sour grapes from Henry Cecil, he would have given Canford Cliffs the credit he would have deserved
I recorded Wednesday’s Glorious Goodwood, watched the racing and forwarded through all the fashion and adverts. I saw the piece with Richard Hannon recorded at his stables in the run-up to the race and I saw him speak to Mike Cattermole a few minutes after the race whilst Channel 4 were showing a replay of the race. He was obviously disappointed but there did not appear to be any sour grapes just his own opinion that his horse did not run up to his form and that he thought the horse does not like the course. It is possible that both of those opinions could be facts. Hannon did sportingly suggest that he would like to have another go at Frankel, which at least puts him ahead of Aidan O’Brien, who could not find a single runner from his stable full of blue-bloods. Nobody made any excuses when Cut Above won the 1981 St Leger.
Why does it put him ahead of AOB? AOB didn't run a horse in the Sussex because he knew he couldn't win the race, and he could target his milers at more winnable races, there is nothing wrong with that. Richard Hannon lost the race, and then made excuses, that is bad sportsmanship if you ask me, if you lose you accept it, the blokes just a sore loser, like AOB at Ascot. There was no excuses given for Shergar's defeat other than the fact he didn't stay 14 and a half furlongs, Shergar destroyed Cut Above in the Irish Derby. So Shergar was better than Cut above over 12, and Cut Above was better over the Leger trip, no excuses, the same as Frankel is miles better than Canford Cliffs over a mile
