- This topic has 118 replies, 27 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
- Total Posts 17716
This goes live early tomorrow morning. Seventy page document, with an anticipated cut in allowed usage and rise in jockey penalties.
The predictable media feeding frenzy will be sated by officials on Radio 5, Radio 4 Today, and breakfast TV:
I thought Hills’ offer of 12/1 ‘no "overhand" (forehand) use" was a good bet given David Muir’s comments earlier this year. But it looks like I’ve done my dough!
Before the usual suspects jump down my throat, I think that we should see and read the full report before posting.
However, limted use , is in my opinion, overdue, as is the further limited area of useage.
This will not be addressed adequately however until owners and trainers get their charges banned from racing if the whip is over-used.
The poor jock is being put in an impossible position, an almost serf – like position i.e. an irresponsible owner replacing a jock for riding corectly, for one who will belt an animal for a short term gainBefore the usual suspects jump down my throat, I think that we should see and read the full report before posting.
However, limted use , is in my opinion, overdue, as is the further limited area of useage.
This will not be addressed adequately however until owners and trainers get their charges banned from racing if the whip is over-used.
The poor jock is being put in an impossible position, an almost serf – like position i.e. an irresponsible owner replacing a jock for riding corectly, for one who will belt an animal for a short term gainSome beasts need a good few ‘belts’ with the persuader to get the job done. It does them no harm.
So I guess I’d be one of the ‘irresponsible’ owners that you mention.
Well done BHA for making a pigs ear of this as you did with the Grand National. How many of Joe Public will be convinced about the continued use of the whip in any form and congratulate the BHA for the changes when they don’t give a monkeys about racing in the first place?
Mr Pilsen – if you re-read my post, at no point do I say that a few uses of the "persuader" should be banned. However a jockey who is willing to flout the rules should not be put in a preferential position to one who complies with them. For heavens sake, imagine what a position we would be in if everyone decided which of the rules they liked and were willing to comply with, and which they did’nt and wouldn’t. The same should apply to the connections also.
Coggy
Football teams do not lose the match if one of their players commits a foul, gets sent off or has a penalty awarded against them. They are penalised but can still win the match.
I’m a bit puzzled by this "prize money withdrawn" from any jockey getting above a 2 day ban when the minimum has been increased from a caution to 5 days. Everyone will qualify wont they who break the rules? And where will the money be going? Will the owner get to keep it?
- Total Posts 17716
I’m a bit puzzled by this "prize money withdrawn" from any jockey getting above a 2 day ban when the minimum has been increased from a caution to 5 days. Everyone will qualify wont they who break the rules? And where will the money be going? Will the owner get to keep it?
I’ve read the report. The answers to your questions,
Yeats
:
* Most whip offences now carry a 5 days minimum suspension. But some others (such as "Arm above shoulder height" or "down shoulder in forehand") only carry 2 or 3 days.
* The jockey’s money goes to the BHA. And they will prosecute any owners found to be making up the deficit to the jockeys extramurally.
- Total Posts 17716
SCIENTIFIC STATEMENTS
"When used properly, the whip stimulates a horse and should not cause pain."
"Current scientific evidence broadly supports the Review Group’s view that the use of the whip in Racing should continue…"
"The whip currently used in British Horseracing is designed not to cause pain when used appropriately."Given all this, why was there no consideration given to reducing whip bans for frequency, rather than increasing them? Answer here…
PUBLIC SURVEY
"The survey was conducted using an online interview administered to members of the YouGov GB panel of 300,000+ individuals who have agreed to take part in surveys"
So the survey relies on a tiny, manipulated sample."A large proportion of the population – particularly women and those with no interest in Racing – instinctively disagree with the use of the whip and think current penalties are too lenient."
"However, a fair number of those in disagreement have a flawed understanding of both when during a race the whip is allowed to be used, and as to the full range of safety reasons for which the whip is present."BEFORE EXPLANATION – 57% of the public wanted the whip banned.
AFTER EXPLANATION – This figure fell to 33%.
The survey group was self-selecting. 55% of those surveyed claimed to have"at least some"
interest in horse racing. That means that 45% of those surveyed had
absolutely no interest
in horse racing!
JOCKEY PENALTIES
"• A jockey should forfeit any income earned in a race where he or she is subsequently found to have contravened the whip Rules resulting in a suspension of three days or more (before previous breaches are taken into account).
• Any jockey who has been referred to, and found to be in breach by, the Disciplinary Panel for whip related breaches of the Rules on three occasions should be required to ‘show cause’ to the Authority as to why any application for a further jockey’s licence should be granted.
• The Authority puts in place a system which will identify when consideration should be given to refusing a visiting jockey the privilege of riding in Great Britain should the jockey’s disciplinary record when riding in Great Britain be unacceptable."INTERNATIONAL CONSULTATION
"The Authority is involved with an international collaboration with the United States Jockey Club."
France, Ireland and Germany are not mentioned in the report at all. It seems they want no part of the BHA’s capitulation on this issue.
- Total Posts 17716
To summarise my own judgement on the Report.
1. The BHA found no scientific evidence whatsoever that use of the whip was "cruel".
2. So the key phrase is this:
"A large proportion of the population – particularly women and those with no interest in Racing – instinctively disagree with the use of the whip and think current penalties are too lenient."
On the (sexist) basis that
women and those with no interest in racing
don’t like the whip (or understand its use) the BHA have introduced draconian financial penalties to jockeys which will make it hard for foreign jockeys to come here to ply their trade, and reduce our racing to provincialism within Europe.
All this on the statistical basis of the findings from a small sample of
2071 self-selected people
.
3. No attempt has been made to harmonise whip rules with Ireland, France or Germany (let alone Japan) because none of these countries are prepared to engage in dialogue with BHA on the subject. Only the USA (where the rules are much more lenient) has been prepared to do so.
4. The whole report shows an astounding lack of backbone, and lack of willingness to take the lead in putting resource into educating an ignorant public. Instead professionals within the sport are to be penalised in a way which on the face of it amounts to a restraint of trade. I’d be surprised if the new rules aren’t challenged in the Courts.
I have alot to say on this too much in fact, therefore I think I can sum up my opinion in two simple words….
Bull Sh*t
Who will benifit from these new rules, it certainly wont be racing.
Doesn’t go as far I would like but I think the BHA have put forward a sensible set of rules. It’s also encouraging that these changes have the support of those at the top of the game:
Sir Henry Cecil
, ten-times Champion Flat Trainer, said:
“The BHA has done an excellent, thorough job with their Review and I welcome these changes, which will hopefully serve British Racing well.”Paul Nicholls
, Champion Jumps Trainer for the last six years, said:
“Whilst I’ve been a critic of the Rules in the past, nobody likes seeing misuse of the whip and I agree that the time had come when something had to be done. I am pleased that the BHA has made sensible and reasonable changes, and I am supportive of them.AP McCoy
, Champion Jumps Jockey for the last 16 years and reigning BBC Sports Personality of the Year, said:
“The PJA has worked closely with the Authority on the BHA’s Review and I hope my colleagues embrace the proposed changes as being in the best interest of the sport. I for one support the changes.”Frankie Dettori
, one of the most famous jockeys in the world, said:
“I am not proud of having fallen foul of the whip Rules in the past but I have never harmed a horse. These new Rules are easy to understand which will help all jockeys ride within them. I accept these new Rules are in the best interest of our great sport and it is right that they should be in place in time for Britain’s richest ever raceday, QIPCO British Champions Day.”Nicky Henderson
, was at his club and unavailable for comment.
A number of leading figures, including McCoy and Dettori, have spoken out in favour:-
I can think of several horses who will be retired immediately or worse as they cannot race without persuading. They were still entitled to a career however
Coggy
Football teams do not lose the match if one of their players commits a foul, gets sent off or has a penalty awarded against them. They are penalised but can still win the match.
To use your comparison, it is like the referee seeing a foul but allowing play to continue and a goal being scored. In football the goal would be disallowed. In truth the comparison has no credence whatsoever.
I’m puzzled, Prof Tim Morris says horses receive no pain from whip use so what are the whip rules for?
Will horses be booted along more now?
What will the BHA be doing with the money they siphon off from offending jockeys?
Why no consultation with other countries regarding harmonisation?- Total Posts 17716
I’m puzzled, Prof Tim Morris says horses receive no pain from whip use so what are the whip rules for?
Extrapolating from the data in the report, the changes are made
in spite
of the scientific evidence, solely for PR.
They have mainly been made to placate (largely) female members of the 45% of the general public who know nothing about racing and aren’t interested in it (all of course based on a sample of 2061 people).
Anyone who thinks the ban merchants (or the general public) will be placated by these new rules is seriously in need of a reality check. My guess would be that the whole stupid process will be repeated again in about 5 years time, with further concessions and increased jockey bans and fines at that point.
Meanwhile,
Eddie
,
nothing
will have been done to seek harmonisation with France or Ireland. I would love to ask
Silvoir
precisely why BHA saw fit to talk to the USA Jockey Club but not to their peers in Europe, Japan or Hong Kong.
That – amongst other things – is a serious derogation of their duty in this matter.
As for the public comments this morning, let’s wait until Mr Dettori gets his first whip ban in a big race before taking what he says too seriously. The need to be seen to put a united (and brave) face on it accounts for many of the comments, which should not be taken positively.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.