- This topic has 73 replies, 18 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 3 months ago by
.
- Posts
I was away last week so not sure whether this ever made it onto TRF or not, or whether there was any discussion on here, particularly the first two sets of changes, that I imagine are of interest to most on here.
Regards
Paul
Thursday 25th February 2010, for immediate release
UPDATE ON BRITISH HORSERACING AUTHORITY RULES• Increase in corruption penalties introduced from start of Flat Turf Season
• Increase to fine imposed on late arrivals to the Parade Ring in Group and Grade 1 races
• Changes to remounting Rule introduced from 1st March
• Approval of Tapeta All Weather Surface for use on all licensed racecoursesFollowing a British Horseracing Authority Board meeting on Monday, the following have been approved:
INCREASED CORRUPTION PENALTIES
The Board has approved changes to the penalties for breached of the Rules surrounding corruption in Racing following a review of the penalties by the Working Party. These consist of increased entry points, and some changes to the overall penalty ranges.
The amendments, which will be introduced at the start of the Flat Season in 2010, will see the following changes –
Rule Entry Point (Existing) Range (Existing) Entry Point
(New) Range (New)
A(36) Rider Disqualify 18 Months 9 Months –
3 Years 3 Years 18 Months –
5 Years
Trainer/Owner
/Authorised Rider’s Agent Suspend/Withdraw
/Disqualify 18 Months 9 Months –
5 Years Disqualify
3 Years 18 Months –
5 Years
Stable Employee/ Service Provider/ Other Person Disqualify/Exclude 1 Year 9 Months –
5 Years 3 Years 18 Months –
5 YearsRule Entry Point (Existing) Range (Existing) Entry Point
(New) Range (New)
B(59)
a) i) Rider/Trainer Disqualify 30 Months 21 Months –
10 Years 5 Years 3 – 15 Years
B(59)
b) & c) Rider/Trainer Suspend/Withdraw 9 Months 6 Months –
2 Years Disqualify
18 Months 1 – 5 YearsRule Entry Point (Existing) Range (Existing) Entry Point
(New) Range
(No Change)
C(64) Trainer Suspend/Withdraw
/Disqualify 6 Months 3 Months –
10 Years Disqualify
18 Months 3 months – 10 Years
C(64) Stable Employee Disqualify 6 Months 3 Months –
10 Years Disqualify
18 Months 3 months – 10 Years
E(92) Owner Disqualify 6 Months 3 Months –
10 Years Disqualify
18 Months 3 months – 10 Years
D(78) Authorised Rider’s Agent Disqualify/Exclude 6 Months 3 Months –
10 Years Disqualify
18 Months 3 months – 10 Years
A(35) Service Provider Disqualify/Exclude 6 Months 3 Months –
10 Years Disqualify
18 Months 3 months – 10 YearsRule Entry Point (Existing) Range (Existing) Entry Point
(New) Range
(No Change)
D(53.2) Jockey Suspend/Withdraw
/Disqualify 6 Months 3 Months –
10 Years Disqualify
18 Months 3 months – 10 Years
D(54) Amateur Rider Suspend/Withdraw
Disqualify 6 Months 3 Months –
10 Years Disqualify
18 Months 3 months – 10 Years
D(75) Valet Suspend/Withdraw
Disqualify 6 Months 3 Months –
10 Years Disqualify
18 Months 3 months – 10 YearsNic Coward, BHA Chief Executive, said:
“The changes to these Rules reflect the Authority’s zero tolerance approach to corruption in Racing. This is the latest addition to a number of changes in our approach to Integrity, including the recent introduction of enhanced suitability criteria.“Those who are prepared to breach the Rules must be aware of the penalties involved. An increase in these penalties will hopefully act as a deterrent for anyone seeking to profit from malpractice.”
INCREASED PENALTY FOR LATE ARRIVALS TO THE PARADE RING IN GROUP AND GRADE 1 RACES
The Board has approved an increase to the fine imposed on those entering the parade ring late for Group and Grade 1 races from the start of the Flat Turf season.
At present, a breach of Rule B(27.4) incurs the same penalty, not withstanding the importance of the race. Following a review carried out by the Working Party who recommended an increase in penalties for Group and Grade 1 races in Britain.
From 27th March, connections of any horse that arrives into the Parade Ring for a Group or Grade 1 race after the time stipulated on the Timetable Plan for Start Times, will be fined 0.5% of the Total Prize Fund for that race, for every horse late into the Parade Ring.
Tony Goodhew, BHA Director of Raceday Operations and Regulation, said:
“This change has been brought about as it is our belief that is extremely important for the paying public to see the horses before these big races.“Secondly, this reflects a wider strategy carried out by the Stewards to ensure that a race starts at the designated time, as the increased penalty insists on the importance of having all horses promptly in the Parade Ring.”
CHANGES TO REMOUNTING RULE INTRODUCED FROM 1ST MARCH
Following the introduction of the ban on remounting in November 2009, the British Horseracing Authority has confirmed that, from 1st March 2010, jockeys will be permitted to ride back to the unsaddling area without being cleared by a Racecourse Medical Officer. However, jockeys will remain unable to remount and continue in the race.
The introduction of the remounting ban prevented any jockey from remounting without the horse having been checked over by the attending Veterinary Surgeon and the jockey by a Racecourse Medical Officer.
Rule 46 will remain in place from 1st March but, on recommendation from BHA Chief Medical Advisor Dr Michael Turner, the BHA Board has agreed to amend it whereby, if the Racecourse Medical Officer has not carried out his examination before completion of the veterinary examination, the rider will be allowed to remount.
Tony Goodhew, BHA Director of Raceday Operations and Regulation, said:
“Experience has shown, when balancing the risk between a loose horse and a jockey riding back to the unsaddling enclosure, that allowing the jockey to mount and hack back poses less of an overall safety threat.“A jockey who has hold of his horse following a fall or unseating can now ride back as soon as the horse has been checked over, therefore reducing the potential for the horse to run loose and pose a risk to itself and people on and around the track.”
BRITISH HORSERACING AUTHORITY APPROVES TAPETA SURFACE FOR USE ON LICENSED RACECOURSES
Under Rule (F)19, the BHA must approve any All Weather racing surface and, after approaching the BHA Racecourse Department in 2007, Tapeta Footings Ltd has been working with the BHA to ensure compliance with its protocol.
Samples of the surface have been assessed by the BHA Medical and Veterinary Departments while the BHA Racecourse Department and Inspectorate team have visited trainers’ private Tapeta gallops in Britain.
Following completion of the protocol compliance, including participant feedback from the NTF and PJA, the BHA Board has approved Tapeta for use as a synthetic racing surface at licensed racecourses.
25th February 2010
For more information, please contact Turia Tellwright, BHA Communications Officer, on 020 7152 0163 or 07878 822 617
Notes for Editors:
1. The Rules –
Rule A(36) – Communication of Inside Information
Rule B(59) – Failure to run a horse on its merits
Rule C(64), Rule E(92), Rule D(78), A(35), – Restrictions on laying a horse to lose
Rule D(53.2) – Betting and betting contacts: professional riders
Rule D(54) – Betting: amateur riders
Rule D(75) – Restrictions on betting and betting contacts: valets
2. Penalties for a breach of Rule B(27.4) are listed under Band B –
£140 for the first offence, £280 for the second offence, £560 for the third offence and a referral on the fourth offence
3. In 2009, the Total Prize Fund for the Investec Derby was £1,250,000 and therefore the fine per horse would have been £6,125 as opposed the fines levied of £140 per horse
4. The amended Rule B(46), reads:
46. Remounting a horse
46.1 If during the race a horse is remounted and continues in the race it shall, on an objection by the Stewards under Part 7, be disqualified.
46.2 No rider may remount after a race has started and ride back to the place appointed for unsaddling unless
46.2.1 he has been examined by a Racecourse Medical Officer, and
46.2.2 his horse has been examined by a Veterinary Surgeon.
46.3 Paragraph 46.2.1 does not apply if the Racecourse Medical Officer is unable to carry out the examination before completion of the veterinary examination under Paragraph 46.2.2.
Please note – all horses must still be examined by a Veterinary Surgeon before the jockey is allowed to remount.
5. The 2009 Press Release detailing the changes to Rule 46 can be found here:
http://www.britishhorseracing.com/resou … tem=090561
- Total Posts 17716
Good post,
Mine probally isnt worth of the 2nd post in this thread but I want to say that, BHA can place all these rules but they are still a million light years away from actually finding someone guilty – there were at least 30-40 non triers last week and no one has been caught yet – SAY NO MORE.
The BHA talk the tigerish talk but they are childlike when it comes to walking the walk
- Total Posts 17716
On a reported £300,000 a year and that’s the best Nic Coward can come up with?
The BHA need to realise that the immoral and corrupt few won’t be deterred by less lenient, industry-imposed punishments for the simple reason that they’re no more likely to get caught. Recent history has shown us that were our intrepid regulators to fall in to a barrel of t*ts they’d almost certainly come out sucking their thumb and it is that that needs to be addressed, rather than the needless re-evaluation of rules which will have no discernable effect.
When I first started work after leaving university, my employers were happy to give their staff unrestricted access to the internet. They didn’t monitor its use and realised one day, quite by chance, that some of the more questionable characters in the office were spending the majority of their working day doing anything but work. So, in an attempt to make casual browsing less attractive, everyone was informed that access would be severely restricted, and warnings issued, were people to continue to abuse the facility. With people safe in the knowledge that the network was being monitored no more efficiently than before, guess what happened?
Punishments can be ramped up as steeply and as often as you like, but an increased period of disqualification or the promise of mob-style limb amputation is pointless when the methods of detection, obtaining proof and criminal prosecution remain so woefully inept.
It’s about time the BHA started under-pinning the foundations of racing rather than re-planting the garden to shift focus from the cracks in the walls.
I wonder if any racecourses over here are looking at Tapeta & pondering a move.
Rather odd to add it’s approval to the rules if no-one wants it isn’t it?I wondered that, too, Anthony. Can’t recall any course executive having openly stated they were exploring Tapeta as a replacement for their existing surface, but it’d be interesting to learn of any that are considering it, if that wouldn’t require Paul to betray a confidence.
gc
Jeremy Grayson. Son of immigrant. Adoptive father of two. Metadata librarian. Freelance point-to-point / horse racing writer, analyst and commentator wonk. Loves music, buses, cats, the BBC Micro, ale. Advocate of CBT, PACE and therapeutic parenting. Aspergers.
- Total Posts 17716
I would hate Tapeta to be employed at Racecourses over it, this would most certianly be the of our sport as we know it.
The surface was built for the big stage were it could incorporate a fair level playing field from horses coming across the globe, why would you kill our sport by importing this into the flat tracks of today – isnt ground conditions a big part of the throughbred history and form studiers today.
Why would you want to kill part of our game so we can put all horses together on one surface, what damage would this do to our bloodstock industry – massive if you ask me.
Keep it in Dubai and dubai only, please if you are going to bring it over here then re open Great Leighs and relay it with Tapeta then strike a law where you cant go near our traditional flat tracks.
Please please please dont bring it over here.
I don’t think they’ll be putting Tapeta down at Ascot, Epsom or the Rowley Mile anytime soon Mr W so I’d rest easy if I were you, the end of racing as we know it isn’t likely to be reliant on Michael Dickinson, although for some that already happened when he transferred from the Jumps to the flat.
Silvoir
Regarding Rule B 59.2 – Case 1 (intentionally failing to run the horse on its merits)
What is the totting up procedure for the above before these new penalties would be enforced?
I’m probably missing the obvious but why is the entry point for these new penalties above the lower limit of the ranges e.g with the case above the entry point is 5 years but the lower limit of the range is 3 years?
Thanks.
Silvoir –
I wondered if the frequency that certain jockeys/trainers horses are left a few lengths at the start (and other tactics such as exagerrated hold up tactics) is monitored with a view to developing a case against repeat offenders who are clever enough to avoid gross and glaring offences but who consistently have and edge via subtler methods?
I greatly applaud the increased fines for late entry to parade ring in bigger races. As someone who has to travel a considerable distance at considerable cost to witness major race meetings it is very disappointing when you don’t get to see the horses properly. I’d suggest a totting up ‘scale’ on that too, with a long time period, so that some of the visitors to our shores who only run in higher value races and who might be happy to offset the 0.5% fine against the perceived benefit to them and/or their horse can be discopuraged further by higher fines for repeat offences.
All changes are heading in the right direction though and all to be appauded IMO.
Can I ask what the reasoning behind the change to the remounting rule was?
I would hate Tapeta to be employed at Racecourses over it, this would most certianly be the of our sport as we know it.
The surface was built for the big stage were it could incorporate a fair level playing field from horses coming across the globe, why would you kill our sport by importing this into the flat tracks of today – isnt ground conditions a big part of the throughbred history and form studiers today.
Why would you want to kill part of our game so we can put all horses together on one surface, what damage would this do to our bloodstock industry – massive if you ask me.
Keep it in Dubai and dubai only, please if you are going to bring it over here then re open Great Leighs and relay it with Tapeta then strike a law where you cant go near our traditional flat tracks.
Please please please dont bring it over here.
I’d rather have races run on Tapata than on the tapioca that passes for ground at some courses.
How can the BHA prosecute when a trainer verbally instructs the jockey not to finish in the first four and preferably in the middle of the pack?
Cormack’s suggestion of monitoring a pattern of frequency from a combination of certain jockeys/trainers is great, but this still wouldn’t prove corruption.
Perhaps a ban using the reason ofincompetence
, rather than corruption, could be imposed instead.
After all, if a jockey sometimes misses the break, or meets traffic impeding progress, the rider needs more tuition. A ‘holiday’ of one month, and a visit to the racing school, might help to begin with.
Likewise, if a trainer’s horse does not quickly jump out of the stalls, or seems not to enjoy putting their best foot forward, the same could be said about training methods not being adequate.If their horses continually ‘missed the break’ I’d withdraw the license and have them subject to a supervised test (paid for by the trainer) which gives them the opportunity to illustrate that they are capable of training their horses to leave the stalls(i.e look at how they are training their horses in this regard, witness some test stalls opening exercises, etc). In other words, as the previous poster has suggested, a competence test.
Then, if they re-offend, having passed the test, it wouldn’t be incompetence it’d be something else and I’d ban them completely for some appropriate (lengthy)time. Of course all this would have to be prescribed when there was a pattern rather than the odd one-off instance.
But, the again, I’ve had a bad day so perhaps I’m being a bit harsh.
When a horse breaks slowly, is under restraint, finds traffic problems, does not get placed, but happens to be one of the favourites, you might have a problem regarding corruption.
If there was a rule aboutincompetence
then an initial short ban (one month) regarding the trainer/owner/jockey/and horse might be beneficial.
Silvoir
Regarding Rule B 59.2 – Case 1 (intentionally failing to run the horse on its merits)
What is the totting up procedure for the above before these new penalties would be enforced?
I’m probably missing the obvious but why is the entry point for these new penalties above the lower limit of the ranges e.g with the case above the entry point is 5 years but the lower limit of the range is 3 years?
Thanks.
Cav – not sure I understand the first question. The Guidance states:
1 – The Panel should have regard to the current penalty guideline at the date of it’s decision
2 – The Entry Point is the normal penalty for a case with no aggravating or mitigating factors.Not sure whether that answers you or not?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.