- This topic has 102 replies, 29 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 8 months ago by
.
- Posts
By far the worst aspect of this is the double penalty applied to higher class races. I can’t think of any other sport in which penalties are greater in the more important events.
Red card in a Championship football game, three match ban. So should that be red card in a Premier League game, six game ban?
Fence down in a local gymkhana, four faults. Fence down at the Horse of the Year show, eight faults.
It’s illogical and as the owner of a horse that runs in everyday races, it says to me that abusing my horse isn’t as important as abusing a higher rated horse. If it’s a rule, it should be applied equally in a selling handicap or the Derby.
Or should I let my natural cynicism loose and suspect that the real reason is that the better races are far more likely to be shown on ITV, and therefore to a bigger audience than the class 5 stuff on Sky Racing.
Graham Cunningham on twitter yesterday: “Good segment. But, speaking of denial, spare us the ‘whip doesn’t hurt’ cobblers. Hugely respected former Aussie chief steward John Schreck: “To say these whips they use now don’t hurt is so wrong and nobody should fall into that: of course the whip hurts, that’s why it’s used.”
AP is spot on. To build so much around public perception then effectively protect an expensive horse twice as much as a cheap one is a huge blunder. I can see what the BHA is trying to do here – work their way to a position where the whip is banned for encouragement. But every tactic used to try to deliver the strategy seems ill considered, at best.
Of all those 19 jockeys that got banned, they are reporting only 5 were full professionals with the others being conditionals (12) & amateur (2) riders.
All this talk about the whip not hurting by the tv presenters/pundits and I’m yet to see someone taking 7 strikes across the arse to prove it?
I know horses are much bigger and have thicker skin but it would go along way to proving this narrative that it doesn’t hurt the horse.
Its a ludicrous comparison though surely? If we’re going down that route the sport is finished. Try carrying nearly 12 stone in weight for 4 miles+ around Aintree while trying to jump the fences too while we’re at it
“If we’re going down that route the sport is finished.”
I fear it is. Together with the affordability checks, the sport is on the verge of crisis. And it is entirely self inflicted.
Who are all these people who are so desperately concerned about racehorses being struck with a piece of air cushioned foam that it is essential we appease?
When Jason Maguire did misuse his “whip” on Ballabriggs in the Grand National, only about a dozen people in a television audience of about 8 million actually made a formal complaint. That is 0.000001%. Far more people were upset by Clare Balding’s comments about Liam Treadwell’s teeth.
Does anyone think these new rules will make people who are indifferent or hostile to racing less indifferent or hostile, or more likely to go racing? Going by the Jermaine Jenas video, this potential audience out there who currently do not go racing but are itching to go is a figment of the BHA’s imagination.
Here’s a thought. The BHA could show a bit of leadership and look after the people who are interested in racing, instead of constantly fretting about what racing’s opponents think.
From the BHA’s own website:
“The whips used in British racing are foam-padded and energy-absorbing, and the thresholds for use are extremely low…If used properly, there is NO WELFARE PROBLEM (my capitals) associated with use of the energy-absorbing whip in Britain. Indeed Britain is among the world leaders in terms of the regulation of use of the whip in racing.
Due to the fact that the limits on use are set so low, and the padded design of the whip, only in the most extreme cases would a breach of our whip rules constitute a welfare issue.”Remind me again why racing has unilaterally decided to draw attention to the whip, especially on the eve of the most important meeting of the year?
“When Jason Maguire did misuse his “whip” on Ballabriggs in the Grand National, only about a dozen people in a television audience of about 8 million actually made a formal complaint. That is 0.000001%. Far more people were upset by Clare Balding’s comments about Liam Treadwell’s teeth.”
^THIS
Charles Darwin to conquer the World
Looking at the BHA’s official advert for the Cheltenham Festival, it is an image of Rachel Blackmore after crossing the line on A Plus Tard in the Gold Cup – but with the pro-cush airbrushed out.
We can add dishonesty to the the charge sheet against the BHA.
I don’t agree with Dave Yates from the “Daily Mirror” on very much but at least he is a racing journalist standing up for the sport.
His twitter comments are worth reading, especially:
“So much for the DQ being racing’s nuclear button: the threat that would never become action. What a shambles. Julie Harrington said she’d be more visible in the second half of her term. Where is she? I’m sorry to ask this, but who in racing has any confidence in BHA Horseracing?”
Presumably the few jockeys left unbanned by the time Cheltenham comes around will instead miss Aintree when they give their horse one too many cracks coming up the hill.
I’ve been an owner on and off since 1979, have been involved with multiple stables, numerous jockeys, managed syndicates and had hundred of runners over the last forty plus years.
And yet I can’t remember a single conversation about the whip, not with trainer or jockeys, not with syndicate members, nor with any of the many family members and non racing friends that have taken an interest in the careers of the horses I’ve owned.
I know for certain that none of those runners has ever resulted in a ban for misuse of the whip. And I’ve replayed the videos I have online of many of the races in which I’ve had a runner over the last twenty years, and not found a single one in which the use of the whip would have exceeded the limits set by the latest update of the rules. The closest I found was a 1M 6F race at Sandown in which Salute got into a duel with a horse trained by Hugh Morrison over the last quarter mile, ending with a head victory for Salute. In that race, Rab Havlin applied five, possibly six, backhanders to Salute, then put the whip down and pushed him out with just hands and heels through the last 100 yards.
It’s a cliche, but one that makes sense – if it ain’t broke, don’t try to fix it.
But if you appoint a committee to review the rules around the use of the whip, what are the odds against them reporting back that everything is fine and there’s no need to fix it!
Racing journalist stands up for racing.
I almost fainted with shock.
Leave aside biases and tell me one person who’d be disadvantaged by a total whip ban (for encouragement)?
I believe everyone would be disadvantaged because it would no longer be horse RACING.
Do you believe there is a welfare issue with the pro-cush?
Hoiles suggestion of representatives from the sport visiting schools and demonstrating how soft these modern cushioned whips are, would seem a workable and beneficial one. However I just wonder whether some local authorities would veto such a proposal which they’d have the power to do as realistically it will never be part of the National Curriculum
Thus in general I would guess that, at opposite ends of the spectrum, a militant left wing council would not welcome visiting parties entering schools in their locality to promote horse racing, while the reverse would likely be true of local councils in the likes of the Cotswolds, whose school pupils would be more in sync with the equine world and would not need educating on such subjects anyway.
I realise there are a few inner city riding schools spread around the country but they will not necessarily promote horse racing per se – they could even be wanting to separate themselves from such links.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.