THE IMPERIAL CUP

March 10^th, Sandown Park, the Imperial Cup Handicap Hurdle Race was the most extreme example of dangerous riding I have seen for some time, and the Stewards declined to punish the culprit (Mr Antolini, ridden by J. Bargary) or to compensate the victim (Call Me Lord, ridden by D. Jacob). Later that day they authorised the publication of  a “Stewards Report” which re-wrote the facts in such a way as to turn a dangerous conflict into a case of slap and tickle, and the following week they  sent me an email confirming the alleged “triviality” of the encounter.

However, in my opinion it doesn’t matter.

Doesn’t matter? Of course it matters! It sounds appalling!

All in good time, my friend. All in good time! Let me tell the tale.

 

CHELTENHAM 1

THE GOLD CUP

I have no doubt that Richard Johnson’s ride on Native River was as good a ride as I have ever seen. Judgement of pace in that heavy ground was a real tester and he got it exactly right from the word “Go!” Then he had to judge when to increase the pace, not just once but twice, maybe three times, and he got it absolutely right every time.

Let us pause at the top of the hill on the final circuit. Up to this point Native River has met every fence correctly (a joint tour de force between horse and rider) but at the fourth last I think I saw a late call for a “long one.” The call was answered instantly by the horse, and the caller sat back, just in case…  No worries…. crisis over.

But work to do: Might Bite is alongside Native River and looking to be going the better of the two. Mr Johnson asks for something extra. Native River is a most generous horse and has more to give, thanks to the skill with which his rider has managed the resources available. Suddenly Might Bite is struggling. He has run a magnificent race; no shame in giving best to a wonderful winner after a glorious contest.

Cheltenham goes mad, and the stewards turn nasty. They ban Richard Johnson for 7 days and fine him £6,500 for over-use of the whip. What’s the problem? The number of hits.

The rule that applied in this case offered the stewards quite a lot of latitude. For example, it recommends that the stewards consider the ride as a whole before reaching a decision as to whether the number pf hits (with a whip that cannot hurt) needs to be brought into the equation at all. The ride Richard Johnson had given Native River as a whole was a copybook example of how to look after a horse, over three miles (and a bit), over 22 fences, and through ground that was so soft as to be extremely testing.

The rule also allows the stewards to disregard some of the hits if they so choose. Had they done so, I estimate Richard Johnson would have exceeded the limit by very little.

They chose to count every hit and to set the ban at seven days, because that allowed them to impose that £6,500 fine.

Why such unpleasantness? Because in recent years the professional stewards have been encouraged to treat the whip as a deadly weapon, the jockey as a sadist, and the numbers game as the major factor in assessing guilt.

That’s disgusting behaviour!

No it isn’t.

It’s worse than disgusting!

Richard Johnson didn’t think so. He described the stewards’ verdict as irritating and accepted it.

But why didn’t he appeal?

I’m glad you asked. I have to admit that I myself was quite irritated by the fact that the connections of Call Me Lord didn’t appeal over the Imperial Cup, and even more irritated when Richard Johnson followed suit at Cheltenham. But the fact is that they didn’t appeal, which was their prerogative. In spite of which, in terms of the bigger picture, Racing is on track for a hap-hap-happy ending.

It doesn’t sound like it.

Listen up, as they say.

In 2016/7, when it was found that BHA justice required upgrading, Christopher Quinlan QC (perhaps the finest lawyer in the world specialising in the legal needs of sporting authorities) was invited by BHA Chief Executive Nick Rust to do the necessary. As a result of  his recommendations (now implemented) there now exist two brand new bodies (the Judicial Panel and the Appeal Board – (I hope I’ve got the names right). These bodies are independent of the BHA executive and are required to remain strictly independent of that executive. They include nothing but first-rate people, some of whom have spent many years in the racing industry. They are there to oversee (among other things) the selection of Disciplinary and Appeal Board panellists and to rectify any errors in the way the panellists do their work.

At last racing’s finest, from the richest owner to the smallest apprentice, can walk into a BHA courtroom, quite certain that the odds are not stacked against them, and without the sinking feeling that comes from knowing that, when you are up before the beak,  the jury has been selected by the prosecution. Nothing is worse than that feeling, and its removal from the realities of racing life is the bigger picture, compared to which the unsatisfactory outcome of two races is immaterial. Remember the parties concerned did not appeal. Yes, I wish they had, but then I have always been in too much of a hurry.

Never mind. Thanks to Nick Rust and Christopher Quinlan, racing has at last got a justice system it can trust, and the benefits therefrom are already accruing. I can think of two trainers now happily getting on with their careers who might well have been much poorer and prevented from working by suspension under the previous regime. I have no doubt that there is more good stuff to come. Much more, and very good. The new arrangement is in very truth a game-changer.

 

CHELTENHAM 2

I saw no false starts with the big-field races, but plenty of bad ones, which is not surprising.  As long as the BHA persists with the Rolling Maul, horses will be seriously upset for no good reason at a stage in the proceedings when upsetting them is a mistake. In addition, as long as the Processional formation is retained, the starts will be dangerous and unfair. “Make a line, jockeys” is not just a catch phrase. It is a reminder that every runner has a right to a fair start – a concept that is taken seriously in all other sports.

Strangely enough, proper arrangements are religiously applied to all other starts under BHA rules. Why the exception in the case of a fairly small group of contests which includes many of the most prestigious races in the calendar?

If the Top Brass want to know how best to get the job done properly, it should consult the starters. It will discover that it takes no more than a day or two of common sense to put matters right – for ever!

But if the Top Brass can’t summon up the energy to go down that road, it mustn’t expect improvement any time soon.

However all is not lost. One day there will be a major malfunction down at the start of a Grand National, and 36 jockeys will be charged, fined and banned. They will appeal, and one of the new and magnificent Appeal Boards will waive the fines, lift the bans and tell the BHA that it – not the jockeys – is to blame for the disaster, having been warned a thousand times that disaster was inevitable if nothing was done to prevent it, and having taken no notice whatsoever of the admonitions volunteered by that nice Mr Donec.

Aintree, here we come!

Best wishes,

Nice Mr DONEC

PS There is still a need for work on the whip rules, and on the interference rules. Did you know that the latter still instruct the industry that after an instance of interference “the benefit of the doubt must go to the one who finishes in front”? Crazy or what? The one who emerges on top and in front after a physical engagement is more than likely to be the one who caused the altercation.

As for the whip rules, I rather hope that Mr Rust is going to refund Richard Johnson’s £6,500. If he doesn’t, Donec would accept 2 percent of that sum for an analysis of those rules, which are, to put it mildly, not fit for purpose.