Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
14 Oct 11
09:59
Joined:
Date Joined:
05 Jan 10
Paul Nicholls twitter
Oh my god what a mess. Old whip rules should be re instated with immediate effect untill a sensible compromise can be reached .
Oh my god what a mess. Old whip rules should be re instated with immediate effect untill a sensible compromise can be reached .
Show More
Now pumpkinhead has had something to say, surely we can all relax and enjoy the racing again.
From BHA NEWS:
Hughes - jockeys were not consulted
Richard Hughes insists there was no consultation between the British Horseracing Authority and riders over the exact details of the new whip rules.
Hughes pledged last night to relinquish his riding licence after falling foul of the new regulations for the second time since their implementation on Monday. Hughes was banned for five days after being found guilty of hitting his horse six times in the final furlong at Salisbury on Monday and he was suspended for a further 10 days after committing the same offence at Kempton.
Hughes is adamant the BHA did not speak with jockeys and told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "We all agreed to cut down on the number but then they said you're only allowed five in the last furlong. Nothing had come out about that."
He added: "There was no consultation with the (Professional) Jockeys Association as to what the plans were going to be. They brought it out and for a couple of weeks we tried to practice before the rules came in.
"We went to the BHA and said 'listen, this rule is going to have to be changed a bit' and they just stuck their head in the sand and said 'no we're not changing, get on with it'."
While Hughes does not disagree with the intention of making jockeys use the whip less, he feels the penalty structure is unjustly harsh.
"The penalties are horrendous. You get five days for the first race, 10 days for the second and 30 days for the third time," he explained. If someone gives away a foul in a game of football, they don't lose the next five matches. They give a free kick away and get on with it.
"The jockeys are 100% behind the rules to cut down on the whip. We're not stupid, we understand the public perception. They've cut it down to seven and I've hit my horse six times twice and I've got 15 days."
Champion jumps trainer Paul Nicholls has also waded into the debate, calling for the BHA to scrap the new guidelines.
Nicholls tweeted: "Oh my god what a mess. Old whip rules should be re instated with immediate effect until a sensible compromise can be reached."
Hughes - jockeys were not consulted
Richard Hughes insists there was no consultation between the British Horseracing Authority and riders over the exact details of the new whip rules.
Hughes pledged last night to relinquish his riding licence after falling foul of the new regulations for the second time since their implementation on Monday. Hughes was banned for five days after being found guilty of hitting his horse six times in the final furlong at Salisbury on Monday and he was suspended for a further 10 days after committing the same offence at Kempton.
Hughes is adamant the BHA did not speak with jockeys and told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "We all agreed to cut down on the number but then they said you're only allowed five in the last furlong. Nothing had come out about that."
He added: "There was no consultation with the (Professional) Jockeys Association as to what the plans were going to be. They brought it out and for a couple of weeks we tried to practice before the rules came in.
"We went to the BHA and said 'listen, this rule is going to have to be changed a bit' and they just stuck their head in the sand and said 'no we're not changing, get on with it'."
While Hughes does not disagree with the intention of making jockeys use the whip less, he feels the penalty structure is unjustly harsh.
"The penalties are horrendous. You get five days for the first race, 10 days for the second and 30 days for the third time," he explained. If someone gives away a foul in a game of football, they don't lose the next five matches. They give a free kick away and get on with it.
"The jockeys are 100% behind the rules to cut down on the whip. We're not stupid, we understand the public perception. They've cut it down to seven and I've hit my horse six times twice and I've got 15 days."
Champion jumps trainer Paul Nicholls has also waded into the debate, calling for the BHA to scrap the new guidelines.
Nicholls tweeted: "Oh my god what a mess. Old whip rules should be re instated with immediate effect until a sensible compromise can be reached."
Nicholls advice should be heeded imo. It would allow the spotlight on Ascot tomorrow to be about the racing and not the jockeys.
Too late for that....it would all be 'he hit Frankel 9 times, which wouldnt be allowed under proposed new rules'....etc etc
Richard Hannon "The whole thing is a complete shambles and a total embarrassment'
attheraces.com
Richard Hannon, Richard Hughes' father-in-law and boss, has strongly defended the jockey's decision to quit in protest over the new whip regulations.
Among the big rides Hughes will miss is Strong Suit in the Breeders' Cup Mile at Churchill Downs next month.
"It is absolutely ridiculous, and we will be the laughing stock of America when we get to the Breeders' Cup and tell them that we could not bring our jockey because, though he weighs little more than eight-stone, he was suspended for striking half a ton of horseflesh six times with a padded foam whip," he told his website, www.richardhannonracing.tv.
"Qatar Bloodstock, who own Strong Suit, have made an enormous investment into our racing this season and how this horse runs at Churchill Downs will go a long way to determining his value as a stallion.
"Strong Suit is a very good horse, but he is not an easy ride and takes a bit of knowing and now because of one stupid decision, we find that we are going to America without a jockey. Richard Hughes does not abuse horses and he never has done. If Sheikh Fahad thought that he did, he would not have horses with us and nor would Andrew Tinkler or Julie Wood.
"Both Andrew and Julie have also ploughed a huge amount of money into racing. Julie has 26 horses with us and she was actually delighted with the ride that Hughesie gave More Than Words at Kempton and could not believe how they could possibly do him for the whip.
"The whole thing is a complete shambles and a total embarrassment
attheraces.com
Richard Hannon, Richard Hughes' father-in-law and boss, has strongly defended the jockey's decision to quit in protest over the new whip regulations.
Among the big rides Hughes will miss is Strong Suit in the Breeders' Cup Mile at Churchill Downs next month.
"It is absolutely ridiculous, and we will be the laughing stock of America when we get to the Breeders' Cup and tell them that we could not bring our jockey because, though he weighs little more than eight-stone, he was suspended for striking half a ton of horseflesh six times with a padded foam whip," he told his website, www.richardhannonracing.tv.
"Qatar Bloodstock, who own Strong Suit, have made an enormous investment into our racing this season and how this horse runs at Churchill Downs will go a long way to determining his value as a stallion.
"Strong Suit is a very good horse, but he is not an easy ride and takes a bit of knowing and now because of one stupid decision, we find that we are going to America without a jockey. Richard Hughes does not abuse horses and he never has done. If Sheikh Fahad thought that he did, he would not have horses with us and nor would Andrew Tinkler or Julie Wood.
"Both Andrew and Julie have also ploughed a huge amount of money into racing. Julie has 26 horses with us and she was actually delighted with the ride that Hughesie gave More Than Words at Kempton and could not believe how they could possibly do him for the whip.
"The whole thing is a complete shambles and a total embarrassment
Paul Nicholls My Thoughts On Whip
betting.betfair.com
The master trainer clarifies his position on the new whip rules and calls for the BHA to show strength as they bid to resolve the controversy...
Embarrassment - that is the prevailing mood among racing. And under no circumstances can that be good for the sport, or how it is viewed by the public.
And that is what prompted me to tweet the following this morning: "Oh my god what a mess. Old whip rules should be reinstated with immediate effect until a sensible compromise can be reached."
As everyone knows, I am not a political person and on this issue I have been deliberately low key before now, even though I put my name to the BHA press release - along with the likes of AP, Frankie and Sir Henry - when the new whip rules were announced.
Everyone agreed change had to happen.
And I hadn't planned to say any more on the matter. But after every media organisation under the sun was calling me, and Sky Sports News flagging up my tweet every hour it seems, I suppose I cannot leave it there.
Last week, I wrote in this column that we have to "give the new rules a chance" while at the same time adding: "I certainly wouldn't want to be riding these days and personally I was happy enough with the old rules. And having spoken to AP and Ruby about this at length this week, I can see both sides of the argument and the worries that some jockeys have."
So what has changed?
Well, the sport is being dragged into chaos and ridicule on the eve of one of the most important days in the racing calendar - probably the most important, if you are the BHA and RFC - that's what has changed. And when you get whispers of jockeys' protests and strikes next week, you surely have to confront the matter head on.
The headlines at the moment are all for the wrong reasons. Imagine how QIPCO, sponsors of the Champions Day, must be feeling.
You can debate the merits of Richard Hughes' actions as long as you want, but when men of the wisdom and experience of Paul Barber and Andy Stewart use words such as "embarrassed" to describe the current situation, then isn't it time for firm and immediate action?
And the BHA listening to those within racing, and drawing a line under these new whip rules until mature and balanced discussions have taken place, is surely an option that now must be seriously being considered?
The new rules were brought home to me on a personal level when Harry Skelton was the first jumps jockeys to be given a five day ban after striking El Diego nine times at Wincanton yesterday.
As everyone who saw that race would attest to, it was a peach of a ride, even in defeat. He pushed and cajoled an unco-operative horse into contention from a long way out, and only lost out near the line.
But he hit the horse nine times, and so got the ban. I spoke to Harry last night and he told me with so much going on in the 3m1f race - and remember these jockeys are putting their lives on the line here - it is simply impossible for jockeys to count with any accuracy how many times they hit the horse.
We, in racing, fully appreciate that we have a wider responsibility now and that the days of "win at all costs" should be banished to the past.
But when jockeys relate that would they rather err on the side of caution and finish second, rather than risk a ban going for the win, what sort of message is that sending to punters?
So, maybe let's take a pull on the new whip rules for now until we find the correct solution.
By doing this the BHA will be showing strength of character, not weakness of will.
But of course that is just my opinion.
betting.betfair.com
The master trainer clarifies his position on the new whip rules and calls for the BHA to show strength as they bid to resolve the controversy...
Embarrassment - that is the prevailing mood among racing. And under no circumstances can that be good for the sport, or how it is viewed by the public.
And that is what prompted me to tweet the following this morning: "Oh my god what a mess. Old whip rules should be reinstated with immediate effect until a sensible compromise can be reached."
As everyone knows, I am not a political person and on this issue I have been deliberately low key before now, even though I put my name to the BHA press release - along with the likes of AP, Frankie and Sir Henry - when the new whip rules were announced.
Everyone agreed change had to happen.
And I hadn't planned to say any more on the matter. But after every media organisation under the sun was calling me, and Sky Sports News flagging up my tweet every hour it seems, I suppose I cannot leave it there.
Last week, I wrote in this column that we have to "give the new rules a chance" while at the same time adding: "I certainly wouldn't want to be riding these days and personally I was happy enough with the old rules. And having spoken to AP and Ruby about this at length this week, I can see both sides of the argument and the worries that some jockeys have."
So what has changed?
Well, the sport is being dragged into chaos and ridicule on the eve of one of the most important days in the racing calendar - probably the most important, if you are the BHA and RFC - that's what has changed. And when you get whispers of jockeys' protests and strikes next week, you surely have to confront the matter head on.
The headlines at the moment are all for the wrong reasons. Imagine how QIPCO, sponsors of the Champions Day, must be feeling.
You can debate the merits of Richard Hughes' actions as long as you want, but when men of the wisdom and experience of Paul Barber and Andy Stewart use words such as "embarrassed" to describe the current situation, then isn't it time for firm and immediate action?
And the BHA listening to those within racing, and drawing a line under these new whip rules until mature and balanced discussions have taken place, is surely an option that now must be seriously being considered?
The new rules were brought home to me on a personal level when Harry Skelton was the first jumps jockeys to be given a five day ban after striking El Diego nine times at Wincanton yesterday.
As everyone who saw that race would attest to, it was a peach of a ride, even in defeat. He pushed and cajoled an unco-operative horse into contention from a long way out, and only lost out near the line.
But he hit the horse nine times, and so got the ban. I spoke to Harry last night and he told me with so much going on in the 3m1f race - and remember these jockeys are putting their lives on the line here - it is simply impossible for jockeys to count with any accuracy how many times they hit the horse.
We, in racing, fully appreciate that we have a wider responsibility now and that the days of "win at all costs" should be banished to the past.
But when jockeys relate that would they rather err on the side of caution and finish second, rather than risk a ban going for the win, what sort of message is that sending to punters?
So, maybe let's take a pull on the new whip rules for now until we find the correct solution.
By doing this the BHA will be showing strength of character, not weakness of will.
But of course that is just my opinion.
Jeremy Noseda
Our horses wellfare is the most important issue I have. I have never seen a horse marked or hurt by a jockey return to my yard after racing.
Our horses wellfare is the most important issue I have. I have never seen a horse marked or hurt by a jockey return to my yard after racing.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539