imagine if they were disqualifying winners for whip abuse NOW

*than

The Rules will be changed to 7 hits in total on the flat.

Yet there needs to be strong punishment for those who use more than 10. I would go for 3 weeks for 10 or . 2 weeks for 9, 3 days for 8. Jockeys were struggling with the furlong pole allocation.

You need to prevent a situation were when the money is down and a jockey is instructed to win at all measures and uses the whip say 15 times... you need to prevent this from happening. How do we achieve this?

Your last sentence sums up all this brouhaha.

It is because of the BBC's, irresponsible, highlighting of horses under tarpaulins, etc, in the Grand National, that all this has blown up.

The winning jockey also getting - an unrelated whip ban, in real terms - was latched onto by all the 'vested interest' do-gooders -as they were spoon fed that information by the sensationalist media ...

- including, somewhat unforgivably, many factions of the  racing media - who make their cushy  and privileged living from  racing.

Talk about biting the hand that feeds you.

The result now is, that people like me and you others, who assiduously study THOUSANDS of FLAT races per annum. - are being marginalised and having our modus operandi, of many years standing, shredded because of a load of old slow-boats lumbering around a field in Liverpool - in an event that is a totally inconsequential NON-ENTITY from both a pre-race, and more importantly, post-race FORM  perspective.

The race having NO bearing whatsoever on any of the other 10,000 plus races run per annum.

The BHA, and all the bleeding hearts, who think that this is then automatically actually an issue in those other 10,000  plus races - are missing the Bull's Eye by a MILE.

The General Public - and all those PERCEIVED - yet mostly MYTHICAL - 'whip worriers' are OBLIVIOUS to racing for 364 days of the year - yet racing is pandering to their PERCEIVED interest.

The General Public are a fickle lot.

They are far more interested in who is going to win X-Factor - than whether FRANKEL will win at Ascot.

The majority will NOT even be aware there is a meeting on at Ascot - let alone that he is running.

When Wimbledon comes around - ALL the General Public are Tennis EXPERTS for TWO weeks ...

Stop them in the street a month later - and ask them who was the beaten finalist - let alone, who were the two losing semi-finalists - and you will be met with a sea of BLANK faces

So why are Racing's rulers so DELUDED into thinking that there is some massive Public interest, and concern, in the intricacies of racing.

There ISN'T

Why? - Because the majority of the General Public have the attention span of a Goldfish on most peripheral areas -  outside of their work, their kids, school, Soaps etc - and buying a 'birthdays and house numbers' Lottery  ticket - which only takes A MINUTE  ...

ANY interest in racing - even a passing interest - requires a LOT more mental application than that.

For goodness sake, somebody GET A GRIP .... and STAND OUR CORNER.

I think frankel will win x factor.

the punishment clearly does not fit the crime

and its been brought in too quick

what will happen now

the red faced authorities will be seen to back down

make themselves look stupid as per usual

the rules will be diluted

we will end up with an extended "totting" up procedure

which will continually expose the wrong doers in the long run

"onlooker"........An extremely succint & accurate appraisal of the chronic myopia that afflicts horseracing in this Country.

Strange how jockeys can't count to five but a few years ago could count to six.

Why didn't they bring in the new ban system but keep the old rules. The old rules were fine, everyone was used to them, and there wasn't a problem if the number of strokes was kept withing the limits. Changing the number  of strokes while at the same time increasing up the length of bans is just asking for trouble. The previous totting up system meant jockeys often ended up with longish bans anyway.

Btw if if I have backed a horse in a race i don't want my jockey f'n counting the number of times he is using the whip. I want him worrying about where the other horses are and how he is going to beat them.

You think bookies would pay first past the post if 2 or 3 horses were being disqualified daily?  There wouldn't be 2 or 3 horses disqualified daily as the jockeys would get lambasted by connections as well as banned.  As it is set up now some jockeys feel they have to fall on their sword when the money is down.  btw I am amazed that no one seems to understand that the draconian penalties for the jockeys are quite deliberate as without them the new system had no chance at all of being "successful".

Good Post Onlooker, make the race a feckin Handicap Hurdle if Necessary. The New rules should have been applied to one race ONLY


Imo the fault started around 100 years ago when they gave the vote to you know who

They still wouldn't pay first past the post if 2 or 3 horses were being disqualified weekly. They only do it because hardly any horses are disqualified these days. Off course these penalties are deliberate ..I think everyone (or most people) does understand that and (imo) there is nothing wrong with the penalties by themselves. The problem is they have made big changes while at the same time massively increased the penalties. Why not introduce the new rules and then increase the penalties after a dew months, or keep the old rules and increase the penalties. Also why are they worried about the number of strokes inside the final furlong..does it hurt more? Just have a finite number of strokes throughout the race.