There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
20 Oct 11
20:48
Joined:
Date Joined:
05 Jan 10
• British Horseracing Authority to publish changes on Friday
• Final-furlong limit of five strokes likely to be removed
Greg Wood
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 20 October 2011 19.42
Britain's jockeys can expect to discover on Friday whether the British Horseracing Authority is prepared to adjust its strict new regime on the use of the whip to avert the danger of strike action by riders. The BHA's Review Group, which originally took 10 months to devise the new regulations, is confident that it will meet Friday's deadline to report on possible changes to the rules and penalties.
Throughout the growing controversy over the new rules, the BHA has positioned itself as a regulator rather than an employer, since only a tiny handful of the country's jockeys enjoy a paid retainer and the great majority are self-employed. However, it still finds itself trying to head off the threat of strike action by riders over its new rules, which place strict limits on the number of times a jockey can use the whip during a race and also require riders to forfeit their riding fees and share of any prize money if they are found in breach.
The expected response from the BHA follows a meeting with jockeys' representatives on Monday. It will be viewed by the BHA as a statement of the authority's final position on the issue, rather than a basis for negotiation.
One point which seems likely to be conceded by the BHA is a distinction within the new rules between strokes with the whip in the course of an entire race and those in either the final furlong, on the Flat, or after the last obstacle over jumps.
Richard Hughes, one of the country's leading jockeys, has not ridden since picking up his second ban in the space of four days under the new rules on 13 October. In both cases, he used his whip six times overall, within the limit of seven strokes, but since all were inside the final furlong, he was found in breach, as only five are allowed at that point.
Christophe Soumillon was penalised in an identical situation at Ascot last weekend, when he forfeited his winning percentage of £52,000 after winning the Champion Stakes on Cirrus Des Aigles.
However, while the "final furlong or obstacle" rule is likely to be removed, the BHA is unlikely to offer any significant change from the overall limits of seven strokes on the Flat and eight over jumps. Tough new bans for breaches of the rules, which mean a jockey is likely to miss five days for a first offence rather than receiving only a caution, are unlikely to be significantly amended, however, while the authority's attitude towards the financial penalties will also be a crucial point for many riders.
The charity World Horse Welfare has urged the BHA not to back down on the issue of fines for breaches of the rules. "Clearly the rules need to work in practice," Roly Owers, WHW's chief executive, said on Thursday, "and the BHA is looking at that. However, we hope the BHA will stand firm in denying jockeys who break the rules their percentage of any prize money. An effective penalty structure would be seriously weakened without a significant financial element. Jockeys should never profit at the expense of the horse.
"If there is to be a review of the penalty structure, then we feel it should include the trainer and owner in addition to the jockey; after all it is very much a team sport in this regard."
The BHA's week became significantly busier on Thursday with the start of a 10-day hearing into allegations of corruption against four jockeys and a trainer.
Media representatives are barred from the hearing and it is likely to be next month before any news of the outcome becomes available
• Final-furlong limit of five strokes likely to be removed
Greg Wood
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 20 October 2011 19.42
Britain's jockeys can expect to discover on Friday whether the British Horseracing Authority is prepared to adjust its strict new regime on the use of the whip to avert the danger of strike action by riders. The BHA's Review Group, which originally took 10 months to devise the new regulations, is confident that it will meet Friday's deadline to report on possible changes to the rules and penalties.
Throughout the growing controversy over the new rules, the BHA has positioned itself as a regulator rather than an employer, since only a tiny handful of the country's jockeys enjoy a paid retainer and the great majority are self-employed. However, it still finds itself trying to head off the threat of strike action by riders over its new rules, which place strict limits on the number of times a jockey can use the whip during a race and also require riders to forfeit their riding fees and share of any prize money if they are found in breach.
The expected response from the BHA follows a meeting with jockeys' representatives on Monday. It will be viewed by the BHA as a statement of the authority's final position on the issue, rather than a basis for negotiation.
One point which seems likely to be conceded by the BHA is a distinction within the new rules between strokes with the whip in the course of an entire race and those in either the final furlong, on the Flat, or after the last obstacle over jumps.
Richard Hughes, one of the country's leading jockeys, has not ridden since picking up his second ban in the space of four days under the new rules on 13 October. In both cases, he used his whip six times overall, within the limit of seven strokes, but since all were inside the final furlong, he was found in breach, as only five are allowed at that point.
Christophe Soumillon was penalised in an identical situation at Ascot last weekend, when he forfeited his winning percentage of £52,000 after winning the Champion Stakes on Cirrus Des Aigles.
However, while the "final furlong or obstacle" rule is likely to be removed, the BHA is unlikely to offer any significant change from the overall limits of seven strokes on the Flat and eight over jumps. Tough new bans for breaches of the rules, which mean a jockey is likely to miss five days for a first offence rather than receiving only a caution, are unlikely to be significantly amended, however, while the authority's attitude towards the financial penalties will also be a crucial point for many riders.
The charity World Horse Welfare has urged the BHA not to back down on the issue of fines for breaches of the rules. "Clearly the rules need to work in practice," Roly Owers, WHW's chief executive, said on Thursday, "and the BHA is looking at that. However, we hope the BHA will stand firm in denying jockeys who break the rules their percentage of any prize money. An effective penalty structure would be seriously weakened without a significant financial element. Jockeys should never profit at the expense of the horse.
"If there is to be a review of the penalty structure, then we feel it should include the trainer and owner in addition to the jockey; after all it is very much a team sport in this regard."
The BHA's week became significantly busier on Thursday with the start of a 10-day hearing into allegations of corruption against four jockeys and a trainer.
Media representatives are barred from the hearing and it is likely to be next month before any news of the outcome becomes available
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 20
|
By:
Goes to show how big of a joke the BHA are and rightly so should the rest of the world laugh at them.
The BHA's Review Group, which originally took 10 months to devise the new regulations, |
|
By:
The BHA have shown themselves to be clueless.
|
|
By:
Jockeys should never profit at the expense of the horse.
That sentence alone shows how farkin clueless that lot are about Racing.. |
|
By:
Who elected World Horse Welfare please ?
|
|
By:
the face saving has begun
|
|
By:
A jockeys' strike is surely a non-runner
Friday is D-Day in the increasingly acrimonious row between jockeys and the racing authorities over the stringent new whip rules, which were introduced on Monday Oct 10 and have been a matter of huge controversy ever since. By Marcus Armytage http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/horseracing/8839686/A-jockeys-strike-is-surely-a-non-runner.html 20 Oct 2011 The Professional Jockeys Association will today hear what changes, if any, to the new rules the British Horseracing Authority are prepared to make. The review of the original edict follows the meeting between the two parties at 75, High Holborn on Monday, at which the jockeys submitted their own proposals for alterations to the rules. On Thursday, the main players in the introduction of the new rules from the BHA, Paul Roy, the chairman, Jamie Stier, the director of raceday operations and regulation, and Dr Tim Morris, the director of equine science and welfare, had lengthy meetings with representatives from racing’s main stakeholders (owners, trainers and racecourses, but not the jockeys themselves) in a bid to thrash-out the basis of a compromise, which will be put to the PJA. It is unlikely riders will get it all their own way but, it is believed, there will be enough in it for jockeys, if not to accept a deal immediately then negotiate further and avert the possibility of a protest. But what happens if the jockeys are not satisfied? There has been much talk of a 'strike’, although, to be pedantic, it is not a strike, it would be a protest by a bunch of mainly self-employed people deciding not to turn up for work. Although other jockeys have talked of possible action Steve Drowne, a senior member of the PJA, said there were no such plans at the moment. “Nothing has been planned and won’t be until we get a response,” he said. “At the moment we’re still hopeful of a good response.” There are, of course, certain difficulties in jockeys refusing to work. At the moment, trainers and owners are, by and large, on side. However, they have already said they do not believe a 'strike’ by the riders is the way forward. This is also an important time of year for them, particularly on the Flat. There is only a fortnight’s turf racing left this season and there is huge demand to run horses before the all-weather season starts. Demand is such that at Leicester on Monday 194 horses have been entered, while Redcar has attracted 211 entries. Trainers are very keen to get a run into their backward two year-olds at this time of year and at Yarmouth on Tuesday there are 65 entries in the seven-furlong maiden and 68 in the mile maiden. Quite apart from souring everyone else in racing, 'striking’ jockeys would very soon lose the support of trainers. There will also be jockeys who may not want to work, but need to. The average annual earnings of a jockey are £12,000 and if your three rides of the week (at £148.95 a ride for a jump jockey and £109.10 for a Flat jockey) happen to be on the day a protest is organised, it is going to be tough to stay at home |
|
By:
The average annual earnings of a jockey are £12,000
Jockeys should never profit at the expense of the horse. FFS |
|
By:
Averages are really just figures to hide behind by people who want to use them to suit their argument and are generally meaningless overall. That £12,000 figure will include those at the top earning over £1million and those at the bottom who might only really be glorified work riders who have a handful of rides a season.
If you filled a room full of sportsmen and women made up of jockeys and basketball players then you might get an average height of say 5 feet 10 inches but how many people in the room would actually be 5 feet 10? |
|
By:
I can understand that Flat jockeys have problems judging the one furlong marker, especially since our lax interference rules provide no motive for looking where you are going, but surely the jumps boys must know when they have jumped the final fence.
|
|
By:
The average annual jockeys earnings are £12,000?
Probably the most laughable statement yet, surely they can come up with something better than that, more holes in that statement than a swiss cheese. |
|
By:
If the average wage of a Jockey really is £12000 per year I am surprised that cheating
does not go on on a far greater scale. |
|
By:
By Graham Green racingpost.com
THE BHA review group announced major changes to the controversial whip rules on Friday morning in a last-ditch effort to fend off the threat of strike action by jockeys. The five-hits edict in the final furlong/after the last obstacles has been dropped, although the limit on strikes remains seven times in a Flat race, and eight over jumps. Riders will not lose their riding fee if they get banned for a whip offence and will forfeit their prize-money percentage only if receiving a suspension of seven days or more - up from three. Therefore a jockey who uses one more hit than allowed will not lose his or her prize-money percentage. All whip bans incurred since the introduction of the new harsher regime that came in on October 10 will be subject to the new set of rules. This means Christophe Soumillon, who lost his £52,000 share of the prize-money when banned for five days after hitting Cirrus Des Aigles six times in the final furlong when winning the Qipco Champion Stakes at Ascot last Saturday, will now be paid. The amended rules come into effect from the start of racing today. The BHA's statement added: "The Board is committed to the highest standards of regulation in the sport, and ensuring that British horseracing continues to lead theway in matters of equine welfare. "This is a sport not without its challenges, but they will always be outweighed by the sport's strengths. These challenges will best be met – and are being met – by finding a common purpose amongst the sport’s participants, and by putting the sport first |
|
By:
Pure and unadulterated Shoite.
|
|
By:
3 or 4 rides a day, 5 or 6 days a week, at £110 a time?
They are coining it in. plus the 'extras' : prizemoney ON TOP, and the - ahem - priviledged position? |
|
By:
I'm actually disappointed now that they never give it a go. Ah well now we know who rule racing and it's not the BHA or Owners and Trainers
|
|
By:
I agree with Wee Eck on this occasion.
|
|
By:
Analogs, they one way or another have when the chips are down held the whip hand.
|
|
By:
Derek Thompson
Well done BHA! Common sense prevails!let's go forward! Everybody happy?  |
|
By:
Tommo was only worried about his tipping line.
|
|
By:
He probably thought they would go on strike tomorrow so he couldn't put up Master Minded as his nap
|