There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Expecting jockeys to change habits of a riding lifetime heading into the cauldron of Cheltenham next month is a huge ask.
Greg Wood @Greg_Wood_
Mon 13 Feb 2023 15.34 GMT
British racing’s latest attempt to impose once-and-for-all rules on use of the whip began on Monday at Catterick, Plumpton and Wolverhampton, with the hope that the fresh toughening of the regime will not generate the same controversy and negative publicity as the last line-in-the-sand moment in the autumn of 2011.
That prompted threats of an all-out strike by jockeys and led to Richard Hughes briefly handing in his riding licence in protest, while Christophe Soumillon was fined his cut of the prize fund – about £55,000 – for going one stroke over the limit of seven in the Champion Stakes at Ascot.
The process of sanding down the rough edges of the rules began almost immediately. The strike threat was averted, Hughes went on to win the championship three years running from 2012 and Soumillon got his money back. But it was all so bruising and humiliatingly public it is perhaps no surprise that this time around the tweaks to the new regime started before it had even come into force.
The latest rules are the result of an extended consultation process on the use of the whip, which included jockeys, trainers and animal welfare groups. An initial intention to ban use of the whip in the forehand position was dropped last month, after many senior riders expressed concerns.
A proposal to double the current penalty for use above shoulder height has also been dropped, with suggestions from some riders, including Harry Cobden, Paul Nicholls’s stable jockey, they had been warned by officials, during a “bedding-in” period for the new rules,extended bans for winning rides would have been received had they occurred once the new regime was in force.
The British Horseracing Authority disputes the numbers attached to those claims – it was allegedly a 24-day “ban” in Cobden’s case after his win on Il Ridoto at Cheltenham’s Trials day meeting, which would be enough to rule a rider out of Aintree if they offend at the Cheltenham Festival. The regulator also points out that breaches will now be considered by a new Whip Review Committee, not the stewards on the day, and published figures from the bedding-in period that show a significant number of potential breaches in the early weeks dropping markedly before Monday’s full implementation.
However, there has been no shift on the timing of the new rules’ introduction or on the decision to introduce disqualification as the ultimate penalty for the most serious breaches of the rules – defined as four strokes over the limit of six on the Flat and seven over jumps.
Having suffered the PR consequences after the last big change to the whip rules, which arrived a few days before the first Champions Day at Ascot, the timing certainly feels like a brave decision, at best. It could be argued there is never an ideal moment and that when summer arrives there will always be a big meeting in the not-too-distant future.
But next month’s Cheltenham Festival is not just a big meeting, but the biggest of the year, flat or jumps. The Grand National a few weeks later is the sport’s most famous and popular race. That inevitably heaps extra pressure on all jockeys, not least those based in Ireland who will be turning up to ride at the Festival in March without the benefit of a bedding-in period.
The arrival of potential disqualification – several days after the event and so not for betting purposes – is also fraught with danger. One of the most likely scenarios for a rider going four strokes over the limit is in the closing stages of a major race and the headlines that could follow a close finish up the long run-in in the National and in the days leading up to a WRC decision on whether or not punters who backed the runner-up were robbed are scarcely imaginable.
Proponents of disqualification for serious breaches often claim the deterrent effect will be such that it may never need to be used. We shall see, but my own view would be that it is highly likely to happen and probably sooner rather than later.
The BHA has praised the efforts of jockeys in recent weeks to adapt to the new rules, but expecting riders to change what are, in some cases at least, the habits of a riding lifetime, just as they head into the cauldron of Cheltenham, is a huge ask. They will get there in time, but the next few weeks could give us all an unnecessarily bumpy ride.
Greg Wood @Greg_Wood_
Mon 13 Feb 2023 15.34 GMT
British racing’s latest attempt to impose once-and-for-all rules on use of the whip began on Monday at Catterick, Plumpton and Wolverhampton, with the hope that the fresh toughening of the regime will not generate the same controversy and negative publicity as the last line-in-the-sand moment in the autumn of 2011.
That prompted threats of an all-out strike by jockeys and led to Richard Hughes briefly handing in his riding licence in protest, while Christophe Soumillon was fined his cut of the prize fund – about £55,000 – for going one stroke over the limit of seven in the Champion Stakes at Ascot.
The process of sanding down the rough edges of the rules began almost immediately. The strike threat was averted, Hughes went on to win the championship three years running from 2012 and Soumillon got his money back. But it was all so bruising and humiliatingly public it is perhaps no surprise that this time around the tweaks to the new regime started before it had even come into force.
The latest rules are the result of an extended consultation process on the use of the whip, which included jockeys, trainers and animal welfare groups. An initial intention to ban use of the whip in the forehand position was dropped last month, after many senior riders expressed concerns.
A proposal to double the current penalty for use above shoulder height has also been dropped, with suggestions from some riders, including Harry Cobden, Paul Nicholls’s stable jockey, they had been warned by officials, during a “bedding-in” period for the new rules,extended bans for winning rides would have been received had they occurred once the new regime was in force.
The British Horseracing Authority disputes the numbers attached to those claims – it was allegedly a 24-day “ban” in Cobden’s case after his win on Il Ridoto at Cheltenham’s Trials day meeting, which would be enough to rule a rider out of Aintree if they offend at the Cheltenham Festival. The regulator also points out that breaches will now be considered by a new Whip Review Committee, not the stewards on the day, and published figures from the bedding-in period that show a significant number of potential breaches in the early weeks dropping markedly before Monday’s full implementation.
However, there has been no shift on the timing of the new rules’ introduction or on the decision to introduce disqualification as the ultimate penalty for the most serious breaches of the rules – defined as four strokes over the limit of six on the Flat and seven over jumps.
Having suffered the PR consequences after the last big change to the whip rules, which arrived a few days before the first Champions Day at Ascot, the timing certainly feels like a brave decision, at best. It could be argued there is never an ideal moment and that when summer arrives there will always be a big meeting in the not-too-distant future.
But next month’s Cheltenham Festival is not just a big meeting, but the biggest of the year, flat or jumps. The Grand National a few weeks later is the sport’s most famous and popular race. That inevitably heaps extra pressure on all jockeys, not least those based in Ireland who will be turning up to ride at the Festival in March without the benefit of a bedding-in period.
The arrival of potential disqualification – several days after the event and so not for betting purposes – is also fraught with danger. One of the most likely scenarios for a rider going four strokes over the limit is in the closing stages of a major race and the headlines that could follow a close finish up the long run-in in the National and in the days leading up to a WRC decision on whether or not punters who backed the runner-up were robbed are scarcely imaginable.
Proponents of disqualification for serious breaches often claim the deterrent effect will be such that it may never need to be used. We shall see, but my own view would be that it is highly likely to happen and probably sooner rather than later.
The BHA has praised the efforts of jockeys in recent weeks to adapt to the new rules, but expecting riders to change what are, in some cases at least, the habits of a riding lifetime, just as they head into the cauldron of Cheltenham, is a huge ask. They will get there in time, but the next few weeks could give us all an unnecessarily bumpy ride.
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 82
|
By:
Diddums. What is it about our weighing room? Don't the dinosaurs realise that the BHA are bending over backwards to stretch out the period of time before the whip goes?
The rules are tougher in France. They recently made them even tougher. I didn't hear any surrounding ballyhoo to the new implementation. |
|
By:
Do them Jockeys ever stop winging ffs.
 |
|
By:
Surely they can count ?
Barry O’Connell rider stated he doesn’t really like the whip…seldom uses the whip…..quiet rider…. And that’s coming from an Irish jockey….difficult to believe but he did say it live on tv….. Most prefer slasher and rashers….up towards the line and punters screaming hit the fkn thing…..dreadful…imv.. |
|
By:
Lorcan Williams to get 14-day ban and miss Cheltenham Festival.
The jockey said: "I'm missing the four biggest days of racing for doing my job and achieving the best possible position for everyone. My horse has responded to the encouragement every time I've asked him. Every time I laid off him it gave the other horse a chance to get back at me. "We're jockeys, we want to win and my horse wouldn't have won if I hadn't done that. We're in a competitive sport and a competitive environment. I had to give the horse the encouragement he needed to achieve the best possible position for myself, the horse, my owners and trainer. Whereas if I had dropped my hands I would have been called in by the stewards. There's a rule and you broke it to gain an unfair advantage. You admitted you wouldn't have won if you hadn't cheated. Zero sympathy here. Learn to count in your 2 weeks off would be my advice. |
|
By:
Yes, what a pathetic attempt to gain sympathy.
Why would you drop your hands, rather than ride hands and heels? He sounds like a complete chump, as does Nicholls for backing him up. Must be really tough missing out on a couple of 50/1 no hopers. |
|
By:
Exactly
|
|
By:
I think there are a couple of issues here. I totally get the failing to ride out stuff and the why would they go over the permitted strikes of the whip argument.
However I do have a bit of sympathy with regards having to change their whip action and style. It's something that comes automatic to them, each has their own style, whip action, they are now being asked to change that with immediate affect. I would imagine that would be similar to learning to drive in a car with 5 gears and 10 years later saying you now can't use gear 2 or 4. Imo it would take a fair bit of getting used to and for some time you would automatically still go for gear 2 and 4. I think its a bit hard to say any jockey wouldn't miss riding at the festival, whatever prices his mounts were. Personally I think its a shambles and for once I actually agree with Mark Chapman. In what is now becomes the norm, we are pampering to a minority once again. |
|
By:
Williams defended his actions and argued that he would have effectively had to concede the race to stay within the rules.
This beggars belief. As always feel for the connections of the 2nd placed horse, who stuck to the rules and got cheated out of a big day of celebrations. Shades of Billaway at the Festival, which was a total disgrace. |
|
By:
Within the bubble there is no proper debate. You are literally told that the whip must stay. Chapman is happy to spout his views over and over again because it keeps him in with the crowd.
It's not pandering to a minority to say animals shouldn't be hit with a whip in the name of sport. I think given reasoned argument, in fact any argument, the vast majority of people would agree. The actual pandering is being done by the BHA to constantly appease the jockeys, and allow them to keep hitting horses for as long as possible. If it was only allowed to be used for correction there would none of this counting and disqualification nonsense. |
|
By:
I probably disagree with most of that but it's all about opinions.
I believe in this case Chapman is so vociferous and passionate about the whip issue because he strongly believes what they are trying to do 8s wrong. The whip has changed, the present version does no damage to the horse. I don't think they are allowed to keep hitting horses as long as possible. If they went over they deserve to be punished, as they do if they continue to hit them without giving the horse time to respond. They rules are in place and probably should have been adhered to more but I just don't see the need for another change. Being only allowed for correction imo would be open to loads of debate and personal opinion. It's a very emotive subject and I do agree that when it's used wrongly and in the wrong way it does the sport no good but imo they are few and far between and not enough to have brought in the new changes. Without the whip imho it would become a totally different sport and not for the better. |
|
By:
Chapman ain’t for the punter just watch they way he carries on in the paddock,kidding around and crawling making out they are all his friends ffs
|
|
By:
It's always the same with Chapman, just an ego trip like the rest of his loudmouth act.
|
|
By:
Without the whip imho it would become a totally different sport and not for the better....You would still back just as many losers so what is the big deal?
|
|
By:
Many think the future of racing will depend on this issue, acey.
|
|
By:
Nothing to do with betting, not sure why that would be your assumption.
Every horse is different, some do it easily, some are just lazy, some need sencouragement. Without the whip that all changes. The problem I have is there isn't a problem and doesn't need changing |
|
By:
To acey obviously
|
|
By:
Forgetting the rights or wrongs of the new rules, with Williams he knew the new 'number', he knew he was breaking those rules , yet he proceeded to cheat his fellow professionals on his way to a victory, and now he cries that he's going to be punished. This wasn't a case of stewards interpretation of above shoulder height, riding style etc.
In the same way Oisin Murphy cheated Buick out of the jockey's title, Buick kept his counsel but knows he was beaten by a cheat. I hope other jockeys start speaking out. |
|
By:
My betting habits would not change one iota if the whip was abolished why would it?...Carry it for correctional purposes only imho.
|
|
By:
Chapman going off on one again before a race at Southwell.
|
|
By:
BHA encouraging non triers with the new rules.. Crazy ban for Williams for that ride. AP would have been given 6 months for his ride on Wichita Lineman using current rules...
|
|
By:
He cost the runner-up a prestigious grade 2 and £18k difference in prizemoney that day . They will , along with the sensible majority on here, have no sympathy for the lad on his occasion.
|
|
By:
Should be no maximum number at all. Either no whip at all, or no limit, keeps is very simple then.
|
|
By:
and the jockeys themselves agreed to these rules to keep the whip.Now they want to stick to these rules with the caveat they can break them if 'it matters'
 |
|
By:
The jockeys are similar to Johnson. Sign a deal and then renege a short time afterwards
|
|
By:
That's a bit unfair on jockeys, combustible.
 |
|
By:
Chapman still ranting and raving during the breaks at Southwell.
 |
|
By:
Every right to though, both of them talking sense.. especially regarding the marking of horses etc.
|
|
By:
Its more dangerous to the horses to let some of these so called professional jocks get on board in the first place...
|
|
By:
How would it be a different sport? It would be exactly the same without horses being hit. I suspect the vast majority of results would be exactly the same, with or without the whip. What's actually wrong with the horse that has the most natural desire winning the race? I would say absolutely nothing. The truth is nobody knows the degree of pain when the horse it, only that if it isn't hit then there isn't any. You can quote what you like, produce ridiculous demonstartions, but that is the only actual fact that can be argued. The rest is a load of bull, something Chapman is an expert at spouting. There are few better at it.
The way forward is to have a trial period where the whip is only carried for correction. I have a feeling the jockeys would oppose the idea because they would be fearful that it would be successful. The BHA should have implemented this years ago, but instead we have had year after year of just fannying around. They need to start acting like they have a grip on the situation, and if that means upsetting the weighing room for a greater good, then so be it. |
|
By:
Don't need a trial period, just a few trial meetings. There used to be some hands and heels races for conditional jockeys but i think they've now been phased out.
|
|
By:
At Kempton over Xmas you had to walk past the Horse Death Watch chalked pavement of all the horses who had lost their lives for our entertainment. It did not make it a particularly nice start to the day.
Now, I'm not one for appeasing activists but the simple fact is hitting animals does not sit well in the current climate and it will eventually be eliminated from racing. Nobody really knows why certain horses are 'lazy'. There is a fair chance they are hurting in their body or their breathing or something else. A perfectable fit and healthy will often run all the way to the line without any need for the jockey to resort to the whip. I'm sick of Chapman saying it doesn't hurt the horse, in any number. I'd love someone to slap him round the face once. No doubt he'll laugh and say he didn't feel a thing. Then do it 10 times and let's have a look at his face. I'd certainly pay to watch. |
|
By:
It never ceases to amaze me how people don't actually read everything that's posted, No one seems to want a genuine debate, it has to be thats all bull, I'm right your wrong.ive never once said anyone else's opinion is wrong. I've gave an opinion that I believe horse racing without whips would be a different sport. I believe that had the whip been removed 5 years ago, hundreds of results would have been different. How many less winners would McCoy have ridden without the whip? There has been a massive improvement in standards over the last few years regarding the whip, I just think the latest step imo is one step too far.
Anyway I bow out of the "debate" we will see what happens over the next few months. |
|
By:
It looks to me as if you're the one who doesn't want a debate, preferring instead to try and put yourself on a pedestal. That precisely mirrors the action of Chapman and many other talking heads within the bubble. They just want to talk to people who agree with them. That's not a debate, and it just becomes someone saying the same thing over and over.
There is zero evidence that the whip doesn't hurt. Consequently, that idea is bull. Not that it should matter one jot to whether there is whip or not, but I would be surprised if McCoy wouldn't have ridden quite a few more winners without the whip. He was very fit, and would just have adapted that much better than the rest. |
|
By:
There is also no evidence that the whip does hurt... farcical debate really.
|
|
By:
From first posting on this thread.
British racing’s latest attempt to impose once-and-for-all rules on use of the whip began on Monday at Catterick, Plumpton and Wolverhampton, with the hope that the fresh toughening of the regime will not generate the same controversy and negative publicity as the last line-in-the-sand moment in the autumn of 2011. |
|
By:
I think the last time , even though he claimed he wasn't a big user of the whip, that Richard hughes handed in his license in protest.
|
|
By:
Brogan on the second in Williams race has also been given a ban. So if wiliams sticks to the rules and loses the second gets the race by breaking the rules. Anyone else thinks this is nonsense. Jockeys will be trying to count the other rider's strokes as well as their own.
|
|
By:
It might not be a a different sport but the results would change. Some horses will try their hardest whip or not but others would stop as soon as they felt a bit tired without a whip. I am not making a judgement as to which is best, just pointing out that the results would change.
|
|
By:
1.01 will be a jockey strike BHA leadership will have to go following
|