Misuse of the whip at Cheltenham

A

Ardross

Senior Jockey
Joined
Aug 8, 2007
Messages
5,492
Time to disqualify those who breach the whip rules?

There were some shocking breaches especially by the amateur jockeys at the Festival . I would suggest minor breaches forfeit 25% of the prize money and serious breach should lead to disqualification.
 
Absolute nonsense -would penalise punters & owners -not a good move with a sport in danger of becoming irrelevant.
 
Might Bite was the horse that could have saved the festival for me -in my opinion Johnson should get a knighthood for the ride he gave Native River -Nico de Boinville had no complaints this morning on RUK.
 
Don't take it out on the owners. As said in another thread, make the bans longer ( and fines heavier maybe) and make the bans come into effective with immediate effect. Six days now, make it 3 weeks. The jockey is the only one wielding the whip, he/she should be the only one punished, no one has control over them during the race.
 
If jockeys knew they had the threat of disqualification hanging over them that would be a powerful incentive to obey the rules

As for penalising punters what about those who backed a horse that gets beaten a neck by one whose jockey infringed eg Ms Parfois

Agree the whip offence probably made no difference to the GC result



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
This is an argument that recurs regularly after a controversial race.

The controversy can be removed long term by having a simple rule: break the rule and you lose the race.

In the short term there will be debate about it but once people accept that there will be a disqualification the over/mis-use will stop.

If it means disqualifying the first two or three in a race so be it. We see it in olympic sports. It can happen.
 
Desert Orchid said:
This is an argument that recurs regularly after a controversial race.

The controversy can be removed long term by having a simple rule: break the rule and you lose the race.

In the short term there will be debate about it but once people accept that there will be a disqualification the over/mis-use will stop.

If it means disqualifying the first two or three in a race so be it. We see it in olympic sports. It can happen.
Click to expand...

Agree completely Des I've posted similar thoughts over at my place.

If a couple more cracks of the whip to ensure victory in any big race is what it takes and the punishment remains a few days holiday then it will always keep happening because the prize and the glory outweighs the punishment.

What you'd find is that very few horses would ever be disqualified under the those rules. If a jockey knew he was going to be disqualified from the Gold Cup for over use then I'd guarantee the horse would only receive the maximum number of cracks and not one more.

You'd obviously have to find some way of ensuring that jockey's could take corrective measures even after using the maximum amount though from just a safety perspective.

That is the way to ensure the rules are kept.

That said I've never been in agreement with the rules in the first place though tbh. I think they were rules brought in only to appease the general public and the animal rights brigade who are less informed than the people involved in the training and the riding of the horses. The only people IMO who should make decisions on the use of the whip should be jockeys. If the majority of jockeys thought that the number of hits should be limited then fair enough but I very much doubt that would be the case.
 
Perhaps owners' thoughts on the subject would be enlightening. It is, after all, their horse that is being and they are the ones whose prize money being affected. The trainers and jockeys are ,after all is said and done, their employees.
 
I think by all means canvass their views but I would be surprised if the majority favoured disqualification.

Most of the big owners, I suspect, don't give a damn about how their horses are treated during a race. I suspect a lot of them would take the Ted Walsh view [that if they're in with a chance they want the jockey to "tear rashers off them"].
 
If the best player in the team keeps getting red carded and doesnt change his behaviour, less talented players get picked.
 
I've never had one of mine abused so I can't predict how I would react if my jockey was done and the horse disqualified. Judging by the scenes in the betting ring last week, I'd like to think that it would be with more grace than shown by your average punter. I'd certainly take a different view to 'abuse' of a young/immature horse compared to a seasoned pro.
Just so that everyone is talking the same language, this is the PJA summary of the regulations:
http://www.thepja.co.uk/members-info/regulatory/useofwhip/

The first point that I'd make is that, for me, this is a subjective issue in the sense that it's the subject of any abuse that is most important. However, it's also subjective in the sense that evil, like beauty, is in the ye of the beholder. In that secondary meaning, I find it ludicrous that the same whip rules apply to a 2yo having it's first run as do to a 10yo chaser having its forty first. I'm guessing that the average flat race distance is about 7 furlongs compared to maybe 20 furlongs over jumps so to have the whip thresholds at 7 and 8 respectively is wrong. Now I'd be in favour of banning the racing of 2yos but, if it must be done I'd like to see the whip threshold be much reduced to, say, 3 strokes. On the flat, for 3yos it could rise to 6 and older horses could stay at 7. For NH racing, bumpers and races for 3yos and 4yos only could work with 6 and older horses rather more, say 10.

The whip is a vital piece of race riding steering equipment and I'm not sure that it's realistic to expect jockeys (of all people) to be counting whip strokes under penalty of losing the race. The manner and placement of whip strikes is, for me, more important than the number.
 
I would definitely agree with your last sentence, Archie.

Flicks when riding a finish are totally different to a jock standing up in his saddle and letting loose a belter.
 
I one hundred percent agree with that Archie, apart from the last sentence. You couldn't have put my own views on it any better. I'd also add to that I would ban three year olds hurdling, and I'd ban horses chasing before they're five, which is a particular problem in France. I also believe that these are rules that should be agreed and adopted worldwide.

With regards whip bans how will any kind of a ban deter an amateur from delivering the biggest day of his or her life? As tough as it sounds, the only way is to disqualify the horse. I've been an owner (not currently), and I'd accept it for what it is. Cheating. Unless that measure is taken no length of whip ban or fine will ever stop it in valuable races. If it is however, it'll stop immediately and never come back.

Can you imagine what I'm going to do as an owner if a jockey takes away the biggest day of my life!!!
 
Last edited:
Trouble is, Colin, that many armchair punters don't realise that some of the time the whip doesn't make contact with the horse and is just used for percussive effect and rhythm.

In the earlier piece I forgot to add that I certainly wouldn't empower local stewards to disqualify. Some of the Colonel Blimps that sit can't even count to eight by the end of the afternoon so a reference to a central panel would have to be the vehicle.
 
To clarify why I disagree with the last paragraph, it shouldn't be up to the stewards to decide from a distance what constitutes a slap or a smack. Anything that is ambiguous or open to interpretation can't be regarded as a rule, and will simply be another reason for a split opinion in the stewards room.
 
Maruco said:
To clarify why I disagree with the last paragraph, it shouldn't be up to the stewards to decide from a distance what constitutes a slap or a smack. Anything that is ambiguous or open to interpretation can't be regarded as a rule, and will simply be another reason for a split opinion in the stewards room.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, that interpretation is already part of the regulations/guidelines.
 
If we are all happy that our sport becomes niche, only enjoyed by those who actually know what's going on and has no appeal to a wider "couple of times a year" market, then let's keep the whip. If on the other hand, we can take into account an outsider's perspective, and a few that will help to sustain racing in years to come - and may even start attending meetings - we should listen to them. My view is that the whip is a vile and unedifying spectacle - ban its use, other than for corrective purposes. And, yes, disqualify jockeys for breaking the rules and "cheating".
 
It certainly doesn't look seeing horses getting pummelled at the end of the race on desperate ground, exactly the image you don't want for the sport.
 
I think some jockeys at Cheltenham were aware of the punishment but made the calculated risk of going for it anyway, and take the hit (ironically). That Rathvinden couldnt be led into the winners enclosure out of exhaustion whereas Ms Parfois could, and maybe coincidentally benefitted from receiving more judicious and legal handling didnt seem right.

I guess its like a defender handling the ball on the line with 2 mins left in the game (suarez at world cup springs to mind), knowing that the red card is still better than letting in the goal.
 
Having more severe penalties for jockeys would be unfair because it doesn't take into account where the real power lies.

Trainers and owners will continue to expect riders to do all they can to win, even if it means a few weeks off rather than a few days. If the stakes are high enough the rider can always be compensated financially. The only logical thing to do is disqualify the horse. Like others, I believe it wouldn't be long before everyone got used to it and offences would cease.

Archie makes a good point about the inflexibility of having the same rules regardless of the type of race.
 
To me there is simply no argument. If the rule is broken the horse loses the race regardless of the feelings or views of owners, trainers, or punters. It simply is not right, in any sport , that breaking the rules allows you to win.
 
Back
Top