I’m not sure how familiar with Robert Browning apologists of the BHA’s new and revised Whip Rules might be, but they have at least something in common with Pippa, the heroine of his long narrative poem Pippa Passes. She’s a sunny, ever-smiling juvenile with the good attitude: despite the murders, suicides and bankruptcies blossoming around her she’s still able to skip and sing along, to her perpetually irritating refrain: “God’s in his Heaven, All’s right with the World!”
Now, the Pippas of British Racing tell us that The Whip is fast becoming a non-issue. They come out with sunny statements to the effect that it’s clear that jockeys have, “by and large, adapted to the new rules”. They claim that now “initial glitches” have been ironed out the rules are working perfectly well and (to quote the ever-optimistic David Cormack of The Racing Forum) “provide racing that is every bit as interesting, absorbing and exciting while allowing for safer racing for both horse and jockey.” [Safer? Why??]
Well Pippa, let’s look at some facts, shall we?
* In December 2010 jockeys received 50 days bans for whip offences, 44 on the flat and 6 over jumps. The number of offences (including cautions) was 26: 21 on the flat and 5 over jumps.
* In December 2011 jockeys received 214 days bans for whip offences, 127 on the flat and 87 over jumps. The number of offences was 51: 29 on the flat and 22 over jumps.
This represents a massive rise both in the number of offences (196%) and the number of employment days lost to the profession (428%). But interpreters need to bear in mind the huge number of National Hunt race meetings lost to bad weather during December 2010, and it is a much fairer gauge to look at the data from the all-weather flat. And on the flat, offences are up 38%, whilst the number of employment days lost has risen by a staggering 288%, in line with the rises recorded in October and November. There is no “adapting” and no “ironing out”.
I hope that will give our BHA Pippas pause for thought. Many of the penalised rides under both codes, but especially over jumps, have been praised as excellent by commentators and pundits – not least Timmy Murphy‘s beautiful display of horsemanship at Haydock on December 30th to get Tamarin Bleu home first, only to receive a four day ban for his pains.
An online survey of Racing Post online readers last weekend (January 7/8) showed 81% believed that the new rules were adversely affecting racing, whilst only 19% thought otherwise. Meanwhile the Animal Aiders and Whip Ban Brigade continue to make hay with these appalling figures.
Remember that these whip rules were not brought in by BHA for welfare reasons, but to “change the culture” and improve public perception by demonstrating a reduction in the number of bans. Instead we’ve all become whip stroke counters, and the finishes of many races look worse than ever, with ugly hands-and-heels cajoling added to the sight of harder whip strokes in the final furlong as jockeys do their best to ride to full quota and be seen to try their hardest.
A thought then for poor Maurice Linehan (Chepstow, December 27th), who got 5 days for whipping Palace Jester too frequently and a further 10 days for not riding the horse out to the finish when dead-heating in the same race. Anyone who sees any evidence here to encourage BHA to leave this highly unsatisfactory state of affairs untouched might indeed consider reaching for their Brownings (poet not pistols). Because, as with poor little Pippa, it will all end in tears unless radical changes are made to this foolish and unworkable frequency rule, and made soon.
Pinza 
Based on those figures for the flat all weather I make it £15658 lost in riding fees on banned days for Dec 2010. But for Dec 2011 (under the new rules) all weather jockeys would now be missing out on £46278 in riding fees.
Thank you for that, Phil. You’ve given a reality check to the “All’s right with the world” crew, by putting fiscal flesh on my bare statistical bones. So we’re talking over £46K of lost bread on tables here, for the flat jockeys alone – and that’s before taking account the considerable amount of prize money forfeited by several “offenders”, and placed in BHA’s escrow account. This is an intolerable situation, surely.
Will Kennedy and Timmy Murphy fall oul of the rules; One young and inexperienced, one older and experienced. Where will it end? Alas,I’m reaching the point of no longer caring.
Mo, you’re not alone in finding the situation increasingly worthy of despair – many of us in the same boat. And that, at least, gives some hope that BHA may want to find a way out of the impasse they themselves have created through cooking up a rule which pleases nobody – nobody, mark you, on either “side” of the debate.
The good news is that the Jockeys are meeting Paul Bittar next Friday, and aren’t going to let the situation rest here.
How every other major administration in the racing world manages without this (frankly) cancerous disease of the “whip issue” is the question BHA really must address very soon, if our racing is not to drive many more core supporters into disillusioned indifference. I for one am starting to feel there may be some light at the end of tunnel.
…….due to current restraints, the light at the end of the tunnel will be switched off until further notice……
It rather looks that way. While acknowldeging that Paul Bittar has to tread carefully in his first week, it seems that he (and the spineless PJA) have at this stage sidelined the only change which can resolve the issue – namely, to “up” the number of available strokes and return to Guideline rather than Rule implementation. The BHA’s massaging of stats (I’m waiting to see how they’ve done this) is also hugely depressing. Throwing sand in the ostriches’ eyes….
I didn’t see the Morning Line the other day but it was reported that Paul Bittar said that the number of strokes was not an issue for jockeys. This is clearly not the case.
Sam Twiston-Davies in his column today asks Bittar to revise the 8-hit limit as it is simply not enough for many jumps horses.
Ryan Moore on RUK before Xmas said that the new rule takes the art of race-riding away from him and his colleagues.
Ruby Walsh tweeted the other day that Andrew Thornton fell foul of a ‘stupid rule’ for his ride on Tatenen.
When will this arbitrary hit limit be scrapped and common sense returned? A numerical limit on whip strokes is clearly too blunt an instrument.
A good rule is one that promotes desirable actions and penalises unacceptable ones. Thornton’s ride on Tatenen, Soumillon’s ride on Cirrus des Aigles.. both rides that should have been applauded aesthetically and sportingly, yet both were punished.
Racing is shooting itself in the foot and tarnishing its own image by decreeing that these rides are worthy of sanctions. The sooner this law is torn up the better.
I agree. The apparently careless attitude of the PJA towards the opinions of its own members is truly baffling – BHA is not the only organisation which seems to need a thorough shake-out. It seems as if the only aspect of the rule which Kevin Darley believes he is empowered to negotiate over is the fiscal penalties. All of which means it will take longer for BHA to come to their senses over the whip rules, whilst (as you say) the whole image of racing continues to be tarnished. It’ll take years to recover the ground lost with public perception.
Darley has been replaced by someone with negotiating skills. Difficult as it now seems, in that any increase in the whip allowance will be pounced on by certain groups both within and outside of racing, there is now a chink of light perhaps?
A professional has taken over from an amateur, which is very good news. The days of the PJA snake being mesmerised by the BHA mongoose should be over.
On the other hand as far as the Whip Rules were concerned, Paul Struthers was deeply implicated in their public presentation (for which thankless task he lost his job) and it will be very difficult for him personally to row back totally from his initial official enthusiasm.
Not impossible, however. He can see as well as anyone just how poorly the rules are working in practice; and his practical instinct (as well as new professional interest) might be to encourage BHA to back down before too much more egg lands on too many more faces.
It all makes for an interesting situation for sure…