against all odds, the B.H.A. MIGHT BE ON TO SOMETHING.

​When first proposed, I hated the concept of preferential treatment for the premier racecourses over their smaller counterparts. That I have come around to the idea is not because I have taken a walk on the dark side and am indoctrinated into a belief system that requires smaller racecourses to go to the wall. I continue to believe that our sport can only survive if local people have local racecourses to attend. In time, I believe, it will become difficult for ordinary people to travel long distances from their homes as individual ownership of cars will become a thing of the past. But that is a topic for a different kind of forum.
To my mind, if the concept of the ‘Saturday Afternoon Window’ is to be the blueprint upon which to build a thriving racing industry, to allow the major races the full spotlight of media and public observation, surely that spotlight should be focused on one meeting, not three, as proposed. Next Saturday is a poor example but I will use the Epsom Derby to make my point. Only Epsom and the Derby matter next Saturday. All other meetings are irrelevant, in the same way that the F.A. Cup Final will be the only football match played on the day that the eyes of the nation will be focused on.
That said, I wish people would desist in associating horse racing with how other sports conduct themselves. There is no comparison between horse racing and Formula I or football or tennis. It is why horse racing should be governed by people steeped in the history of the sport and not by executives from other sporting organisation. Horses are not machines, which is why fireworks and marching bands are a definite no-no on British racecourses. Horses are sentient beings; those who govern the sport must have the knowledge that the first rule is that horses are the first rule of thought when proposing new rules.
My major criticism of the proposed changes to the fixture lists is that everyone, seemingly, is catered for except the people who work at the cliff-face, the stable staff and trainers. Morning meetings will disrupt stable routines, for horses travelling long or longish distances it will mean more overnight stays for staff and horses and more evening meetings will cause staff to work longer hours more often. For staff retention, the concept proposed might be a deal breaker. It doesn’t matter if staff are paid large bonuses for working unsocial hours if they are too tired to care for the horses in their charge. Has any consideration been given to the mental health of stable staff? I doubt it.
Improving the quality of Sunday racing will be made easier to achieve by these plans if, and this is not actually mentioned thus far, the smaller racecourses are given priority, with the likes of Musselburgh, Thirsk, Chester and Hamilton prioritised on the Sabbath. If the likes of Ascot, Goodwood, Cheltenham, for example, are allocated Sunday afternoon slots, then an opportunity to breath life into all realms of the sport will be lost and the B.H.A. will be seen as disingenuous. And they do not need 6 experimental Sunday evening fixtures as the ‘Sunday Series’ already fulfils that role.
It is all very well the B.H.A. preaching that the core product, the bread-and -butter days, are to be protected but unless they commit to aspirations of enhanced prize-money for the lowest rated races, then disingenuous will be the correct adjective to describe their objectives.
Cutting the fixture list is obviously a step in the right direction. In my opinion there should be far fewer all-weather meetings through the summer as the original concept behind all-weather tracks was that they were to be a safety-net for betting revenue when turf meetings have be cancelled due to rain, snow, frost, etc.
The aspect of the B.H.A.’s announcement that ‘got my goat’ was not any of the above but what they left in the pending tray. Days with no flat racing during the summer to allow jockeys, staff, etc, an easy day. Brilliant idea. Should have been adopted years ago. On certain days, only race-meetings in the north or the south. Sensible and forward-thinking. Extending the break between one jumps season the next. No-brainer. Adopt now, along with fewer summer jumps meetings to improve field-sizes. As in Ireland, ‘rider restricted’ meetings for jockeys who have rode fewer than a set number of winners in a six or twelve-month period. A small adjustment that would make a major difference in the income potential of so many people. I would also suggest restricted races for trainers who have trained a similar lower number of winners in a similar period.
The sport must be seen to helping all sectors as the B.H.A. will be helping no one if it thinks it can grow the sport from the top while ignoring the reliability of the sport’s foundations. If these proposals do not allow Newton Abbot, Taunton or Salisbury to grow alongside Ascot, Newmarket and Newbury, the B.H.A. will have failed and the sport will surely continue to wither. 
I award the B.H.A. 6/10 for being proactive for once in its lifetime.