​Finally, and I do boast this as some sort of triumph for my own thoughts on the subject, the people who matter in this sport are challenging the B.H.A. and its stakeholders to show more faith in the sport’s core product. I have said this many times, in many different ways: if we do not put the horse and the jockey, and the race, to the forefront when we are promoting the sport’s big days, we, or those responsible for promotion and marketing, are doing the sport a great disservice.
Back in the seventies and eighties, the sport, to my mind, was handed over to the influence of the bookmaking industry and their groupthink that horse racing’s great attraction was the punter’s ambition to win big, was where, if there is a rot, is when it set in. Bookmakers, pundits, racing journalists, even handicappers, were united in their wish to have the sport’s rules slanted toward the benefit of the punter, with loud calls for all horses to be ridden out to the finishing line, with no thought to the potential injury risk to the horse. Remember, John McCririck’s determination to have jockeys hung, drawn and quartered (I exaggerate) for dropping their hands prematurely or riding an injudicious race?
What the Jockey Club (then) and the B.H.A. (now) missed was that in the main racegoers are more concerned for the welfare of the horse than any disputes that might arise between bookmaker and punter.
While innovation is to be encouraged, innovation for the sake of innovation will only prove a fruitless quest.
There is only one standout problem in British horse racing and we all know what it is – prize money. It is, at the lowest levels, an embarrassment that should shame the sport’s administrators. The B.H.A. and its stakeholders must as a priority be setting as its goal a revenue stream that for well into the future will inject the sport with sustainable and reliable levels of prize money that is on a par with our competitors, and that should be from the bottom-up not the other way round. And as all our competitors are funded through one sort of ‘Tote Monopoly’ or another, journalists and administrators should stop using the phrase ‘that ship has sailed’, as though it may have sailed it has not sunk to the bottom of the ocean. I am sick to death with people seemingly preferring to have the sport suffering than to ditch their prejudice and actively support the surest method of funding the sport.
If we want a thriving sport, to have Cartmel style attendance at every country racecourse and York-sized attendance at all our premier racecourses, ‘we’ have to bite the bullet, whether ‘we’ like it or not, that the whip and jockeys over-reliance on its use, is the biggest stumbling block to the public’s acceptance of the sport.
And this promoting of the sport sits cheek by jowl with the race programme. Conditions races, as Ireland have in abundance, may be uncompetitive at times and, as in Ireland, they may be mined by the top trainers, and may be poor for betting turnover, but I challenge anyone to disagree with me that if, for example, Wincanton staged a 3-mile conditions chase in October or November, if Frodon was to run, attendance would be substantially larger than on ordinary weekday Wincanton fare. Or if Shishkin ran in a similar race over 2-miles. Or any horse that has caught the public’s affection and admiration. Horses are the attraction, especially over jumps, but with flat horses becoming more likely to stay in training beyond their three-year-old days, the flat, too, has a dynamic worth promoting.
The jockeys, too, are an attraction for the public. Tom Marquand, Hollie Doyle, Hayley Turner, Sean Levy, Oisin Murphy and Frankie Dettori, of course, are wonderful spokespeople for the sport, as are many others. And who cannot be but inspired by Bryony Frost. In fact, at the moment the flat jockeys are more camera-worthy than the jump jockeys.
Seduced by the gift of better prize-money, the B.H.A. have endorsed ideas such as the Racing League, the Sunday Series and the accident waiting to happen that is City Racing, without giving any consideration as to where, if any or all of these ‘innovations’ were to be successful, they would lead the sport. The first and third of these ideas were taken from Formula 1, a sport that is as competitive as flies walking up a wall, whilst the middle one takes for granted and takes advantage of stable staff by the concept of starting the meetings mid-afternoon and finishing early-evening.
As I have said repeatedly; if you want to get fresh faces on the grandstands of racecourses, run free local coach services, either charge no admission fee or greatly reduced admission, and put on something other than the racing to keep everyone entertained between races, and have staff on call to guide and help first-timers get an understanding on how racing and racecourses work.
Sell the sport; stop selling the sport down the river. We have beautiful horses in harmony with brave and skilful jockeys. We do not need gimmicks. We need a ruling body that believes wholeheartedly in the core product.

​I have just finished reading a book published in 1952, a year, as with 1902, that is from today’s perspective a long long time ago. It was, for instance, two years before my own birth. Though it was four-years after Lester Piggott made his racecourse debut on the 7th April at Salisbury. I mention Lester as it is odd to recall that he, though he has been retired now for over ten-years or more, could easily have raced against Joe Childs, author of the autobiography, ‘My Racing Reminiscences’, that I have just finished reading.
The reason I would encourage every jockey and trainer to write their autobiography or memoir is to be found in Joe Childs’ reminiscences. When the book was published Childs probably considered he was producing an extra bit of income to see him through retirement. But in effect he was placing in the racing archive an account of the sport as he lived it throughout his career. And he had longevity, beginning at the turn of the 20th century right through to somewhere between the end of the 2nd World War and 1950. Dates were not a strong suit of Joe Childs’ and in some ways his book is a bit of a mess, one of those autobiographies that badly needed an editor to knock it into shape. But there you are; he was a jockey not a wordsmith and a very successful jockey at that!
Of course, you will not know very much about Joe Childs, and I confess being in the same boat, as to use the name of a Hollywood film he rode during a time that could be summed-up as ‘The Past Is Another Country’. He rode successfully in France and Germany before he ever established himself in the country of his birth. And horse racing post 1900’s through to the early 1960’s held only a passing resemblance to the sport we have today. For most part there was no photo-finish camera, no patrol cameras, jockeys rode with a long length of leg and long rein even after Tod Sloan and his American compatriots sailed across the Atlantic to show the Brits how to ride from the front and still win. Races were started from barriers, an art of racing quite foreign to all jockeys from the Lester Piggott era onwards. In 1900 horses arrived at racecourses by train and if the station was several miles from the racecourse a long walk was involved. Jockeys, too, would travel in those early years of the century by train. It was a very different world.
In his book, Childs compares two fillies still remembered to this day in major races named in their honour, Sceptre and Pretty Polly, two horses that graced the racing stage within two-years of each other.
As was his want, Childs began the chapter comparing the two horses, siding in the second paragraph Sceptre as the superior of the two and though he wrote extensively about Sceptre and her owner Bob Sievier, he completely neglects Pretty Polly’s racing career. In his spirit, I too will omit to write about Pretty Polly.
Sceptre’s three-year-old career exemplifies the difference between how horses are campaigned today and in the 1900’s. Firstly she ran in all five classics, winning four of them. Do you think any horse will ever achieve a similar fete? Nor I. But she began her season by running in the Lincoln or the Lincolnshire Handicap as it was then called and being beaten by a short head! Incidentally, the horse that defeated her, St. Maclou, finished its season winning the Manchester November Handicap, a double that I suspect no horse will ever achieve again.
The filly was entered in all five classics. Again, I doubt if we shall ever see that sort of ambition again either. She won the 2,000 Guineas at 4/1 and 2-days later she triumphed in the 1,000 Guineas at the less than generous odds of 1/2. She did not though win the Epsom Derby and so does not qualify as a Triple Crown winner as she was beaten by Ard Patrick ridden by the American jockey Skeets Martin.
Childs expresses the view that the overall opinion was that if Sceptre had not run in the Lincolnshire Handicap, she could have won the Derby. They may have a point, though these critics gave no significance to the fact that she had already run in and won two classics in two days only a few weeks before Epsom and that 2-days later she came out and won the Oaks.
Later in the year, of course, she won the St.Leger, after which her owner, Bob Sievier cashed in on the mare and sold her to Sir William Bass for £25,000.
To return to the argument as to the reason Sceptre ‘only’ won 4 out of the 5 classics, it is interesting to note that in the following year’s Eclipse she again failed to beat her Epsom conqueror Ard Patrick, though she finished in front of the colt that was to win that year’s Triple Crown Rock Sand.
Amazingly, at least by todays standard when a classic winner would never be considered for a mere handicap, Sceptre won the Duke of York Handicap at Kempton later in the season, winning by a head, giving the runner-up 3-stone!
You understand now why Sceptre has a race named after her, though why she is not due a Group 1, the same as Eclipse, is beyond me.

​I have given the report in Sunday’s Racing Post on the on-line abuse that jockeys and trainers have to contend with and cannot come-up with any constructive thought other than to live life without social media. Of course, if those who make big bucks from social media platforms – Facebook, Twitter, etc – were to prevent anyone posting messages from behind a screen of anonymity there would be no problem to overcome. But until every on-line message is easily traced the only answer is to de-platform, if that is the correct term.
As you may have guessed, I speak from ignorance on this subject as I have no social media presence. Never have, never will. Mainly because I do not want to be confronted by the illiteracy, downright filth and needless profanity that accompanies a good majority of the postings. If there is a line in the sand when it comes electronic communication social media fell well below it very soon after the invention of the World Wide Web.
Young people have been groomed by government and the media companies to believe that to live without a smart phone would render life not worth living. By now, the same can most likely apply to those in the middle-age bracket and the elderly who use their hand-held devices to keep in touch with family and friends, especially when they live alone. I could write more about the dangers of smart phones but that is not the point of this piece.
My conclusion is that unless racing folk divorce themselves from social media they will just have to suck-up vile messages and learn to laugh at the imbeciles who send them. In the Racing Post report, the jockeys featured seemed to believe that as they get older, they are immured from the effects of such anonymous messages, though they believed the younger members of the weighing room, those starting out in their careers, might not be as able to dismiss unwarranted criticism. P.J. McDonald is of the opinion that I in 10 jockeys could easily have their careers harmed by receiving baseless criticism from the untutored, the pig-ignorant (an insult to pigs, I would suggest) and the clueless.
I did have two thoughts on the subject, neither of which may be tenable and might have little or no effect. But here goes.
Jockeys seem to be starting out at a very young age these days. Those with pony racing experience are having their first rides in public almost fully-formed. But no matter how well they ride, they remain immature, perhaps unable to cope with any abuse they might receive on social media. It would do no harm, I believe, if jockey licences were not issued until the boy or girl is seventeen, rather than sixteen as it is at present. Fern O’Brien, admittedly an amateur, had her first ride, a winner, days after her sixteenth birthday.
My idea is that between the ages of sixteen and seventeen young jockeys should only be permitted to ride as amateurs. It did Ryan Moore no harm to start his career as an amateur. Thus, allowing them a full year to get into the routine of being a jockey, learning the job behind the anonymity of the Corinthian code of riding. This system would, perhaps, to a degree, separate the wheat from the chaff, allowing the young riders to turn professional with greater confidence than at present. It will not in itself do anything about vile criticism that will come there way via social media but they might have enough experience, have gained wise counsel from their peers in the weighing room, to know how to cop a deaf ear to the vileness that cometh their way.
My second thought is the B.H.A., or anyone, should start a Facebook page where jockeys could post the vile messaging they receive so that the public can get a handle on the severity of the problem, with perhaps a petition page to have Facebook do something about the gross unfairness of the situation. It is always best to take control of a situation as sitting back and doing nothing because you don’t think anything will help rarely achieves any benefit.

​I agree wholeheartedly with Lee Mottershead that racehorses should not be regarded or classified as ‘livestock’. In his column in today’s Racing Post he gives a clear humanitarian approach to what becomes of a horse at the end of its life. As he writes, when a horse is put to sleep at home or on the racecourse it is euthanised, when it occurs at an abattoir it is slaughtered. And yes, to follow the dictum of dignity and respect from birth to death a racehorse should never be sent to a slaughterhouse.
Vets could be of assistance here. It costs an owner money to have a horse put-down by needle, whereas the carcass of a horse is worth money to the owner if it is to go into the food-chain. If vets were to charge only a nominal fee for euthanising a horse the ratio between the veterinary fee and a cheque from the abattoir would be greatly reduced.
Yet still there is a problem to be overcome. A horse euthanised by needle and humane killer is unfit for the food-chain, so what happens to its carcass? Let me say, and here I have personal experience, a racehorse should not, if possible, be euthanised in a stable as it can be a bloody business removing its body. A dead horse is a magnitude harder to move than a life horse. To remove the dead horse from the stable to the knacker-wagon is a choice between dragging it through the doorway or, and here is where my experience comes into the narrative, if the horse has died in a stable without easy access for the lorry in which the body is to taken away, whoever is tasked with removing the carcass may have no choice but to cut-up the body.
Also, what do you do with the dead animal if it cannot be used as food? If euthanised by needle, perhaps the local hunt will not want it to feed its hounds. Even if a humane gun is used, the vet will often sedate the horse before injecting it. When a domestic pet is put to sleep sedation is used before the lethal injection is administered.
I wrote to Aintree racecourse many moons ago suggesting they could create an equine cemetery in the centre of the course for easy and respectful disposal of any horse killed during the Grand National and was told that because of water levels at Aintree the local council authority would not allow the burial horses on site.
This is another problem for a trainer or owner with a dead horse to dispose of. It takes a big whole to take the body of a horse, a hole that needs a J.C.B. to both dig and fill-in. How many trainers have the acreage to create an equine cemetery?
There are ways around this problem, all costing money, of course. Newmarket, Lambourne, Malton, all the racing centres, could each create an equine cemetery, with plaques naming the horses buried beneath. Such places, if properly maintained and landscaped, could become memorial gardens, an attraction for holiday-makers and racing enthusiasts. Again, it would cost money for owners and trainers to transport the carcasses to these places, though perhaps grants could be given as equine cemeteries would demonstrate to the public that there is a caring attitude within the sport towards the horses that are the pivot of all our lives.
Other than equine cemeteries, I believe the only other viable answer is a B.H.A. approved humane abattoir used only for racehorses and those used for other competitive equine disciplines, with strict working guidelines, frequent inspections and with all profits going to equine charities.
Racehorses deserve respect from their first breath to their last. Every horse will die; some tragically, some will lay down and die peacefully, some, due to infirmity or illness, the owner or trainer will have to make that sad decision for them. Denman had to be euthanised. As did Kauto Star. As did Red Rum. Desert Orchid chose his own moment. Persian Punch suffered a heart attack after a race. One day someone might have to make a decision about Frankel, as Coolmore had to do with Galileo.
But at that moment of last breath, every horse, the, kindest, the unreliable, loyalist, the biters and kickers, deserve the same respect as the great horses. Lee Mottershead is 100% correct – no racehorse should be slaughtered and no owner should get his last pound of flesh out of a horse by sending it to a slaughterhouse. It’s not on, it’s got to stop and the B.H.A. should legislate within the rules of racing to put an end to the unsavoury and undefendable practice. 

​I have stopped mourning the loss of Steve Dennis and Alastair Down and have become accustomed to Richard Forristal and David Jennings and to admire their wit, wisdom and professional excellence. Rarely do I disagree with anything they write. That was until David Jennings’ last column.
Now, whether he read my last piece when I advocated two possible team competitions might be added to the flat programme and thought he could improve upon my suggestions we shall never know. Perhaps I am flattering myself that a professional journalist of the calibre of David Jennings would even visit my site, let alone use it for inspiration. But a few days after my posting here he was going public with an idea of his own regarding team events.
I suggested female jockeys versus male jockeys and northern trainers versus southern trainers. Fun events with a streak of edginess. David Jennings suggested a Ryder Cup event for racing.
I blame Bernie Eccleston for ruining the jockeys championship for giving forth his wisdom on how racing could be made as exiting as Formula 1. He had shares in a horse, attended a race-meeting and suddenly people in racing were taking notice of him. That was horse racing imitating motor racing.
Then there is the Racing League, another ill-considered innovation borrowed from motor racing. City Street Racing a dangerous imitation of bike racing on city streets.
Nobody, it seems, including Racing Post journalists, has any faith in horse racing pure and simple, a sport with a rich history recorded for over 200-years. In the past when the sport has innovated, as with starting stalls, patrol cameras, body protectors for jockeys etc, the effects have always been positive and generally regarded as great improvements. It seems to me that racing journalists have run out of ideas and are now resulting to other sports to fuel their imagination.
The Jennings great idea is an Irish jockey versus British, one on the flat, one over jumps. A Ryder Cup for horse racing, a sport that has got on splendidly for over 200-years without ever being considered, outside of owner, trainer, jockey, stable staff, a team sport. 
The first stick I have to beat Jennings with is this, the Ryder Cup is not contested by Ireland and Britain but the U.S. and Europe. So, it fails on that score if on nothing else. My second stick to beat him with is the proposition that the age-old rivalry between the two nations is reason enough to adopt his idea. The rivalry only exists at the Cheltenham Festival. It does not exist outside of Cheltenham. It does not exist at Royal Ascot, Goodwood, Aintree or any of the other racing festivals. British spectators enjoy an Irish success as much as the Irish on British racecourses, as I suspect the Irish have no bitterness towards a British raider scooping one of their big prizes.
There is no if or maybe about Pat Smullen being deserving of an annual racing event to memorialise his name and achievements but don’t make it something as speculative as a phoney-baloney ‘such fun’ event like an Ireland v Britain team jockeys challenge.
If you were to take a non-racing friend to one of these team events, how can you sell the sport to him or her when their first exposure is something that is only an imitation of the real thing? And that’s my problem with every innovation proposed. Royal Ascot is an imitation of horse racing. It works because it has a history that is laced into the history of the country. You couldn’t have a northern version of Royal Ascot. Or an Irish version. It is unique, an organically perpetuating slice of British cultural life.
To grow this sport, to maintain what we have and to expand its popularity and licence with the public, the imperative has to be to look after the existing spectators so that they have a product they can invite their friends and colleagues to a day at the races. The whip debate must be concluded as the whip is what keeps a great many people away from our sport. We have lost that battle; educating the public is a lost cause. The innovation that would work best in my opinion is for the sport in this country to adopt the Irish tradition of festivals at the country racecourses. 
Yes, we have racing festivals all summer long in Britain but they are in the main at the top echelon. It seems all of Ireland’s country courses stage festivals, with Listowel’s Harvest Festival the next on the menu. When summer jumping commenced, with foresight it could have been linked to the festival concept. Newton Abbot, Cartmel, Worcester, Market Rasen, could all have followed Perth’s example. Link festivals with local events, have a free entry day, bus locals to the track, have talks by racing celebrities in the nearby towns. Take the sport to the people, address their concerns, put on display all the noble and charitable work done by racing people and the sport. Let’s have an English Galway. Not 7-days, though. You have to have the constitution of an Irishman for 7-days and we Brits don’t have the backbone for it. 

​Yesterday’s headline in the Racing Post was on the lines of ‘Snowfall well ahead of York next week.’ The editor should be ashamed of himself. Snowfall wouldn’t be running next week if Aidan O’Brien didn’t think she was tickerty-boo. ‘Snowfall not herself ahead of York’ would be useful information for enthusiast and punter alike. Snowfall fit as a flea is not worth the announcement. Incidentally, though I agree Snowfall is a good name for a racehorse, a racehorse that was grey not bay as Snowfall happens to be. I know Coolmore rarely have grey horses for some reason, though you might have thought they would have reserved the name for one did come along.

Worryingly, though not surprisingly, U.S. racing is embroiled in what could turn out to be a large-scale horse doping scandal. Top trainer Jorge Navarro has admitted administering and supplying performance enhancing drugs that include ‘blood-building substances’, ‘vasodilators’, ‘bronchodilators’, ‘bleeder pills’ and ‘SGF-1000’, a designer drug, medications that are way ahead of my understanding of what they do, except seemingly they make horses run faster for longer. Sadly, it is highly significant that Navarro’s best horse, X Y Jet died of a heart attack last year. Navarro has implicated Jason Servis, trainer of Maximum Security, the winner of the inaugural $20-million Saudi Cup. Servis denies any wrong-doing, even though vet Kristian Rhein has pleaded guilty to administering SGF-1000 to Maximum Security prior to a race at Monmouth Park in 2019.
The worrying aspect of this story is Jim Bolger’s allegation that Ireland has a ‘Lance Armstrong’ in its training ranks and what begins in the quiet of U.S. racing stables often transfers to other racing jurisdictions and it is about time Jim Bolger began naming names because if he can’t back-up his allegations with hard evidence it is his hard-earned reputation that will be sullied.

Occasionally, the Racing Post will include an article that is no more than a convenient filler for a page but which actually displays the sport in a positive light. Today’s paper reports on the death of Squire Silk, a hurdler/chaser owned in the 1990’s by Sir Robert Ogden when he was one of National Hunt’s leading owners. The horse was trained by Andrew Turnell. When a horse is retired the public lose track of it and it is uplifting to be informed that Squire Silk died aged 32, a mighty age for a horse. He lived out his life at Sir Robert’s Sickling Hall Stud alongside Voy Por Ustedes, Ad Hoc and Iris Royal. Three cheers to Sir Robert and his staff at the stud for caring for these horses till their natural deaths.

Honeysuckle, Minella Indo, Minella Times, Put the Kettle On, Telmesomethinggirl, Bob Olinger, Envoi Allen, Quilixios, Jason the Militant and A Plus Tard have reported back for service, the Champion Hurdler, Cheltenham Gold Cup, Grand National and Two-Mile Champion Chase and Triumph Hurdle winners, plus 2 other Cheltenham winners, the most hyped young horse of last season, the Gold Cup runner-up – I’m not sure how Jason the Militant was included in the list, except that Henry de Bromhead must have high hopes for him this season. Has anyone in the history of the sport ever started a season with such an array of talent? The only downside at the moment is that de Bromhead does not have his stable jockey to call on and it seems that Rachel Blackmore will not be back in harness for another 6 to 8-weeks. Her hip and ankle are healing, though unless Paul Townend is similarly side-lined her chances of becoming champion jockey this season are all but out the window. Amazingly, the last time I looked she was still at the top of the jockeys table.

The best method available to jockeys to promote themselves is to take every opportunity that comes their way on the racecourse, work hard for the trainers who regularly employ them and to conduct themselves both on and off the course with quiet circumspection. Jockeys may attract a ‘fan-base’ through social media but from what I can gather the downside far outweighs the upside. Paddy Mathers is the latest jockey to fall foul of baseless abuse and criticism, though on this occasion the disparaging remarks are being sent directly by e-mail and phone to his main employer Mike Smith who continues to support Mathers. 

Finally, I dislike the concept of the Racing League. Apart from the enhanced prize money I cannot see any value in it. If it fails to enthuse racing enthusiasts, with the racing press divided on the subject, how can it hope to enthuse the public, to bring more attention to the sport and to put ‘more bums on seats’? So far, it has not increased spectator numbers and is taking place in the twilight, with, I suspect, very few people able to put a name to any of the teams, let alone be able to name the frontrunners. Giant oaks from small saplings grow, you’ll say. The Cheltenham Gold Cup was not loved from conception, with the National Hunt Chase the dominant race at the Festival for many years before the Gold Cup began to be taken seriously. If it was not for the above-average prize-money the concept would have died in the water. But even, let’s say, to play devil’s advocate, the Racing League is deemed successful, where can it go, how does it fit within the tradition and structure of the sport? This is a money-making venture for those pushing the idea. If it is about an attempt to bring more people into the sport, they should have stuck with whipless races as that would have intrigued the public and attracted a curious media. The one useful idea the Racing League proposed was abandoned and that says all that needs to be said for it.

​In Ivor Herbert’s & Patricia Smyly’s book of the same name as the title of this piece, seventeen horses are included from Lottery to Desert Orchid. If the book were to be updated the likes of Sprinter Sacre, Moscow Flyer, Denman and Kauto Star would have to be included and perhaps a fair few more.
No trainer has more than two representatives in the book, though Fulke Walwyn was associated with three of the celebrated inclusions through having ridden Golden Miller, if without distinction, and having trained both Mandarin and Mill House. Tom Dreaper is represented by his first great chaser Prince Regent and his last, the greatest of them all, Arkle. When asked if Arkle was the best he ever trained, he replied sadly ‘I’m afraid he is. I’m afraid he is’, as if he was letting down an old and much-loved friend.
The Dickenson’s also have two horses featured, though when compared against Sprinter Sacre and Kauto Star they might be out-shone. Without a shadow of doubt both Silver Buck and Wayward Lad were brilliant chasers, though whether Silver Buck would have been so good in other hands than Michael and his parents is a moot point. The horse was not quite right in the head, as his death exposed. Taking fright at Graham Bradley’s waterproofs in driving rain, the horse bolted, dumped his rider, and proceeded to gallop into a high brick wall, fracturing his pelvis and several ribs. Before the vet could get to him, he died of an internal haemorrhage. Michael’s mother had only recently taken over the training licence from her son who had changed career to become master of Manton at the behest of Robert Sangster.
Wayward Lad, though, was what could be termed ‘a good old boy’, loved by everyone who came into contact with him and a firm favourite with the public. The horse who regularly rocked up at Kempton each Boxing Day to win or run his heart out in the King George almost had a sad ending to his career, though not if the Dickinson’s had anything to do with it.
Wayward Lad won 28 of his 55 races and was only out-of-the-money on five occasions. He was owned in partnership by Les Abbott and Shirley Thewlis. When, after, for Wayward Lad, a low-key season, the horse won what is now the Betfair Bowl at the Aintree Grand National meeting, Monica Dickinson announced to the press and public that the 12-year-old was to be retired and that he would spend the rest of his days with the Dickinson family. The announcement was well-received. Not though by Mr.Abbott. He was affronted that he was not consulted and believed the horse had a future in hunter chases and point-to-points. He cut a lone figure as no one agreed with his point-of-view and the dispute could only be resolved by the revered horse being sent to public auction.
Mrs.Thewlis and the Dickinson expressed the fear that the horse might make a figure beyond what they could afford. This was, of course, not a young horse of great potential but an aged horse in need of retirement and people actually sent them money to help swell available funds. One anonymous benefactor offered £30,000, which was half what the experts thought the likely money Wayward Lad would make on Thursday 21st May.
But Wayward Lad was popular; more popular than even the Dickinsons’ knew.
The controversy reached across the Atlantic and came to the notice of Mrs. Miles Valentine whose racing colours of pink and cherry hearts were well-known at the time through having horses in training with Fred Winter and she went directly into action. She telephoned her daughter Joy Carrier and suggested she should buy the horse and as soon as the directive was passed-on to Joy’s husband Rusty a plan was drawn-up.
He promised the Dickinsons’ that he would provide all the funds necessary to buy Wayward Lad and to fly him to the States where the Carrier family would ensure he got the retirement he deserved. They would hunt him and as Michael lived close by, he could keep an eye on the old horse and report back to his mother and family. Rusty Carrier was as good as his word.
As it was when the owner of Stalbridge Colonist wanted his last pound of flesh by selling one of the few horses to beat Arkle at public auction, when the auctioneer announced ‘And Wayward Lad goes back to Harewood’, in the manner the auctioneer had announced ‘Stalbridge is going home’, people cheered, clapped and stamped their feet. Mrs Dickinson went up the old horse, wrapped her arms around him and wept.
What this story, lifted from the book ‘Winter Kings’, proves is that there are caring, beautiful people in this world. The Dufosees’ bought back Stalbridge Colonist not because he was the best horse they ever bred but because he deserved a retirement amongst people who cared for his well-being. The Carriers’ were even more magnificent; they had no connection to Wayward Lad, yet they took no persuading to the honour of having the great horse live out his life as part of their lives.

​The Shergar Cup is one of my favourite flat meetings of the season, if not my actual favourite. Whoever first proposed the idea should be congratulated as it is the best example of innovation within racing for many a long day?
The meeting works because it is a simple and easily followable formula and it allows people, if they choose, to take a position on which team they would like to have win. Obviously, because they are thought to be the underdogs, the female team get a bigger slice of support and I suspect that will always be the way no matter how many times they win the cup. I dare say anyone of Irish extraction tip their hat in that direction and anyone from abroad will favour an international team. But overall, it is an afternoon of good, clean fun that even the jockeys seem to enjoy. 
In its twenty-years of existence it has gone from novelty to a looked-for date in the calendar. And with so many jockeys of ‘foreign parentage’ riding in this country, I would prefer if only one visiting jockey was brought over to make up a team of international riders. If Sean Levey was used on a regular basis he might become as much a Shergar stalwart as Hayley Turner. If I have one small criticism, it is that the jockeys riding are not given enough screen time as this is an opportunity to see a more relaxed jockey, to get to know them as the characters they are. Certainly, Sean Levey’s smile and sense of humour was a pleasure to witness.
Anyone who has visited this website on even a sub-regular basis will know that I am a fan of Nicola Currie. She is a greatly under-rated jockey and her success in becoming leading rider in this year’s renewal of the Shergar Cup warmed the cockles of my old heart. Hopefully, from this day forth, trainers will give her more opportunity to prove her worth and it seems Mark Johnston was impressed enough to suggest he will use her in the future. And with her ever-present sense of humour, she is someone who given the right opportunities can help promote the sport to the non-racing public.
And this, to me, is the main selling point of the Shergar Cup. Not only does it give foreign jockeys an opportunity to display their skills to a whole new audience but it can be a window of opportunity for jockeys of the calibre of Nicola Currie, who for whatever reason have faded from the limelight. Though it is the luck of the draw, it gives them a chance to get on good handicappers for owners and trainers who ordinarily would not think to have them ride their horses.
Although you couldn’t advocate a greater spread of such events during the season, and not on the exact lines of the Shergar Cup, it is concept that could be exploited on other occasions throughout the season. A gender challenge might be a way to go, six female jockeys versus six male jockeys might provide an edge. Or if you wanted three teams it could be female, male and apprentice, which might work well on the all-weather during the winter season. And then what about Northern trainers versus Southern trainers, that certainly might have an edge to it especially if it staged on a northern racecourse?
It seems Ascot are planning a ‘reboot’ for the event next season. I hope it is nothing too radical and it would be a mistake not to have a female team, even if the woke society, and even female jockeys themselves, do not care for the definition of female jockey, preferring to be known simply as jockey. As innovations go, the Dubai Duty Free Shergar Cup is leaps and bounds a better proposition than the truly awful Racing League, the rank dangerous City Street Racing and though the Sunday series has potential, it rides a coach and horses through the mantra of making life easier for stable staff as the late Sunday finish is the complete opposite of what is required. Did they never consider an earlier start time, say 11.30 am?

​It seems, at last, racing folk in Ireland are waking from their collective dream of winning praise and brownie points from their government for their sustained attempt at being ‘best boys in class’ throughout the ‘pandemic’. Unfortunately, they were sound asleep when their elected government were subject to a coup d’etat – how violent an overthrow we might never know – by the Institute of Public Health Ireland, more commonly known as Nphet. To all extent and purpose the country formerly known as Eire has become the unelected, undemocratic Republic of Nphet. Appealing the unfairness of disproportionate small crowd numbers to sane and honourable men will come to nothing if those in absolute power are corrupt and in league with what is in effect a foreign power.
Ruby Walsh, a man known for his straight-talking common sense and used to getting things done, is the latest racing personality to raise his head above the parapet to demand unlimited crowds be allowed back onto racecourses. The covid rules in Ireland ‘make no sense’, he is quoted as saying in the Racing Post, aligning himself with Dermot Weld, Jessica Harrington, Noel Meade, Henry de Bromhead and uncle Tom Cobbly and all. Covid has made no sense from day 1, whenever the tapes went up on this health emergency crisis race to Hell, and hopefully back again.
If your agenda is to confuse, annoy, instil stress and keep-up fear levels, then allowing 40,000 people into an enclosed space like Croke Park, whilst only allowing 500 people into an outdoor space, is perfectly rational.
Senator Rand Paul, the man who is attempting to indict Anthony Fauci for telling big porkies to Congress, and who advocates the wearing of N96 masks, the sort worn in hospitals, is derisory about the sort of masks you can buy over the counter. As any scientist will tell you, the aerosols that carry virus are no larger than 1-micron, whilst the holes in the masks worn at the Olympic Games are between 50-80 microns. You could wear 5 of these masks and have almost no protection from a virus travelling in any direction. Rand Paul is a doctor; he is qualified to say such things.
So, when masks that are practically useless are made an essential aspect of covid protocols for racecourses and other sporting events, the disparity between 40,000 people allowed inside Croke Park and 500 allowed on to a racecourse is not so confusing, if you look at it from Nphet’s perspective.
Ruby Walsh smashes the ball into the top corner of the net when he says. ‘Don’t tell me the 40,000 people who will be in attendance at Croke Park later this month will form an orderly queue on O’Connell Bridge and stay two-metres apart until they get in.’
Look at the nonsense going on at the Olympics with masks, social distance and empty stadia. It’s all theatre; reinforcing the agenda that the pandemic remains all around us. If there is a pandemic, show me the bodies. Go to the official data and show me the excess mortality.
Irish racing has behaved like the ‘best boys in class’ since last summer. Nphet are treating Irish racing with contempt and it will continually do so until horse racing’s leaders and luminaries display some backbone and bite back. Where is the warrior spirit of the Irish clans? Since when did Irishmen roll over and play dead? All over Europe people are rebelling, marching on their parliaments; the French trade unions are proposing a national strike. If Nphet are using the worn-out phrase ‘We are following the science’ as piddled out by Johnson and his Gang of Gates stooges, then Irish Racing should consult with independent scientists and follow the scientific data as provided by the large gatherings that have taken place in Britain. Or as a society, follow the science of Florida and Texas, American States that rescinded all their covid restrictions to dire warning from the President and Fauci and which have thrived ever since.
I am aware that Irish Racing is part-funded by its government. But it is not funded by Nphet. Irish Racing should demand a change to the covid protocols by a date convenient to themselves and if this is not met a race meeting with unlimited crowd numbers should take place to demonstrate the complete lack of threat to public health.
As is proved both in Britain and all around the world, those driving this covid agenda have not a single care for people or businesses that die through the disproportionate restrictions put into place to succumb a virus that has killed 0.03% of the world’s population. Nphet will shed no tears if Irish Horse Racing and breeding industry joins the death count.
This is a moment in time, if Irish Racing has the backbone to lead the charge, for a sport to unite a nation and win itself a greater reputation than it has now or in the past. I have absolutely no doubt that the majority of Ireland is sick to death with Nphet and the tame politicians subservient to it. Rise up, hold a race-meeting with unlimited crowds. Drive the occupier of your country into the sea as true Irish warriors would have done in the past and you will be remembered in history with song, poem and the admiration of a proud nation. 

​If you ask the question to those who comprise horse racing’s ‘stakeholders’, as if anyone who loves the sport and is interested in its future are not a stakeholder, ‘how to address racing’s financial woes?’, you would receive at least ten different seemingly plausible paths out of the quagmire. Of course, and this may be stating ‘the bleeding obvious’, the problem is the concept of stakeholders, which in effect are semi-autonomous committees, none of which worries about being underneath the over-arching umbrella that is the B.H.A. when the rain sets in.
Horse racing needs a supremo, not someone appointed from ‘big business’ to run a body tasked with running a sport that is also an industry, someone who at every new appointment must run to catch-up, who has very little idea how the sport works and has even less idea of the nuances and funny little ways that have developed of their own accord since Queen Anne went for a carriage ride and came home to found Ascot racecourse.
Horse racing is an odd sport in that its heroes tend to have four legs and big teeth. I doubt if any head of the B.H.A. comes into the job with that perspective. If you ask someone on a quiz which team won the F.A. Cup in 1987 (no idea) and who scored the winning goal, the answer would be a football club and a football player. Or human, to put it more succinctly. Ask who won the 1987 Grand National and the answer would not be any of the following, though each one would be correct, Steve Knight (no relation, unfortunately) or Andrew Turnell or Mr. Jim Joel but Maori Venture. It is always the horse that comes first whether it is the Derby or a seller at Catterick. This sport is centred on horses. And they are not ‘stakeholders’, even though they take the greatest risks and too often pay the hardest price, and their opinions are never sought or heard.
‘Stakeholders’ only want what is best for them, though they all agree that general funding and prize money is the most pressing problem facing the sport. There is a simple, though perhaps complex, method to sort out the problem of prize money – some kind of ‘Tote Monopoly’ or system used in other countries like Australia, France, Hong Kong, etc. If the problem of funding could be resolved virtually every problem within the sport would fade away. You would think the B.H.A. would know this and would be stretching every sinew, burning the candle at both ends, to put in place the solution, whatever the solution might be? But you would be wrong to think it. I’m not even sure the B.H.A. has any cognisance of the problem. 
The sport is in desperate need an Admiral Rous or Lord George Bentinck or perhaps someone alive like Barry Hearn, someone who will listen, consider, rake-out the bad ideas, the bad practices, rationalise, consult and then draw-up a blueprint for the present and future financing of the sport. One man (or woman), with knowledge of the sport, prepared to listen and consult, yet brave enough to take bold decisions. The present system of governance is like watching frogs slowly coming to the boil in a pot on a range likely to run out of oil any moment.
The whip debate in this country got a good stirring back in the mid-eighties during the Cheltenham Festival when two Irish jockeys were brought to book for over-zealous use of the old attitude adjustor and here we are getting on for forty years and still we are embroiled in a whip debate. The consultations have gone on for decades; the rules have been tinkered with, number of strikes set and still the rumblings of discourse continue. Journalists at the Racing Post can always fill a quiet day with their thoughts and solutions on the whip and either its importance to the sport or it being the cause of horse racing having such a maligned image one might think the sport is run by a producer working on Panorama.
The B.H.A. should run the sport. The buck really should stop with them. The ‘stakeholders’ nonsense may be a good concept on paper but it allows the sport to appear like a ‘horse designed by a committee’, which is a camel, if you didn’t know. The B.H.A. is a meet and greet organisation that delegates responsibilities that they should grasp and as a result the B.H.A. and its board are reactive when the sport requires proactive governance.
One of the best initiatives in many a long year came about through someone at the B.H.A. taking a proactive decision to only allow jockeys to ride at one meeting a day, a forward-thinking step that has improved mental well-being amongst jockeys and allowed so many more jockeys to achieve a better standard of living. Yet this radical decision only came about because of the covid nonsense. One meeting a day rule was never considered prior to the scandal of covid, yet if the B.H.A. were more forward-thinking than they have ever been, or employed someone that actually knows the sport inside out, suicides and substance abuse within the sport might have been avoided.
The problems shackling horse racing are the B.H.A. and its ‘stakeholders’. One governing voice, that is the solution.