THE ROONEYS AND BARE-NAKED HOOVES.

​Firstly, I bet all the tea in my tea-caddy that Paul & Claire get really hacked-off when they are asked if they are related to Wayne. It could be worse, of course, as the follow-up question could be ‘are you related to Adam, then?’ For the unknowing, Adam Rooney is the number nine for Salford City. He also is no relation to the mighty Wayne.
When it emerged that the Rooneys had instructed their battalion of trainers not to enter their horses at Cheltenham as according to their own statistics there is a greater risk of injury at the home of National Hunt than any other racecourse, I was rather cross with them. No one, especially a leading and respected owner, should say or do anything to bring disrepute to the sport, to give ammunition to our detractors by suggesting that harm will come to any horse made to race at our most cherished racecourse.
As everyone who has subsequently commented on their decision has made clear, it is their prerogative to race their horses, or not to race their horses, wherever they like. I am also led to believe that the Rooneys know how to retire a horse well and as someone who advocates the responsibility of an owner to care for their horses from cradle to grave, I heartily commend them on the goodness of their hearts. But there is also, perhaps unwritten and unenforceable in conscience or law, in the contract of ownership a duty of care to the sport that is as vital and important as the duty of care to the horse.
National Hunt is a pursuit that has embedded within its many layers the trophy of extreme highs and the cruel penalty of extreme lows. On a beautiful sunny day at dead flat Musselburgh only a few weeks ago three horses perished in unrelated circumstances. Every equine death is a tragedy, whether it happens at Cheltenham, Musselburgh or at a point-to-point. It shouldn’t happen, no one wants it to happen and if any of us could wave a magic wand or dream-up some sort of plan that would stop death from haunting the racecourse we would give that idea to the sport and forfeit any royalties. But, as in life, death haunts us all. Only yesterday a colleague of my better-half was killed crossing a busy main road. No one wanted her to die, especially not the poor man driving the lorry that hit her, but cruel fate determined that January 10th should be her last day on Earth.
Life has highs; it has lows.
I have other two problems, away from the charge of possibly bringing the sport into disrepute, with the Rooney’s decision: what if their statistics tell them next season that, as an example, Taunton, Kelso and Warwick are more of a risk of harming their horses than Cheltenham, do they then reinstate Cheltenham and inform their trainers not to enter their horses at the three aforementioned racecourses? They might just be opening a can of worms that has the rogue snake amongst its number. Also, what if the Rooneys come upon a genuine Gold Cup horse, another Arkle, Kauto Star etc? Would it never be allowed to follow in the footsteps of those great horses simply because it would be statistically and marginally more likely to sustain an injury at Cheltenham than at Kempton or Aintree?
Upon this road madness lies.
Please, Paul & Claire: run the right horses at Cheltenham and shred your spreadsheets.
 
The stupidest rule change ever to be introduced comes into force on February 1st. From that day trainers must run their horses fully shod – that is shoes on all four hooves. To the uninitiated this may seem a trivial gripe, especially as the rule-change has come about under the guise of horse welfare.
After two years of negotiation with all relevant bodies, it is decided that running horses without hind shoes will reduce the number of horses slipping on bends. Yet many trainers as routine never put hind shoes on a horse at the races due to the risk of horses over-reaching and as a worse-case scenario cutting through their tendons, a far more potent horse welfare issue, I would have thought, than merely losing their footing, something a horse can correct, if lucky. Why not insist on calkins inserted into the shoe, as eventers are shod, to aid traction? Until they were banned because of the damage they could do to a fallen jockey if trodden on they were used regularly by trainers to help stop horses slipping on firm ground. It could be argued that for the safety of jockeys all horses the regulation should be that all horses run naked on the hind hooves.
This a terrible and unforgiveable decision must be rectified as soon as possible. Only a horse-ignorant regulatory body could come up with a rule change that purports to be introduced on horse welfare grounds but which, as any knowledgeable trainer would freely inform them, has the potential to be the complete opposite.