WHIPPING.

​The use and misuse of the whip in horse racing is a topic that refuses to lie down, with a ride by Patrick Mullins in the National Hunt Chase at the Festival coming under scrutiny due to the ‘ride of the season award’ giving it prominence.
My memory is poor at the best of times and if asked I would have struggled to recall the winner of the 4-mile amateur chase, let alone that Mullins received a six-day whip ban for the ride he gave Rathvindon. I suspect the judges of this award also must have overlooked the whip ban because the only other scenario I can think of is the awarding of this prestigious award was decided upon to put two fingers up to those of us who believe disqualification should result if jockeys disregard the rules of racing. The most used adjective to describe this kick in the teeth to racing’s reputation is ‘crass’ and A.P. McCoy must now put up a defence of an award given in his name.
Those who argue that disqualification would be to penalise the innocent – owner, trainer, punter and stable staff – need to answer this question. Is a wheal mark worse than a bump? Is a jockey a better rider for preventing an incident that might result in injury to horse and rider than a jockey who breaks the whip rules but wins the race? Is winning at all costs a more inspiring image of the sport than a jockey who puts down the whip but loses the race? For those who believe Lester Piggott was the greatest flat jockey, I suggest you watch him winning the Derby on The Minstrel as I believe it was as unedifying a ride as any horse has ever received. A poor image, I would suggest, of our sport.
There is a drive at the moment to find new customers for the sport, yet one of the reasons the majority of people do not wish to be associated with horse racing is use of the whip. People do not like it. People object to the sight of a beautiful animal being struck by a whip to make it go faster. That is the general impression this aspect of the sport leaves with people. You can argue till the cows come home that the modern-day whip is air-cushioned and does not inflict pain and that all a jockey is attempting to do is to keep the horse galloping and is not bullying it into going faster. As evidence it may win in a court of law but it does not wash with the general public.
British racing must begin the process of introducing hands and heels races for professional jockeys, both on the flat and in hurdles and jump races. In fact, it could be brought in with immediate effect for National Hunt flat races in this country.
Simply as an experiment this radical strategy would provide interesting statistics. Some horses may well improve for hands and heels races. Others may lose their form. Certainly, the true horseman will come to the fore.
I cannot think of any strategy, even if implemented for cynical marketing and promotional reasons, that has the potential to provide the sport with good publicity than consideration of an eventual ban on the whip in the closing stages of a race.
In the interim, perhaps as a method of encouraging best practice, perhaps an award should be introduced for ‘ride of the season’ to a jockey who demonstrated positive use of the whip while staying within the whip guide-lines. There should certainly be a code of conduct when allotting riding awards that disqualify any winning ride that infringed the rules of racing.
I only know of Patrick Mullins from what I read about him and what others say but he comes across as a really good bloke who appreciates his position in the world of racing is due in no small matter to being the son of a great racehorse trainer. He does not deserve the controversy this award has stirred up. He didn’t ask for the award, though equally he has not volunteered to give it up, which I think for the good of racing’s reputation he should consider. He may well have achieved a miracle of riding to have kept Rathvindon on his feet but the plain truth is he broke the rules of racing to win and in the mind of the sport’s detractors that will be the salient point. The six-day ban suggests he was excessive in his use of the whip. In the eyes of the sport’s detractors, to win he beat up his horse.
Perhaps it should always be taken into account how the horse involved recovered from the race before any award is given out, with these questions asked: Did the horse run again subsequent to the race in question? Did it improve or lose form?
One other aspect of the whip and whether disqualification is appropriate is this: when a jockey loses a race due to ‘dangerous riding’ or some other riding offence, punters and connections of the second are rewarded, yet no one argues that it is the jockey who has broke the rules and that the owner, trainer, stable staff and punters are innocents in the matter.
NB.  Anyone who has read Bill Barber's article in the Racing Post (4-10-18) can be under no allusions as to the importance of this subject to racing's future. Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour Party have links to anti-racing organisations, with the whip issue soon to become debated in Parliament due to a petition demanding a ban on the whip achieving 100,000 signatures. The B.H.B. must be pro-active and not bury their heads  in the sand in hope the problem will go away.