WHIPS, WHIPPING, SUSPENSIONS and rules made of fudge.

​As with every other right-minded man or woman I like and admire Frankie Dettori. He is undoubtedly the greatest personality horse racing has ever produced. He is god-send to flat racing and is one of the best flat jockeys of all-time. He is also, I am led to believe, a superb father and husband and an all-round good bloke. That said, I will be disappointed if he either wins his appeal against his ten-day suspension or has the number of days reduced. It happened. He did not mean it to happen. But his carelessness could easily have caused the death of a horse and serious injury to one of his fellow jockeys. If a 4-day suspension is justified for a nudge, as with Oisin Murphy in the Eclipse, then 10-days, I would argue, might be a tad lenient for very nearly putting a jockey over the rails. Frankie’s riding at Newmarket dealt severe blows to every punter who backed the horses whose chances he scuppered. It can be argued that as his 10-day suspension will rule him out of the King George and Queen Elisabeth and Goodwood the punishment does not fit the crime. But if any of the jockeys he knocked about at Newmarket had suffered a serious injury they also would most likely to have missed the same two important meetings.
In general, I believe flat jockeys get away lightly with the rules as they stand. Going back to Oisin Murphy and his ride on Roaring Lion in the Eclipse. He made no attempt whatsoever to keep his mount running in a straight line, knowing that if he bumped the runner-up, as long as he won by a head or more, he could argue in the stewards’ room that he was on the best horse. And why shouldn’t he think like that? He was there to achieve the best possible result for his employer and the rules seemingly allow him to ride as he did. So why didn’t Donnacha O’Brien do the same? If he had pulled Saxon Warrior across toward Roaring Lion the intimidation might have acted to thwart his progress and Murphy would have had to stop riding for a moment to pull his whip into his other hand.
To my way of thinking, the benefit of the doubt in enquiries similar to the Eclipse should go to the jockey who kept straight, as a jockey is expected to do at every other stage of a race. If the powers-that-be want to encourage safe and proper race-riding they must not give the benefit of the doubt to the jockey who either broke the rules or came close to breaking the rules. Try explaining to someone new to the sport why Murphy was allowed to keep the race yet his riding was deemed unacceptable and given a 4-day suspension.
As there might be – you have to be optimistic – new eyes to my ‘racing rambles’ I will repeat my views on the whip.
The whip is the most contentious issue for the public, both knowledgeable and ignorant about racing. If we want to attract a new and larger audience to the sport over reliance on the whip must be ended. You can try to inform people that the modern whip is cushioned and you could beat your granny with it and she wouldn’t spill her gin and tonic until you are blue in the face and they will not believe you. A whip is designed, they will say, to be used as a form of punishment.
I have argued the case for there to be a trial of ‘hands and heels’ races for professional jockeys flat and National Hunt as there are for apprentices and conditionals. Some horses will, of course, not run up to form, though others may well improve for the prohibition. One day in the future Government legislation may bring an end to the use of the whip in racing and jockeys might benefit if such trials were brought in to prepare for a future when strength in the saddle will be all they have to get that last ounce of energy out of their mounts.
Personally, I doubt if Oisin Murphy cared a jot or a fig about the 4-day ‘holiday’ the Sandown stewards awarded him. He won the Eclipse and a healthy amount of spending money for his holiday. He may have even laughed all the way to the A.T.M.
I would not suspend a jockey for a whip offence, though I might issue a large fine. What I would do is allow him or her to continue riding but without the use of a whip. They could carry it but they would not be allowed to use it in anger, and if they did the prohibition would be doubled. If I ruled the racing world Oisin Murphy would not be suspended for 4-days but would be banned from using his whip for 4-days. Frankie would have received a large fine but would be able to ride at Ascot and Goodwood but would be disadvantaged as he would not be allowed to use his whip. Owners and trainers could then decide if a jockey can or cannot ride.
A rule of the road is that you always give priority to traffic coming from the right. A rule at work is that safety-boots must be worn at all times. These rules cannot be interpreted. They are a rule. An instruction. A law. Get my point?