YESTERDAY AT FONTWELL & SCHRODINGER'S CAT.

The first past the post in the novice handicap hurdle at Fontwell yesterday was disqualified due to an objection from the clerk of the scales in that the jockey, Freddie Mitchell, weighed-in 5Ibs light. In the stewards' enquiry the fault was placed on trainer Max Comley's travelling head lad for saddling I Love You Sivola incorrectly by not putting on the weight cloth. No one can argue with the verdict of the stewards, though we must have some sympathy for the travelling head lad who doubtless will be feeling this morning that his world has been tipped upside down. During our lives, all of us will make at least one silly mistake that wreaks havoc with our pride and dignity. As a man of 72 and a half, I embarrass myself on a daily basis.

The problem I am having with this case is not the disqualification but that the whole of the Max Comley team - trainer, jockey, stable staff and owner - are regarded as a team, with the whole team feeling the smart of the stewards' cane. And worse is still to come for the owner as though he or she will receive no prize-money for seeing I Love You Sivola first past the post, the handicapper will view the race as won by I Love You Sivola and put the horse up a few pounds for its next race. A case of double jeopardy, if you ask me.

Compare the Fontwell race with any race where a jockey has been given a suspension for misuse of the whip. The horse may not be disqualified if the excess is not fiv over the limit, though as with Aimalah Aswat recently where the horse was subsequently disqualified because she used her whip five-above the limit, where the whole team involved with the horse were made to pay for her error, as the owner, trainer, jockey and stable staff are not, in whip offences. considered a team.

There is in racing a Schrodinger's cat type juxtoposition in that the trainer, jockey, owner and stable staff are both a team and not a team at the same time. The cat in the box is both dead and alive until the box is opened, then the answer is known to all that have eyes. To my mind, the box here needs to be opened to determine if the connections to a horse are either a team or just a collection of individuals. Because a member of staff messed-up, all the connections of I Love You Sivola had to suffer. If the jockey had messed-up, he or she would be, in the majority of cases, the only one made to suffer the consequences. What I am taking the scenic route to say is that I believe when a jockey breaks either the whip rules or commits a riding offence during a race, the horse should be disqualified on the basis that the jockey, trainer, owner and stable staff represent a team, as was the case at Fontwell yesterday.

The best method of driving up standards is to set high standardto begin with and then not to allow those standards to drop. It is only in very rare cases when a jockey or trainer will knowingly transgress the rules of racing and in those instances the 'team' concept of the sport is not warranted. But in accidental error, as with breaking of whip rules, the team should suffer as a whole as an owner denied a winner through jockey error will become his or her own judiciary.

In football, for instance, when there is a penalty, either a goal will be scored or not, there is no latitude for the ball skimming the post or the goalie getting a glove on the ball as it passes him/her on its way to the back of the net. And given that all jockeys can count to ten, I see no reason why a jockey should be forgiven if he uses his whip one more than the limit allowed, and as an important rule of racing is broken disqualification should be mandatory, and the views of both licenced and retired jockeys on this subject should never be taken into consideration.

I do not refer to the whip as an evil aspect of our sport. Nor do I ever accuse jockeys of beating a horse with the whip. But they cannot claim the whip is so useless as a whip it cannot hurt a horse and then claim they must be allowed to strike a horse with it as it persuades the horse to maintain its speed. Again, we have a Schrodinger's cat paradox here where the whip connects hard enough to induce a horse to go forward, yet at the same time it neither frightens or hurts the horse. If it is the noise of the whip that is effectual, why was the long tom banned at the start of N.H. races as the assistant starter would only crack the whip to make a recaltritant horse to go forward, not actually strike the horse with the whip. Here we have a double standard to add to the Schrodinger's situation.

Monty Roberts was of the opinion that it was a mad mindset to think a whip could be of any use when it comes to a flight animal, and Fred Archer is on record as saying that he believed he lost more races because of the whip than he won by use of the whip. If a trainer approves of his or her jockey using the whip five, six, seven or above times, and the owner also approves of use of the whip, then this is the glue that confirms them as a team. For the long term good of the sport, I ask the B.H.A. to look again at the whip rules and plan for a year-long series of races, both on the flat and over jumps, where professional riders, as with conditionals, are only permitted to use hands and heels, with the whip only used in an emergency - if a horse is about to veer wildly off course, for example. If the social licence is real, the sport must go to the enth-degree to fulfil the expectations of society. If I cannot hit my  dog (I do not have a dog) why should I be allowed to hit my horse. I rest my case.