Whip rules continue to make no sense – and I can’t get any answer why

FOR nearly two years now I have wanted to interview the powers that be about the current whip rules.

They refuse to be questioned publicly. I can only hope that when new leaders are chosen at the British Horseracing Authority they feel capable and able to discuss the subjects over which they reside.

PAWhy is the horse not considered in stewards’ actions regarding whip rules breaches?[/caption]

I don’t understand the logic of the current regulations. And I can’t get answers. It’s frustrating.

THE SUN RACING MEMBERS ENCLOSURE

THE best bet for savvy punters.

Two free racing tickets, four times a year
Templegate’s daily tips before anyone else
Tomorrow’s copy of The Favourite at 9pm today
Exclusive insights from Andrew Balding and Hayley Turner
VIP competitions from Racing Breaks each month
New customer offer with Coral

Become a member today for just £1*

*For the first month then £3 per month thereafter.

SIGN UP NOW

18+ Ts and Cs apply. First month membership £1, then £3 per month unless you cancel at least 7 days before your next billing date. For more information contact help@thesun.co.uk

One area that confuses me is how little ‘the horse’ is mentioned when whip bans are handed out.

After all, one would presume that the whip rules are in place solely for the benefit of the horses. Wouldn’t one?

So if that is the case why don’t the horses ever get a mention?

For instance, if you go through the Whip Review Committee findings on 25 June, 2024, you will encounter ten races looked at by the stewards.

But not one mentions the condition of the animal.

Lets take Dark Trooper as an example. James Doyle was suspended for four days for his efforts in the Wokingham as he went once over the agreed limit in a Class 2 event.

If I was writing one of the reviews it would start with something like: “Dark Trooper in the Wokingham. Horse was not marked or injured in any way.”

Or: “Dark Trooper in the Wokingham. Horse was marked and injured.”

But nothing is ever written about the horses who the majority of the time are in no way affected by the use of the whip.

And if they are not affected why are there bans at all?

‘Oh it’s prevention, Matt!’ I hear you cry. This shows the rules are working.

Well it’s hard to argue with that, but it’s just a cop out.

Indeed the statistics prove that is the case.

Since the new whip rules were implemented there have been eight cases of horses being marked with the whip.

But none of the eight included an additional riding offence. In other words the jockeys rode within the rules.

It’s similar to a human being who when embarrassed suddenly gets covered in a red rash around their neck. Most people don’t. For the few that do that’s just the way it is.

When you use the pro cush whip on the majority of horses it’s nigh on impossible to injure a horse.

So why all the crazy bans? Like the 25 days handed out to Dougie Costello who to most people did nothing wrong in any of the four offences he totalled up in six months.

I’d love to tell you. But alas no one in charge will be challenged.