The RSPCA would appear to be quite reasonable in their renewed push for a whip ban.

Heather Neil, chief executive officer of RSPCA Australia, says a whip ban would do nothing to change interest in racing and its integrity. I agree.

Furthermore, she said: “The RSPCA is quite happy for a jockey to carry a whip for emergency safety situations, should they require it, but they should not be used routinely in a race like we are seeing on a day to day level.”

However, I doubt she’ll get much of a reception from that mysterious body called Racing Australia. In fact, Racing Australia is seemingly moving further away from a whip ban than ever before and that’s transpired almost unnoticed, by accident or design.  

Let’s have a look at what’s happened. The first change from the old rule, which simply allowed stewards to police ‘unnecessary, excessive or improper’ use of the whip, at their discretion was implemented in August 2009.

The rule then read: “In a race or trial a rider using the whip must give his horse time to respond and, other than on one occasion in the last 200 metres when the whip may be used in three consecutive strides, the whip shall not to be used in consecutive strides, other than in a slapping motion down the shoulder, with the whip hand remaining on the reins, or alternatively in a backhand manner.”

Now, as of February this year, the rule reads:

“The whip shall not be used on more than five occasions save and except where there have only been minor infractions and the totality of the whip use over the whole race is less than permitted under AR.137A(5)(a) and (b) and also having regard to the circumstances of the race including distance and context of the race, such as a staying race or a rider endeavouring to encourage his mount to improve.”

That (b) says ‘In the final 100 metres of a race, official trial or jump-out a rider may use his whip at his discretion.’

So, now, in the last 100 metres of a race it’s at the jockey’s discretion, not the steward’s. Now, I’m no expert on the law, but that would appear to say that the rider, in the last 100 metres, may do whatever he or she bloody well likes. Who wrote this amendment and who ratified it?

Hardly in line with the spirit of the 2009 changes, reflecting contemporary community attitudes, which Racing Australia (then the ARB) intimated was in response to public perception and opinion and specifically stated that one reason behind the implementation was ‘to protect the welfare of horses.”

Let’s consider the first part of the rule (see above) as it stands now. What a load of gobbledygook and a potential minefield of interpretation – what’s a ‘minor infraction’; what ‘circumstances’ of the race; what’s the definition of ‘encouraging to improve’.

“The whip shall not be used on more than five occasions save and except etc…” does not look to be an attempt to make a better rule but an amendment which they possibly hope provides an ‘out’ against any litigation.

The authorities are just making it muddier and murkier.

It will be interesting to say the least to see whether the connections of Violate (Sebring) take their case any further. Violate of course, ran second in the recent Gunsynd Quality (Gr 3, 1600m) at Eagle Farm, in which winning rider Tiffani Brooker used the whip 12 more times than permitted on Dreams Aplenty (Dream Ahead).

Former leading steward John Schreck, this week, said there should not be an option for objections to be made on the basis of whip offences. I disagree. I don’t want a racing police state.

“Objection rules were designed for incidents of horses against horses, which can be measured. It’s tangible. You can see it,” he said. That is arguable to say the least in my view. Interference cannot be precisely measured and this is yet another bugbear of mine as stewards seem to have become more gung-ho in upholding protests.

I believe there is a need for an immediate summit of all stewards and senior industry officials to address, amongst other things – the whip rule, cobalt, harmonisation of rules Australian wide, mandatory minimum penalties and a universal policy of protest evaluation (roughly along the lines of unless it’s downright obvious, then objection dismissed).

Bear in mind that Racing Australia (then ARB) created this whip mess, not me but I am now an advocate of a ban, simply because I’m playing the ball as it lies. It’s just too convoluted as it is.

Nothing would change. We’d all still bet.

It would be extremely good for public perception, read our standing as a responsible sport. It’s a much better sporting look to see two fit jockeys urging their horses hands and heels rather than flailing whips.

Some trainers will tell you some horses need it. Irrelevant. Some horses need soft ground, or cover, or won’t go between horses etc. It would just be another vagary of the game.

So, unless jockeys can be absolutely convincing in their argument that the whip is a necessary safety tool then I think it should be banned. Begin with next season’s two-year-old races only and proceed year by year.

JOHN MORRISEY
Again on policing matters, has the world gone stark raving mad? Gold Coast trainer John Morrisey gets nine month ban for a cobalt positive.

I’m taking the evidence as reported. Morrisey says he treats horse with a supplement which he’d been told did not contain any prohibited substance. This does not appear to have been disputed. Stewards test supplement and find it contains cobalt.

OK, Morrisey should arguably have done his own research and known this and is entitled to some sanction…but nine months? And nine months after stewards took into account his guilty plea, his UNBLEMISHED record over a long period as a leading trainer, and his forthright and honest evidence. Really?