The Whip Rule....East Coast Racing

The_Bull

I've never really had an opinion one way or the other on the new whip rules (not so new anymore). I guess I just accepted them for what they are and moved on. It favours some horses and not others, like everything.

On Saturday Billy Egan rode Plein Ciel (GER) in race 7 at The Valley. It settled behind the favourite who led, and was under decent pressure to hold its spot coming to the turn. Egan hits the horse 9 times before the 100m (I think it was actually 10) and Plein Ciel dives on the line to dead heat with the fav.

Egan is suspended for 6 meetings and fined $1500, partly owing to his poor whip rule record. But the horse keeps the win. So why have the rule? Stewards have basically conceded that overuse of the whip did not affect this horses finishing position. If there was ever a case for taking the race of one, this was it. What is the rule there for?

Thoughts? :-?

Thunderstruck

Definite grey area because their probably correctly saying how do we quantify how much ground the excess whipping advantaged the horse?..obviously it does but its a bone of contention I can sort of see their dilemma

That dead heat result screamed take the win away from the offender but I reckon their fighting not to start doing this because it may open an even bigger can of worms.
*For the record I was on Shot Of Irish but I wasn't overly pissed off upon hearing it really I was just happy to get half a winner at the "saucer of doom"(sure was a moral beaten though for various actions in that race)

Precision1

The way I see it though is if they continue to refuse to take races off them when they’ve broken the rules even on very small margins (or a dead heat which is even worse) then they’re effectively saying it makes no difference to how a horse performs.  Then if that’s the case what’s the reason not to ban the whip entirely?  They themselves are refusing to acknowledge it makes a difference.

I’m not saying I agree with this but for those who are pushing to ban the whip and there’s plenty of them it’s a pretty strong argument.  

In this instance I acknowledge they didn’t pick it up until after correct weight was declared so I’m talking as a principal not specific to this case.

The_Bull

  

In this instance I acknowledge they didn’t pick it up until after correct weight was declared

It's this part of the rule that bugs me.

Name me any other rule that you can willingly break, and keep the race.

Stewards are sending out a message that overuse of the whip does not give an advantage. This is a very slippery slope....

The_Bull

https://wwos.nine.com.au/horse-racing/whip-rules-scrutinised-after-cup-dead-heat/3bbaf89d-b8ed-451a-830d-08c96c1d8b52

Steward watching live wasn't aware of Egan starting to use the whip at the 400m. Please....

Thunderstruck

"The Australian Trainers' Association won't push for a review of penalties that stem from jockeys winning races while breaking the whip rule.

ATA CEO Andrew Nicholl said his stakeholder group was 'at sixes and sevens' on how the rule should be governed, adding the grey area on how much advantage overuse of the whip gives a horse made things difficult.

"Ultimately, it's a tough one. We understand the limitations from an ATA viewpoint," Nicholl said.

"We understand that there will be some parts of the industry that will cry foul.

"Equally are you going to penalise an owner or owners for the inability of a jockey to count from one to five, so to speak? There's a lot of moving parts to this ... there's owners, breeders and they're innocent parties in this.

"They've moved from having fines to now having fines and suspensions and now having significant suspensions. So is the natural progression to get to a point (where they can disqualify?).

"We've had discussions with stewards on this and their position is very clear. They cannot determine with any degree of certainty whether that infringement caused the loss of a half head, half length, three lengths, six lengths.

"They've been very clear around Australia that they don't believe they're in a position to take a race away from a rider or an owner, for example. That's been their position for years."

Nicholl said the ATA held discussions with stewards two years ago about trying to quantify how much of an advantage extra uses of the whip can give a jockey.

"We brought this to the table two years ago to say, 'Hey, is it your role to establish what that advantage might be'?" Nicholl said.

"Is 10 hits over the limit equal to two lengths? And if that equals two lengths then does that mean you can lose the race?

"They say it's not that cut and dry and they're not in a position to make that judgement"


The above is part of a longwinded story on Racing.com today posted around the Egan controversy, I doubt we punters will get what we want I.e steward taking races off owners they seem to just refuse to go there..rightly or wrongly.