Since the introduction of the "you cannot whip a horse any more than X times at spots Y or any other letter" during a race I have been waiting for the inevitable to happen. After the Australian Cup stewards fined the winning jockey Nicholas Hall $1000 for excessive use of the whip however the fine was for whipping indiscretions prior to the last 100m (there is unlimited whip usage in the last 100m).It seems the owners of the runnerup, Sirmione, were unaware they could have lodged a pro
Since the introduction of the "you cannot whip a horse any more than X times at spots Y or any other letter" during a race I have been waiting for the inevitable to happen. After the Australian Cup stewards fined the winning jockey Nicholas Hall $1000 for excessive use of the whip however the fine was for whipping indiscretions prior to the last 100m (there is unlimited whip usage in the last 100m).
It seems the owners of the runnerup, Sirmione, were unaware they could have lodged a protest against the winner Zipping They are livid the stewards did not alert them to the possibility of protesting, as part of their job as stewards, and I am assuming the comments attributed to Nicholas Hall that he would not have won the race without excessive whipping would have really caused the owners to go on the warpath.
The defence from chief steward, Terry Bailey, that he thought Sirmione had his chance to win is not the point. The point is a jockey has won a Group 1 race by flounting the rules he was well aware of , due to previous fines, and has won a race unfairly which must be grounds for protest. The stewards should have fired in their own protest as a matter of due course and allowed the owners of the runnerup to plead their case. Terry Bailey should have made the statement attributed to him AFTER considering all arguments for and against in conjunction with his panel as then he would have been seen to at least provide an opportunity for Sirmione's connections to gain a fairer chance of collecting first prize than was given during the running of the race.
The issue is one of all runners being provided with an equal chance of winning and it seems to me that Sirmione has not been provided with an equal chance. The difference in prizemoney is $420,000 plus a $5000 trophy plus the honour of winning the race and connections are considering their options. If they do not protest officially that is their choice but you can bet the next group of owners may not be as gracious. How will it look if this happens in the Spring and God forbid what if it is the Melbourne Cup? Sadly, this should have all been thought out beforehand officially (I know I have read about the possibility) and clear guidelines set out by the stewards re protests over excessive whip use. However it seems it hasn't been and here we have a situation that racing does not need all because of the need to appease a minority group in the first place.
á