Monday February 20th 2023

It is somewhat unrealistic to think that everyone will put aside their feelings about the Bryony Frost affair just because Tom Scudamore has called it a day as a jockey. Recent events inevitably predominate over a long career of his success as a jockey. Posters on the Guardian forum obviously saw TS's role in that as a big negative factor - particularly Bryony Frost's view that he had ostracised her. I think it is instructive that that was the reaction of some comments, as it shows that strong feelings still exist about it. I don't think that is particularly surprising or indeed a matter of concern. TS, as you pointed out, Harry, has got a job as a TV commentator.

Tom Scudamore's decision to retire seemed a wise one to me.

I haven't been able to read what Julie Harrington said as, apart from the Racing Post, which I don't subscribe to, I can't find a report anywhere. I would have thought the BHA would have put up a Press release, etc, but I can't see one.

But on the issue of the number of whip strikes, etc, etc, it has been done to death. There was an interminably long lead in from last July, plenty of warning, a long consultation including jockey reps, a (probably predictable) attempt to head off the change by reactionary elements, which partially succeeded as the element which caused most opposition (reportedly) was removed and then the inevitable hullabaloo when the date of the changes arrived. Willy Mullins popped up at the last minute (and may have helped avoid a calamity at Cheltenham). But who knows? The argument changed from Never! to Not This! to Cheltenham! Not now! A feast for the Press, a coming Apocalypse, a story with legs.

Meanwhile whip changes in the same direction, but further, across the channel go ahead with few problems.

Harrington was asserting that the whip debate is no longer a welfare issue but a "perception" issue. She wants to avoid the target audience of new racegoers aged 18-25 seeing whip-rule infractions on the main TV news on Gold Cup day. Apparently the BHA has been polling that age group, focusing on those who are "uninterested in" or "not engaged with" racing. Some of them believe "racing is cruel" in general, jockeys carrying and using whips being only one sign of cruelty. (Some claim that saddling a horse and putting a bit in its mouth is inherently cruel.) It is enough to put them off the sport. However, other polling of the same age group shows that it is the cost of a day at the races, and a perception that it is exclusive, snobbish or "upper class", and this is what puts more of them off. Whether or not one can rely heavily on opinion polls is beside the point; the worrying thing is that the BHA is spending time and resources on a group of people who for a variety of reasons are perhaps the LEAST likely ever to become lovers of the sport.

And they pay Julie Harrington HOW MUCH?

Thanks Harry. I am still puzzled, though, about why the full speech is not freely available.

I suppose JH is focussing on a future potential audience to try to make them more likely to be interested in horseracing.

But the broader picture is that welfare issues, and the whip use falls into that category, are significant drivers of change. It is not just in the UK.

I've had a nibble at that one, just a bit worried by the plunge on Fergusson's expensive recruit. So all the best!

Unlucky Alan.

Two days on the trot...beaten a neck and a head....cheering on the winner and then in the last couple of seconds all change....bugger