Trojan Horse
September 11th 2009 08:58
If the Australian Racing Board (ARB) was in charge of promoting the case for, and benefits of, measures instigated to combat the effects of global warming, we would end up with a pretty hot planet, pretty quickly. They would most likely pander to climate change sceptics.
(photo: Neil Murray)
How the introduction of padded whips into horse racing in Australia could be handled so fumble-fingered is mind boggling. There was initially some reluctance among a few jockeys to use the innocuous new padded whips, taking away as it was a deterrent for unruly horses to obey commands - but this has since been almost universally accepted as a proper and productive measure.
And there you have it. A good news story. A move from tradition and adoption of an improvement.
But somehow the ARB in a supplication to zealots with little understanding of horses, but with very loud voices, has ensured that a positive becomes seen as a perceived negative.
The hysteria today even on ABC radio has been breathtaking. Every cliché and stereotype imaginable has been used to demean those who make a livelihood from horses and racing - and care more for the welfare of horses than those who protest the loudest.
Emotive phrases such as:
“the jockeys will strike in an effort to have the ability to thrash their horses more.”
and snide, derogatory remarks:
“oh, it is far easier to whip a horse is it than to expect a jockey to count.”
I am sick of writing again about this matter. But it does appear that the ARB are not looking after the interests of the parties they are elected to represent. Somehow they have become the industry Trojan Horse. They have allowed misplaced and unreasonable views to first filter into the formation of rules; then secondly procured a public debate full of misinformation and venom that serves best the interests of no one. Certainly not the jockeys who risk their lives each day at work. Certainly not the stables who tend their horses with great care and affection. Certainly not the punter who requires confidence in the racing product.
In the end a thoroughbred horse is a specifically bred work animal. It is treated with far greater consideration and respect than many pets who are often malnourished, abused and mistreated. A recent expose in the pedigree dog breeding industry tells of great suffering of countless thousand animals bred with defects on purpose. Some defects so terrible as King Charles Spaniel dogs bred with heads too small to fit their brains - and thus suffering from a life (though short) of constant pain.
Here we have the fact again. Undisputed by all except the most blinkered zealots:
The padded whip does not hurt a horse.
But it is encouragement just as is shouting and scrubbing the horses neck.
Horses not in contention are not hit with the whip - lest the jockey face a substantial fine and suspension - and this very rare to occur and accepted as appropriate penalty when it does.
To expect a jockey in a high pressure situation of tactics, displaying incredible balance, steering 500 kg or more of horse in a compact field, and keeping both animal and riders safe - to expect a jockey to count reflex actions of encouragement with a whip in this situation is just ludicrous. It is akin to texting while driving - the focus of concentration cannot be split so severely.
The ARB should grant jockeys the ability to ride unfettered in the final 100 metres of a race. Many jockeys will never pass the arbitrary measure of strikes anyway - and for those who do the horse will not feel anything other than the adrenaline of the race and insistence that they try to their best ability.
The jockeys ask a sensible and logical change to one part of the rules.
The zealots ask for capitulation.
And this all began as a good news story. How could they stuff it up so badly.
100 metres to go - barely a whip in sight
(photo: Neil Murray)
How the introduction of padded whips into horse racing in Australia could be handled so fumble-fingered is mind boggling. There was initially some reluctance among a few jockeys to use the innocuous new padded whips, taking away as it was a deterrent for unruly horses to obey commands - but this has since been almost universally accepted as a proper and productive measure.
And there you have it. A good news story. A move from tradition and adoption of an improvement.
But somehow the ARB in a supplication to zealots with little understanding of horses, but with very loud voices, has ensured that a positive becomes seen as a perceived negative.
The hysteria today even on ABC radio has been breathtaking. Every cliché and stereotype imaginable has been used to demean those who make a livelihood from horses and racing - and care more for the welfare of horses than those who protest the loudest.
“the jockeys will strike in an effort to have the ability to thrash their horses more.”
and snide, derogatory remarks:
“oh, it is far easier to whip a horse is it than to expect a jockey to count.”
I am sick of writing again about this matter. But it does appear that the ARB are not looking after the interests of the parties they are elected to represent. Somehow they have become the industry Trojan Horse. They have allowed misplaced and unreasonable views to first filter into the formation of rules; then secondly procured a public debate full of misinformation and venom that serves best the interests of no one. Certainly not the jockeys who risk their lives each day at work. Certainly not the stables who tend their horses with great care and affection. Certainly not the punter who requires confidence in the racing product.
In the end a thoroughbred horse is a specifically bred work animal. It is treated with far greater consideration and respect than many pets who are often malnourished, abused and mistreated. A recent expose in the pedigree dog breeding industry tells of great suffering of countless thousand animals bred with defects on purpose. Some defects so terrible as King Charles Spaniel dogs bred with heads too small to fit their brains - and thus suffering from a life (though short) of constant pain.
Here we have the fact again. Undisputed by all except the most blinkered zealots:
The padded whip does not hurt a horse.
But it is encouragement just as is shouting and scrubbing the horses neck.
Horses not in contention are not hit with the whip - lest the jockey face a substantial fine and suspension - and this very rare to occur and accepted as appropriate penalty when it does.
To expect a jockey in a high pressure situation of tactics, displaying incredible balance, steering 500 kg or more of horse in a compact field, and keeping both animal and riders safe - to expect a jockey to count reflex actions of encouragement with a whip in this situation is just ludicrous. It is akin to texting while driving - the focus of concentration cannot be split so severely.
The ARB should grant jockeys the ability to ride unfettered in the final 100 metres of a race. Many jockeys will never pass the arbitrary measure of strikes anyway - and for those who do the horse will not feel anything other than the adrenaline of the race and insistence that they try to their best ability.
The jockeys ask a sensible and logical change to one part of the rules.
The zealots ask for capitulation.
And this all began as a good news story. How could they stuff it up so badly.
| 34 |
| Vote |
