Australia is hugged after his Irish Derby victory© Photo Healy Racing
Horse racing has no shortage of controversial topics to deal with but in overall reputational terms pretty much everything pales in comparison to the issue of horse welfare. It is HORSE racing after all. And while most of the general public manage to carry on just fine without the game troubling their minds at all, not doing right by the animals around which everything revolves is something even the most ignorant can understand. So racing has to do right by its horses, and be seen to be doing it.
There’s a lot going on currently, whether it is the ongoing steroid scandal, the continuing wheeling and dealing over the industry’s administration, or the perpetual issue of who controls the money. It doesn’t take a genius to make a link between those political issues and an increased official presence in yards around the country. Neither should it take a genius to twig there is a fundamental self-interest for racing professionals in an increased rate of inspections and making them even more meaningful.
But you don’t have to put your ear too close to the ground to hear disgruntlement over these inspections and about trainers getting ticked off for what some appear to dismiss as comparatively ‘frivolous’ issues such as the state of facilities, the use of routine medicines, and the logging of those medicines. It’s basically grumbling on a theme of “I’m not running a f---ing hotel here.” And it’s offside.
No one denies the horse game is a business, and in such an environment hugging-the-horsey to sleep every night isn’t on. But it has to be a fundamental that horses are treated properly, professionally and with the respect they deserve. That that is the case in the vast majority of yards is no more than should be expected, and a reflection of individual professionalism. On the racecourse, a similar professionalism must be seen to be in place.
Welfare cases in yards are thankfully rare but just as with the drugs scourge, it is vital that every effort is made, and is seen to be made, that professional standards are maintained. It’s a fact of life that a slip in one standard usually leads to others. In a cut-throat business, the temptation to cut corners is always present. But cutting corners in horse welfare is a slip capable of costing racing big-time in terms of an already shaky reputation within the wider public consciousness.
Racing has a lot to do in getting its general house in order. Putting pressure on individuals to get their own specific house right is part of that. Cribbing about it might make some feel better in the short term but long term it is desperately short-sighted and unprofessional.
In comparison cribbing about stewards is old-hat and a very old ‘chapeau’ is the accusation that officialdom gets all heavy with the little guy while leaving the big, powerful, wealthy-enough—to-resort-to-law guys off scot-free. And just because it is old-hat doesn’t mean there isn’t something to it a lot of the time.
Certainly the connections of Mount Corkish Girl are probably feeling more than a little sore after the horse was disqualified from racing for sixty days under non-trier rules at Naas. Trainer Gillian Callaghan was fined E1,000 and jockey Andrew Lynch suspended for seven days after the mare finished eighth of twenty five in a maiden hurdle. And they’re probably feeling sore because if Mount Corkish Girl’s performance is now the criteria for non-trier rules to be enforced then we’re in for a lively winter.
On the face of it, Mount Corkish Girl’s run was, to use the vernacular, ‘eye-catching,’ but not especially so. It wasn’t like she was buried at the back and Lynch was motionless the whole time. It should also be irrelevant she started at 66-1, but probably isn’t. What we can say is that plenty of similar or worse efforts don’t get similarly picked up on at all. There may even have been another one in the same race which nothing was said about.
What’s interesting about this though is that the horse was found to be coughing after a post-race veterinary examination and, not for the first time recently, the stewards chose to ignore a ready-made ‘out’ and went ahead with the penalties. In terms of intent, such a move deserves a thumbs-up. Getting a resounding thumbs-up however possibly requires some of the big-guys being on the receiving end of such resolve in future.
In international terms there’s no bigger guy than Sheikh Mohammed and his move to sign up James Doyle and William Buick is a reflection of the mammoth financial clout he possesses. Considering the comparatively meagre top-flight return that clout has provided Godolphin in recent years the packages that encouraged Britain’s two best young jockeys to jump aboard must be very impressive. They are after all leaving jobs with a proven Group 1 track record and Doyle’s decision in particular to jump after his Juddmonte contract winds up is particularly intriguing.
From a Godolphin point of view however there is surely more than a whiff of desperation about this. It’s the oldest move in the racing world to shuffle jockeys when things aren’t going well. Anyone in doubt about that might care to have a word with Silvestre De Sousa and Mikael Barzalona. They were once the flavours of the month too, something Buick and Doyle probably realise better than most, and something probably reflected in their new contracts too.
The real money at the top end of the flat doesn’t need to shout: a whisper will do when everyone is straining to listen. So Australia’s recently announced E50,000 stud fee may ultimately perhaps be the most relevant comment on his racing career. The colt was clearly top class but ultimately didn’t live up to the hype. It might strain credulity to describe fifty grand a throw as cheap but some within bloodstock circles reckon his fee might have been higher. And there’s no getting away from how Kingman’s fee, once the currency translation is made, is E70,000. Is that the most important black and white stat of all?
