Racing administrators around the world have underlined that harmonisation of racing rules remains of paramount importance in the wake of incidents involving Secret Gesture and Storm The Stars.
In the past two weeks, two interference cases on either side of the Atlantic have highlighted, once again, that racing is in desperate need of an international set of racing rules, whether it is for international Group 1 races or for the sport as a whole.
Two weeks ago, the Arlington stewards demoted British raider Secret Gesture from in first place to third place in the Beverly D Stakes for causing minor interference to Stephanie’s Kitten.
It is a decision connections of the mare have appealed, and the hearing will take place in the next month.
At the time little was made of the fact that Irad Ortiz, rider of Stephanie’s Kitten, lost out on second place due to the fact he over-playing having to pull his mount back to avoid hitting Secret Gesture.
His histrionics were tantamount to not riding out the finish properly. Having passed the post third, Stephanie’s Kitten was promoted to the runner-up spot, behind Whatsdachances, who hit the wire in second.
As a direct contrast, last week at York in England, Sheikh Juma bin Dalmook’s Storm The Stars kept the Great Voltigeur Stakes despite shunting Bondi Beach across the full width of the Knavesmire course.
The two cases shine a spotlight on the philosophical schism that exists between different racing jurisdictions and how they manage the interference rules.
At Arlington, the stewards were asked to consider whether or not the party who suffered the interference lost a place, and if so, the interfering party was to be punished.
This is known as the Category Two protest/objection philosophy, which exists broadly across the whole of America. It also underpins the interference rules in France, Germany and in South America.
In Britain, Dubai, Hong Kong and most of the other major racing jurisdictions, however, the stewards ask in any given set of circumstances whether the best horse won the race.
This is known as the Category One philosophy. Unlike the criminal court of law, which is based on the principle of proof beyond a reasonable doubt, racing operates on the proof of the balance of probability.
Both philosophies have their merits, but with racing an increasingly global sport, one set of jurisdictions has to give if the sport is to be the winner.
There is, therefore, a major problem to be unraveled by the International Harmonisation of Race Day Rules Committee (IHRRC) that was set up in 2007.
Kim Kelly was appointed as the chairman of the IHRRC in 2009 and presides over a committee comprising eight other members from around the world.
Dubai does not have direct representation on the committee.
Since Kelly’s appointment, harmonisation has been discussed at every meeting, with total harmonisation across the world the ultimate goal.
“If I did not think that this scenario was possible, then I would be wasting my time,” said Kelly, also the chief steward to the Hong Kong Jockey Club. “I firmly believe that uniformity can be achieved in respect of the significant rules and regulations which affect industry participants.”
Irrespective of whether it would be the correct course of action or not, getting France, Germany and America to align themselves with the rest of the major racing jurisdictions may be the easiest of the two routes to harmonisation nirvana.
This approach is not without significant problems.
The sport in America is governed by almost a different regulatory body in each state. In France, the rules underpin the French approach to the sport and are increasingly intertwined with betting.
There is a precedent, however.
After lengthy debate and consultation, two years ago Japan moved from the Category Two way of thinking after 20 years to Category One.
Henri Pouret is the director of racing for France Galop and sits on the IHRRC.
He makes clear that the interference rules in France have evolved due to historical and cultural reasons, and that the driving force behind the Catergory Two principle is the deterrent effect – interfere in a horse race and you are punished.
France also has a daily competition called the Quinte, in which racing fans are asked to pick the first five home in one particular race. It is extremely lucrative, and its presence is a significant factor in France keeping the Category Two philosophy as the French believe that their approach produces fewer incidents.
Should France and America ever change, there are still likely to be problems with interpretation and application of rules, even if they are worded in a similar manner.
“It is not a perfect situation in Category One countries, because different jurisdictions have a different emphasis,” said Jamie Stier, the former chief steward in Hong Kong and now director of race-day operations and integrity for the British Horseracing Authority.
“Some stewards might turn around results in one jurisdiction and not in another, but they have the same interference rules.”
Unfortunately, the interference rules are just one of a myriad that require harmonisation if racing is to ever get its house in order.
In May, Victor Espinoza hit American Pharoah more than 30 times down the short straight at Churchill Downs in the Kentucky Derby.
There are no rules in Kentucky as to how many times a jockey can hit their horse.
In Dubai, according to rule 69 (i) of the Rules Of Racing, it is up to the discretion of the stewards.
In Britain, a jockey is only allowed to encourage their mount seven times during any flat race.
Other areas that require harmonisation include what gear jockeys and horses can and cannot use or wear, and the specified weight of such items.
After Speculative Bid came out of the stalls without jockey Jamie Spencer at the start of the International Stakes at Ascot last month, what constitutes a non-runner at the start of a race is a contentious issue, too.
Then there is the thorny problem of race-day medication, which continues to blight American racing and is a serious obstacle to the total harmonisation of rules internationally.
It is clear that racing needs an international set of rules, and although some progress has been made, the sport is still woefully short of where it should be.
The time is right to sort this out. The next meeting of the IHRRC, and every meeting thereafter, needs to produce tangible results.
Kelly does not shirk the challenge but says he needs more time.
“It can be difficult to achieve uniformity given that industry participants, interest groups and the supporting public in general have operated under a certain set of rules and regulations for many years, which can make changing such rules and regulations a daunting prospect,” he said.
“This never makes change unachievable but can result in the process often taking some time to effect.”
THE DEFINITION The Category One philosophy states:
“If the interferer finished ahead of the sufferer and has not improved its placing as a result of the interference, or stated differently, but for the interference, the sufferer would not have beaten the interferer, the interferer retains its place.” This philosophy is adopted by Great Britain, Ireland and most countries in the Asian Racing Federation, such as Australia, Hong Kong, India, Korea, New Zealand, Singapore, South Africa and the UAE.
Category Two states:
“If the interferer is guilty of causing the interference, and such interference has affected the result of the race, the interferer should be demoted behind the sufferer.” France, Germany, the United States and countries in South America are using this philosophy.
COMMENTARY: AND MAY THE BEST HORSE WIN
Unfortunately harmonisation of the rules of racing boils down to a question of philosophy, so it is not as clear cut as some might have you believe.
At the heart of the Category One and Category Two problem is whether it is more important to deter and punish the interferer or try to select the best horse in the race.
Horse racing is a sport and sport should always be about identifying the fastest or strongest, not the most maligned.
When breeding and the future of the thoroughbred is also taken in to consideration, the importance of the best horse winning is magnified.
Three incidents in October underline that the principle of the best horse should be the underlying one.
At the Prix de l’Arc de Triomphe meeting, Cirrus Des Aigles was demoted from the Prix Dollar and a day later Gleneagles was demoted in the Prix Jean-Luc Lagadere for the smallest interference.
A few weeks after that, Bayern was allowed to keep the Breeders’ Cup Classic from horses such as Toast Of New York, California Chrome and Shared Belief despite causing chaos at the start.
Although stewards could not have taken this in to account at the time, subsequent events have shown Cirrus Des Aigles, Gleneagles and Shared Belief are much better horses than those placed ahead of them by the Category Two philosophy.
Of course, the onus is on adapting to your surroundings in international racing and ,given that the Arlington stewards have previously disqualified several European horses, the Secret Gesture team should have been better briefed.
There is almost no question, however, that Secret Gesture was the best horse in the Beverly D Stakes. Her value as a broodmare – a horse used for breeding – hangs in the balance as the Arlington race would have been her first win at Grade 1 level.
Racing clearly needs to open up right up this debate in order to reach a conclusion, and quickly. Otherwise these issues will continue to make a laughing stock out of our sport in comparison to truly global sports such as football, tennis or cricket.
MOSSE WANTS TO SEE A DECISION ... AND SOON
Legendary jockey Gerald Mosse says the French, German and American interference rules are unjust and that the sooner there are a global set of rules for racing, the better.
The 48-year-old Frenchman is one of the world’s most experienced riders, having secured Group or Grade 1 honours in Hong Kong, England, Australia, Canada and his homeland, in addition to riding Jim And Tonic to victory in the 2001 Dubai Duty Free at Nad Al Sheba.
He has also ridden at the Breeders’ Cup, the Japan Cup and the Singapore Cup.
Mosse, who started riding professionally in 1983, understands the nuances behind the rules of racing in most jurisdictions and believes the Category Two protest philosophy lets jockeys off lightly.
“A horse should not be disqualified just for minor interference,” he said from his Hong Kong base. “The way the French and Americans do things, it is not fair on the trainer or the owner. If a jockey makes a mistake in a race they should be reprimanded, and sometimes heavily. Why should an owner or trainer pay for a jockey’s mistake?
“If you make the penalties stern enough, jockeys will respect the rules.
“I strongly believe there should be one worldwide set of rules. It would be so much easier for everybody concerned. You look at the whip rules. In some countries you can whip a lot, in others hardly any at all. How is that right?”
Despite assurances to The National by Henri Pouret, the director Of racing at France Galop, that the harmonisation of racing rules remains “in the DNA of France Galop”, seasoned observer Scott Burton thinks it is likely that France will move from its present position with regards to the interference rule.
Burton is the France correspondent for the UK-based Racing Post, and he believes the French rules perform a function as a deterrent and ensure there are fewer incidents.
“Day in day out, there are fewer interference and whip incidents in France when compared to somewhere like England, no doubt,” he said.
“In the apprentice schools, jockeys are constantly reminded about the use of the whip and how it can land them in hot water.
“I don’t sense there is any desire to move towards a thinking that the best horse wins here.
“I speak to French trainers and jockeys all the time. There are a lot of them who admire the Category One principle, and although those who make the laws like the idea of international harmonisation, behind the scenes it is more a matter of international rules are fine providing they are our rules. I think that is probably the problem the world over.”
sports@thenational.ae
Follow us on twitter at @NatSportUAE
