THE SUNSHINE COAST NEWSPAPER COLUMN - 'PREJUDICIAL CONDUCT' RULE NEEDS TO BE MORE CLEARLY DEFINED

By Graham Potter | Sunday, May 12, 2013

Graham Potter writes a weekly column for the Sunshine Coast daily. Due to demand from those having trouble accessing the paper these columns are now also published on HRO courtesy of the Sunshine Coast daily

According to reports, trainer Robert Heathcote was a very angry man earlier this week when Queensland Racing Stewards found him guilty of ‘conduct prejudicial to the image, or interests, or welfare of racing.’

I have a different description of Heathcote’s response. I’d say he was hurt … in fact severely offended … by what he considered to be unjust treatment and that, for several days at least, the wound struck deep. Anger merely masked the true emotion.

That is my interpretation, not his.

But I might be wrong. Such is the open nature of the word ‘interpretation.’

And therein lies the problem facing racing’s licensees.

In theory ... and racing authorities will play this tune … of course all licensees, who are bound to a code of conduct, certainly do have the right to share their opinion without unfair sanction and if licensees have any specific perception to the contrary, that is not the racing authorities’ problem.

In practise however, for the most part, licensees are at risk when voicing their opinions. It isn’t rocket science. They are at risk because of the open nature of the word ‘interpretation.’

They might think they are saying one thing. It might be interpreted in another sense altogether and when the ultimate power in deciding the ‘correct’ interpretation lies with stewards, the police arm of the ruling body, it is obviously more prudent for licensees to be more careful than careless with their thoughts and words, in case their opinions land them in hot water.

The problem in essence is that, as dictated by the Rules Of Racing, stewards do not have to prove the guilt of any party whose opinion might attract a ‘conduct prejudicial to the image, or interests, or welfare of racing’ charge. They merely have to adjudicate on what version they believe to be true and hand down that verdict.

In other words, they have to give their opinion, which translates into the deciding vote.

To be fair, that at times must be a thankless task but, equally, it must be an untenable position for anybody with completely innocent intentions to have a ‘conduct prejudicial to the image, or interests, or welfare of racing’ decision go against them when they meant no harm.

Ask Robert Heathcote.

So, can any lasting good come out of the much debated Heathcote saga?

Heathcote’s case was a particular issue. Away from that example, the general principle involved still very much indicates that this is an area which racing needs to refine.

Of course, people who are in blatant breach of the rule should be dealt with as harshly as necessary, as dictated by the particular circumstances of their individual cases, but racing also has to grow a thicker skin as it strives to survive in the gambling jungle.

Some will say racing has a soft underbelly and that it has been super-sensitive to criticism for too long. Someone once described this to me by saying, ‘you give them a pin-prick and they act like you have broken their arm’.

Not all criticism is counter-productive. The best criticism is constructive criticism which is best fuelled by lively debate which, in turn, plays best when allowed an open forum where opinions are put forward without fear or favour.

Licensees, and this might surprise some people, are actually VIP’s in racing and should be recognised as such. They are at the coal-face of the industry and are thus best placed to put forward well-informed opinions and suggestions, some of which could make all the difference to the value of the racing product moving forward.

To me, conduct prejudicial to the image, or interests, or welfare of racing is too much of a grey area that arguably currently threatens freedom of speech for the reasons described above.

Until that rule is redefined with more clear parameters it could keep racing on the back foot, which is not where racing needs to be at this time.

More articles