FROM THE SHERIFF'S DESK - THE NONSENSICAL 'MONEY BACK' IDEA THAT SHOULD NOT EVEN BE CONSIDERED

By John Schreck | Thursday, February 25, 2016

John Schreck, a former Chief Steward in both Sydney and Hong Kong, has seen both the colourful and the dark sides of racing. His wealth of experience and his deep knowledge of racing matters across the board is unquestioned and the reputation he built as a racing ‘lawman’ remains firmly entrenched in racing’s history. Shreck’s personal blog, ‘From the Sheriff’s Desk', appears exclusively on HRO.

There has been a lot of talk about jockeys who weigh in light and how those who backed the horses involved should have their money refunded.

As it stands now that horse is disqualified and the punters who back that horse lose their money.

To suggest that those who back a horse that has a start (weight-wise) and is beaten should get their money back is quite ludicrous.

The ones who will pay if that money is refunded are those who backed the winner because they will have deductions from their winning bets to refund money to those who backed a loser that weighed in light.

It is just a crazy suggestion. It would drive the sport backwards.

Horses who had a start and who cannot win a race ... well, there is no argument that can be mounted for those who backed the horse to have money refunded at all.

To give a refund for a horse weighing in light, putting all the opportunity for malpractice in those circumstances aside, is simply unfair to those who have backed the winner.

You can possibly make an argument when a horse wins a race and weighs in light to have money refunded.

I wouldn’t.

To repeat, to give money back to those punters for a horse that is beaten and weighs in light is just nonsensical and the idea should not even be considered.

*********************************************************************************************************

I have been asked how big a role I think the jockey’s argument and presentation plays in protest hearings.

Firstly, it is a well-known fact that some jockeys are better advocates than others. John Marshall was wonderful. So was Roy Higgins. So was Mick Dittman. So was Ron Quinton.

They were very, very good advocates in the stewards room in my time.

These days I don’t think a jockey’s advocacy will sway a decision with regard to a protest because any incident is there for the whole world to see. You can basically measure how much ground a horse has lost.

In the pre-film days the jockey’s evidence and the way it was presented might have been a factor but, now, with tangible evidence on the screen it is very hard for a jockey or trainer to sell something that is not there ... although they try to, of course they do, and you can’t blame them for that.

You expect it from them actually but an experienced steward’s panel won’t be fooled.

So, to answer the question, as well as jockeys might try to sell their argument in a protest hearing, unless there is tangible evidence to support their view on the film they will not win the fight.

*******************************************************************************************************

I have also been asked how racing officials should manage comments on social media and when are those comments deemed to have crossed the line?

The truth is I don’t know the exact answer to that question.

The only thing I can say to licensees is that there is a rule in place that if they bring the sport into disrepute they can be penalised. It is a very broad, open ranging rule and, in this day and age, it does include behaviour on social media.

If it can be established that someone has brought the sport into disrepute they leave themselves open to be penalised.

It must be remembered that when somebody takes out a license in a racing organisation or when somebody takes out a membership at a golf club, they have responsibilities to that organisation.

If they don’t conform to the rules of that organisation there are consequences. They can even be expelled from it.

It all comes down to respecting a code of conduct.

Being a licensed person is not a God given right. It is a privilege that is granted and if they don’t like to abide by the rules they can go somewhere else.

When a licensee signs his or her application or any formal paper work involved in between themselves and the racing authority that is a written contract between that person and the sport.

As happens anywhere, if they breach that contract they are liable to be penalised and they can have no complaints about that.