SWIFT RESOLUTION REQUIRED TO EASE RACING’S PAIN

By Graham Potter | Friday, September 11, 2009

Racing suffered badly yesterday all because of the fact that stubbornness and common-sense could not find a compromise.

The decision by the Australian Racing Board (ARB) to not make amendments to the controversial new whip rule prompted a radical response from jockeys in four states with meetings at Ballarat, Hawkesbury, Ipswich and Northam being shut down by industrial action.

The chain reaction which brought racing grinding to a halt at these venues, with its associated loss of income and loss of face for an industry in dispute, stemmed directly from the ARB’s decision to turn down the request to modify a law which the majority of racing participants believe to be unworkable.

After initial action was taken at Ballarat, jockeys in the other states showed solidarity in making the point of how serious they are about this issue.

The jockeys are not alone in their opinion of the new whip rule. Most stake-holders, the actual participants in the game, have quickly understood that the new whip law is a flawed system and support the need for the rule to be modified. However, not all of the stake-holders agreed with the jockeys’ choice of action. Some, in fact, were very upset by it.

The bottom line is that nobody was in a place where they wanted to be ... but they all knew why they were there.

The stake-holders have met the ARB halfway. They have accepted the change to the type of whip used and they have gone as far as to trial the whip rule and give a ‘fair go’ to an idea which seemed to have a huge question mark behind it. Now the ARB needs to return the compliment, particularly as all that is being called for is a minor modification of the rule.

One month might seem a short time period to have adequately assessed the matter, but with the number of races held across the country is it more than enough time to gauge a valid response to the rules viability.

In terms of gathering information there is no difference between one month and six months, except that in the six month spread you will have six times the amount controversy.

The industrial action yesterday highlighted the point of separation between the jockeys and the ARB. The choice of industrial action split the stakeholders. Racing was hurting. To all intents and purposes its participants were fighting amongst themselves to the delight of those who oppose the sport. Score another win for the animal activists.

Newscasts, by not going to specific details, also put racing in a bad light. Imagine the reaction of the non-racing fraternity to the report that jockeys went on strike because they can’t hit a horse with a whip. It was coverage racing did not need. Score two for the animal activists.

There is a big picture here which can rapidly get out of hand if not reined in. The matter needs a swift outcome. Any drawn out process will cause more damage to the sport.

It will all be about attitude between the opposing parties going into the next important phase of proceedings.

Top trainer Lee Freedman best summed up the situation.

“The way we have got to look at this is that the ARB have brought in a rule here which, to my knowledge, almost universally through all the participants in racing ... from owners to trainers to jockeys ... feel is unworkable and needs a minor adjustment.

“That’s all the Jockeys Association was asking for ... not the scrapping of the rule, but an adjustment to it that everybody could live with. The ARB basically thumbed their noses at them and said we’ll just defer it for a period of time ... till February.

“Now, as far as going forward is concerned, I think the jockeys have signalled to the ARB that they are serious in getting this issue addressed.

"I think racing has got to have some leadership here.

"These two parties, with the support of the owners and trainers, have to sit down again and get a resolution to this, because we can’t have both parties retreating to neutral corners and not addressing the issue.

“Racing is the only one that is going to suffer and I think we’ve all got to put egos behind us and get the issue sorted out. The industry I think has clearly told the ARB that we are not satisfied with the rules ... so, who are they listening to?”

*Go to the article ‘Time to take a stand’ posted on HRO yesterday (September 10) to learn more about the concerns with regard to the new whip rule.