The changing of and subsequent revisions to the whip rules in Britain caused a storm of debate back in 2011/’12 but, as jockeys adjusted to the new regulations, the issue only rears its head every so often these days.

More often than not, what has rekindled the discussion has been the breaking of the rules by the winning rider in a high-profile race, leading to accusations that jockeys still ride to ‘win at all costs’ on the big days. Unfortunately this has often led to attention being diverted from the horses and their performances on the most high-profile of stages.

It also worries me that there seems to be an increasing number of people who believe that the only effective deterrent is to disqualify horses whose riders have broken the whip rules.

This view may seem logical and fair, but think about the ramifications of introducing such a rule. Imagine how damaging it would be for the sport if the first and/or second home in the Aintree Grand National were disqualified due to their riders breaking the whip rules? It would be horrendous. Such a rule would only serve to make a rod for horse racing to be beaten with, not to mention souring owners, trainers and the betting public, who would undoubtedly feel aggrieved for being robbed of victory for no other reason than their rider tried too hard.

My view is that the discussion shouldn’t be about what is an appropriate punishment for breaking the rules, it should be a debate about the rules themselves.

INSECURITY

The British whip rules are wrong. Badly wrong. Unfortunately, this was another case of British racing showing just how insecure it is regarding how non-racing fans view the sport, with it opting to make fundamental changes to the sport in an effort to appease what is largely an ill-informed public rather than seeking to educate them as to the realities of whip use in racing.

The salient point in this whole discussion, the one that the debate should start and end with, is that the whip is not a welfare issue in racing. It is a light, foam-filled piece of equipment that is designed to make a loud crack rather than hurt the animal. Cases of a horse being marked by a whip have been exceptionally rare since the new style of whip was introduced.

Anyone who has ridden or dealt with thoroughbred horses knows that it is an absolutely necessary piece of equipment to safely control and get the best from the vast majority of animals. The tiny number of racing jurisdictions that bowed to pressure from uninformed public opinion and banned whips have experienced a wide array of unintended consequences, the most concerning being unethical training methods designed to heighten the flight instinct of horses in the absence of a whip as well as the rise to prominence of free-going tearaway horses that would not prosper in normal circumstances, which will have long-term negative ramifications for the thoroughbred breed in those non-whip jurisdictions.

JOHN McCRIRICK

Of course, it is tricky from a perception perspective to get this truth across to a sceptical public that instinctively associate the term “whip” with pain and punishment. It also doesn’t help when a racing personality with such a mainstream presence as John McCririck continues to loudly broadcast his over-the-top and ill-informed personal opinions on whip use, referring to it as “barbaric” and comparing it to the beating of household pets and domestic abuse.

By changing the whip rules as they did, British racing essentially gave the high-profile impression that the whip is indeed a welfare issue and its use needed to be curtailed. This only reinforced the views of the innocently ignorant and, even more worryingly, the out-and-out enemies of racing who are actively campaigning to damage the sport and have it banned outright. Giving ground to these people is a massive mistake, as supporters of National Hunt racing in Australia found out when their efforts to appease the unappeasable eventually led to the sport being banned entirely for a brief period.

Not only are the British rules wrong in terms of the impression they give, their structure is very poor. Having a set number of whip strikes that trigger an enquiry (seven on the flat, eight over jumps), regardless of the distance of the race, is just plain silly. Allowing the same threshold of strikes for a five-furlong sprint as for a two-mile staying race is just not logical. Furthermore, there is a massive variety in the style, force and intention of whip strikes and setting a fixed number of permitted strikes as a trigger point only encourages riders to hit their mounts even harder than they would otherwise.

CHANGE THE RULES

Of course, I’m not suggesting that riders should be allowed use their whip with absolute impunity, but the reality is that all riders are aware that a horse only has so much to give and will only respond to a certain amount of pressure. Rather than continuing to persist with silly rules that invite a whip-related PR disaster on all of British racing’s biggest stages, the rules should revert to what they were before the initial changes in 2011.

The message should be put across loud and clear that the whip is not a welfare issue, but that there is a definition of what constitutes appropriate use.

Personally, I have no great concern for how many times a rider uses his whip in a race as long as it is applied to the correct area of the horse with appropriate action/force and the horse is given adequate time to respond in between strikes.

Thankfully, the Irish racing authorities have shown much more assuredness in their regulation of whip use. Despite coming under a lot of pressure to replicate the British whip rules at the time, the Irish made what was absolutely the right decision in not setting any sort of fixed number of permitted strikes. The acting stewards police the issue effectively and it is very rare that comment is made about what is considered inappropriate whip use in an Irish race.

Irish racing is far from perfect, but the British racing authorities would do well to take a leaf out of the Irish book on the whip issue before more damage is done to the reputation of British racing because of their ill-advised whip rules.

Comments are welcome on Twitter (@kevinblake2011). The best ones may be published in The Irish Field on Saturday.