South Africa’s new twelve-strike crop rule is now almost a way of life for local jockeys as we move on to other more pressing issues on the debate menu.
Keanen Steyn (photo: Tracy Robertson)
We have, however, asked the NHA earlier this week to explain why jockey Keanen Steyn’s recent contravention of Rule 58.10.2 (read in conjunction with Guideline M on the use of the crop), incurred on Merengue in the third at Turffontein on 23 June led to a suspension – instead of the seemingly standard R1000 or R1500 that has been a regular occurence since it was instituted in early.
The Steyn press release indicates that the Inquiry Board found him guilty and after considering his history of contravening this Rule and Guideline,imposed a penalty of a suspension from riding in races for a period of 7 days.
We put it to the regulator that without specific knowledge of the history or background, what does the average reader infer from their cursory statement?
While it may seem obvious to some, it all hinges on earnings, surely? One would obviously need to know something of the history to come to a conclusion.
We also asked that, while loss of earnings and time off go hand in hand, why did they shift from fiscal punishment to time for this particular offence?
Interestingly, the deterrent aspect for jockeys was highlighted by British jockey Hayley Turner’s (seen above) admission that the prospect of a two or three-month suspension would have been enough to deter her from breaking the whip rules aboard her historic Royal Ascot winner Thanks Be in the Sandringham last month.
Turner went over the limit of seven strikes on the Flat by four as she became only the second female jockey and first in 32 years, to ride a winner at the royal meeting, leading to a nine-day suspension and £1,600 fine.
Watch that race here
Thanks Be’s trainer Charlie Fellowes revealed in a Racing Post column recently that he felt that his first Royal Ascot winner should have been disqualified, although Turner took a different view. She told the Racing Post:
“I think Charlie has a point but I don’t entirely agree with the horse losing the race. I’ve discussed it with loads of people and feel it certainly would have taken a harsher penalty for me not to have gone over the limit at Ascot. It might be good for the horse not to lose the race but for the jockey to receive a more severe ban. If there was the prospect of a two or three-month ban I wouldn’t have done it because it’s the middle of the season and I have a mortgage to pay and it wouldn’t have been worth it for a Royal Ascot handicap.”
Speaking as part of the ITV Racing team on the opening day of Newmarket’s July festival, Turner added: “I had no idea I had gone over the whip limit and I think it was a bit of ‘Ascot fever’.
Also opposed to Fellowes’ view was on-course bookmaker Gary Wiltshire, who believes disqualifying winners would ‘wreak havoc’ in the betting ring.
Wiltshire said: “It’s a nice idea from a welfare point of view to disqualify runners for overuse of the whip, but I don’t really know how they can run it.”
