S’manga Khumalo. Victim or the villain?
Racing is a game famously built on opinion, or more often, differences of opinion. Most of the time, opinions are of the ‘vive la difference’ “I think my horse is faster than your horse” variety and we settle the matter amicably out on the track. However, sometimes opinions can be a bit more serious. Opinions which enjoy the backing of the rule book can be more serious still and can end up having pretty far-reaching effects, writes Robyn Louw.
Opinions opinions
We are currently witnessing one such difference of opinion in the case of jockey S’manga Khumalo. It started on 5 November 2013 and what seemed a pretty ordinary Tuesday at the Vaal, turned out to be a memorable one for a number of reasons. S’manga Khumalo and Weiho Mawing enjoyed a triple on the card, Gauteng Guineas winner, Louis The King, won on debut in race 9 and the last race on the card sticks in the memory for a rather impressive win by the Woodruff-trained Rake’s Chestnut, who seemed to follow in his sire’s footsteps, drawing away from the field to win by 6.25 lengths. However, while I’d been watching the front of the field, the Stipes had been watching the back and jockey S’manga Khumalo was called in and advised that there would be an enquiry into his handling of Supertube.
The Inquiry was duly held on Monday, 2 December 2013, chaired by Mr Neville Daniels and assisted by Mr G Timm and S’manga was charged with contravening rule 62.2.1 (more commonly known as the “pulling up” rule). Sorry to have to get a little technical, but the Rulebook makes for somewhat dry reading and for those who have not read it cover to cover, this pertains to the rules of Running. There are a number of subdivisions to the rule, but S’manga was charged with contravention of the most severe form of the rule. The details of the charge were that after Supertube stumbled at the start, S’manga failed to take measures to improve his position in the first 900 metres of the race, and that in the final 500 metres he failed to ride with his normal vigour and determination. The NHA press release states “Since the Jockey was unsure how to plea, the Board entered a plea of not guilty on his behalf, but found him guilty of the charge. The Inquiry Board imposed a penalty of a suspension from riding in races for a period of sixty days.”
S’manga launched an Appeal against both the finding and the penalty. The Appeal proceedings were originally scheduled for 12 March, but had to be postponed due to inclement weather and they finally convened on Friday, 14 March. The 3-man Appeal Board comprised attorney and previous chairman of the NHA, Jonathan Witts-Hewinson, with fellow Board members, attorney and Executive Director of Phumelela, Mpho Ramafalo and former chief stipendiary steward, Dudley Feldman. They dismissed the Appeal and declared the prescribed fee to be forfeited. The Board are preparing detailed reasons for its decision, to be published in due course, which I for one am looking forward to reading as I confess to being more than a little puzzled by the matter.
White Elephant ?
Let’s kick off by dealing with the elephant in the room. S’manga is black. We live in an era of quota systems in sport, Affirmative Action, BEE, the EFF and probably a few more TLA’s and ‘transformation’ is the watchword on everyone’s lips. So, if we can make a fuss about ‘the first black jockey’ to win the Summer Cup and the Vodacom Durban July, then I should be able to say that this incident means that we face the prospect of losing our first black champion jockey. And probably a little more besides. S’manga has become a familiar face in the winner’s enclosure, on our TV’s and in our print media and in the same way that ‘big’ horses have fans, so too do jockeys. There can be no question that S’manga’s high profile wins in the Summer Cup and Durban July have earned him a loyal fan base and a two month suspension will surely have some effect on the punting rand. Should this matter? No, I don’t think the colour of one’s skin should make any difference, but I think the following should.
It is common knowledge that S’manga is chasing the jockey title this year, so it is no surprise to note that of the 10 races carded for that day at the Vaal (one of which was a work riders’ race), S’manga had 8 rides. Of his 8 rides, the results he chalked up were 3rd (0.15 lengths), deadheat for 2nd (2.75 lengths), 1st (2 lengths, despite dropping his whip), 1st (0.25 lengths), 1st (1.75 lengths), 11th (8.25 lengths, with the course vet pronouncing the horse not striding out on its left fore), 12th (12.50 lengths) and the fateful 5th (8.05 lengths after stumbling at the start).
Too many questions
Those do not look like the results of someone who would suddenly pull up a horse, but stranger things have happened and I am admittedly no expert, so I canvassed a bunch of other people to see what they made of it. The opinions vary right across the spectrum (should have seen that coming, really!). A number of people feel that there are too many uncertainties about the ride and are pleased that the NHA have finally chosen to take a hard line on something. Others feel that there are at least as many questions on the other side of the coin.
The ride does appear to be a patient one, and the horse only gets one smack, but then, Rake’s Chestnut won by 6 lengths going away – there is simply no question that anyone in the field, let alone Supertube, was going to threaten him, so how often should a first timer, who has already had a wobbly start, be smacked across the line on his first outing?
In the past few years with the big cheques on offer, we’ve seen some fantastic contests for the championship, with rival jockeys fighting all the way down to the wire. So it is worth mentioning that S’manga has been riding for 13 years. He has been at the top of his game for the past season and is pulling out all the stops to be champion jockey. At the time of the Appeal, he had logged 123 rides more than Muzi Yeni (2nd on the log) and a massive 238 rides more than Fransie Herholdt in 3rd. It’s not exactly conclusive evidence, but it does seem odd that after all that hard work, he’d suddenly choose not to try on a horse.
Another case for sectional timing
It is regrettable that we do not have sectional timing as that might put the matter beyond doubt once and for all, but I pulled some information from Computaform and Formgrids. The Computaform reflects that Supertube clocked the 3rd fastest 400m to finish time and in fact, Rake’s Chestnut crossed the line in 81.6 sec. By comparison, in the previous race Louis The King, also carrying 58kg over 1400m, crossed the line in a time of 82.9. In two other races run over the same course and distance that day, one was won in a time of 82.55 and the other in 83.15, with all the horses being 3 years of age and carrying 58kg. Despite his messy start, Supertube seems to get himself together and by about the 1000m mark, they are galloping at the back of the field. The horse only really seems to find his stride at about the 600m mark after which he makes up ground steadily along the rail over the last 500m, unleashes a run from the 200m and is only just touched off for 4th place, crossing the line in 83.06. In fact, Supertube is one of the few horses making up ground, while others are losing it.
S’manga has never been charged with a contravention of this rule before. There doesn’t appear to be anything untoward in the betting, and in fact, they started joint favourite. Supertube is reportedly a big-framed, lanky horse who takes a while to find his stride. It was his debut run and his first visit to the Vaal. S’manga had never sat on the horse before and to crown it all, when the gates opened, the horse pecked and stumbled quite visibly. Did he pull the horse up? Or was he merely being patient with a green baby on its first outing ? And whatever the reasons for the ride, does the punishment fit the crime ?
Robert Bloomberg
Robert Bloomberg, who acted as S’manga’s legal counsel during the appeal expressed disbelief at the ruling. “I am absolutely dismayed and shocked at the punitive measures meted out by the NHA. When I represented Andrew Fortune at an Inquiry under the self-same Rule, he was fined R50k! S’manga’s 2 month suspension, based on his average earnings, is tantamount to a R460k fine, never mind the jockey’s championship and how this may impact on his future overseas ambitions. The Appeal Board has basically found him guilty of “pulling up” “Supertube” despite there being no intent, no motive and no evidence other than a ride read in isolation, on a first-timer that stumbled and then nodded a second time shortly after the jump. Piere Strydom who won on the horse at his 4th start and in an affidavit actually stated that the horse “was still green and inexperienced.” As we have no further recourse ‘in house’, the NHA has been notified that we intend taking the matter on review to the High Court. It is regrettable as no-one benefits from court action except lawyers, but S’manga is determined to clear his name.”
Justin Vermaak
S’manga’s agent, Justin Vermaak was similarly shocked by the outcome. “S’manga was understandably shattered by Friday’s decision, but we have had enormous support from all across the industry, we have regrouped and are planning to go to the High Court. We will go all the way if necessary. That has given us something to aim for and the prospect of some light at the end of the tunnel, but Robert (Bloomberg) is handling all that. In the meantime, S’manga is allowed to keep riding and we are just staying positive and focussing on our goal, which is to keep him at the top of the log and to win the championship. Thanks to all our supporters out there.”
Conclusion
I looked up the definition of the word “opinion”. One definition says it is “a view or judgement formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge.” I’ve not seen the official tapes or scrutinised the ride from every angle and I’ve not read the reasons behind the NHA’s choice of Rule or their reasons for dismissing the Appeal. I wasn’t in the saddle that day, so it is impossible to hazard an objective opinion as to what really happened, but I did think a person was generally judged innocent until proven guilty. Not the other way round.
