An objection at Turffontein on Tuesday has come under the spotlight with arguments for and against the decision to uphold it.
But more seriously, questions have been raised about the racing regulator effectively allowing an environment where the independence of the Stipendiary Stewards who made the decision, can be brought into question.
The perception of bias is based on the reasonable man test and that is all that is required to raise even a minimal suggestion of any perceived conflict of interest.
Nobody is suggesting that anybody acted improperly or is of questionable morals, after the ruling that followed the eighth at Turffontein on Tuesday.
But when the National Horseracing Authority allowed a father-in-law to be a member of a Stipendiary Board which presided over a matter where his son-in-law was the objecting jockey, they were entering dangerous territory with eyes wide open, and frankly doing neither racing nor a very well-respected racing family any favours in the process.
And when NHA Racing Control Executive Arnold Hyde defended the issue on length of service and experience, as well as the impartiality and fair treatment by all members of the board, in a response to a communication from Stuart Pettigrew, the trainer on the receiving end of the upheld decision, Hyde was probably missing the point.
That’s because the perception of bias is there and it’s not about the morals, integrity or experience of any of the gentlemen who made the decision.This is about the logistics of setting racing up for a fail.
The Sporting Post has not had sight of Mr Pettigrew’s original communication to the racing regulator but received a letter on Wednesday morning from KZN racing expert Hilton Witz, who said he was not questioning the outcome of the objection, but the composition of the board who were on duty for the objection hearing.
He writes:
According to the stipes report Mr Hoffman was one of three stipes on duty plus the race day Chairman. The jockey who lodged the objection was Calvin Habib who is Mr Hoffman’s son-in-law.
Nowhere in the stipes report does it mention that Mr Hoffman was asked to excuse himself from the board who voted on the outcome of the objection or that he asked to recuse himself.
In my opinion this is a major conflict of interest and in no ways maintains the integrity levels that the NHRA are trying to maintain. In fact it places further doubt in the public’s mind that the game is not run and policed properly.
Simply put, Mr Hoffman should have been completely removed from the objection panel and mention made of this in the stipes report.
Mr Witz’ letter was sent to the National Horseracing Authority on Wednesday morning but no response was received at the end of the working day.
0n the subject of a good or bad decision, that debate is likely to rage.
Watch the replay here:
The Stipes reported:
Leaving the 300m, EMERALD PRINCESS (C Habib) was carried in by QUEEN OF SMOKE (*P Mxoli), which was directed inwards to obtain a run on the inside of MIKE’S CHICK (K de Melo). This resulted in EMERALD PRINCESS (C Habib) and QUEEN OF SMOKE (*P Mxoli) coming together and brushing on a number of occasions.
A race review was called by a member of the Stipendiary Board which was followed by an Objection being lodged by Jockey C Habib, on behalf of the second-placed horse, EMERALD PRINCESS, against the winner, QUEEN OF SMOKE (*P Mxoli), on the grounds intimidation and interference in the concluding stages. The Objection Board, after reviewing the patrol film of the race and hearing all the evidence put forward by the connections, was of the opinion that EMERALD PRINCESS (C Habib), but for this incident, would have finished in front of QUEEN OF SMOKE (*P Mxoli) and therefore upheld the Objection and amended the Judges result.
While it is believed that top jockeys Richard Fourie and Piere Strydom have supported the decision to uphold the objection, Robert Bloomberg said that he, and clearly many others that called the Sporting Post’s offices today, beg to differ from the opinions expressed by Messrs Fourie and Strydom.
“As they express their professional opinions, I do mine having dealt with these type of incidents on numerous occasions spanning decades. Interestingly, their colleague Anton Marcus, as well as the likes of astute racing pros Darryl Maree, Gabi Soma, Vaughan Marshall, Alistair Cohen and Matthew Stevens, all concur with me. I will even go one step further and state that I have shared the footage with a few international stipes and they are all similarly incredulous at the decision to uphold the objection. None of us even believe that an objection was warranted. It is common cause that Mxoli was in front of Habib and already ‘in the gap’. In order to create a ‘hole’ for himself, Habib forces himself into the gap and most importantly is the one who initiates the contact. All Mxoli does, and to which he is perfectly entitled, is to hold his ground. Look at the mowed lines before the first contact is made by Habib and see how straight Mxoli was going.”
Experienced former jockey Derek Martin writes on social media:
‘The lines on the grass clearly shows the blue colours moves off his line first contacting the horse on his left, which leans back onto him in reaction. But the blue colours (Habib) initiated the whole sequence. Then later he moves even more to his left with the yellow colours moving left to avoid him! In my opinion the blue colours were in the wrong.’
