October
AugustYou're all wrong
Winning Post readers, you are starting to sound like a broken record. From now on, as soon as I see the word “do-gooders” in a letter I will skip to the next.
Teething problems with the new whip rule were inevitable. It is not necessary to spell them out in mind-numbing detail over 400 words, making exactly the same points as three other readers did in the previous issue.
Unfortunately, people, racing is not conducted on an island inhabited exclusively by Racing Men, Gentlemen of the Turf, country squires, knockabout blokes, beaut sorts, coat tuggers, touts, colourful identities, emus, battling hoops and strappers with hearts of gold.
No doubt enthusiasts of dogfights, cockfights, bullfights and snuff movies can all point to the rich history of their pursuits and wish society would leave them alone.
Sadly racing is not conducted in a bubble, and in any case racing's bubble is aging and shrinking (Bruce Clark 29/8).
We've got to get those young city folk on board, and they just don't like seeing a little fella belt the bejesus out of a nice horsey, however misinformed they may be. And they're never going to like it.
None of your readers has yet enlightened us as to why Australian jockeys are congenitally incapable of conforming to rules cheerfully obeyed by jockeys in most other jurisdictions in the world — and are obeyed by Australian jockeys when they ride in those jurisdictions.
It seems to me that all these teething problems could be solved by one simple expedient: giving the stewards the power to relegate a horse where illegal whip use has been found to have improved its finishing position.
This would eliminate what might be termed the John Singleton Factor.
And wouldn't it be nice if he just shut up occasionally?
Cremorne (Vic)