Home » Racing & Sport » Leather Reins And Forfeits

Leather Reins And Forfeits

Frivolity costs jockey R4887

The forfeit of an objection  deposit and the use of leather reins, outlawed some 15 years ago, are featured in the latest Stipes Report published after Friday’s Fairview meeting.

Deposits are lodged in the course of objections as a means of showing commitment by the party objecting. Jockey Collen Storey is R4887 out of pocket after the seventh race at Fairview on Friday.

Emmanuel Kacnis trains The Carpenter

Following the running of this race, Storey, the rider of The Carpenter lodged an objection against the winner Highland Hero (W Agrella) on the grounds of intimidation in the closing stages. An objection Board was established and found that whilst the winner Highland Hero shifted ground towards the inside, he was sufficiently clear of The Carpenter in the concluding stages.

After due consideration, the Board over-ruled the objection, allowed the judges results to stand and deemed this objection to be frivolous and the objection fee of R4887 was forfeited.

In an addendum to yesterday’s report, an investigation was opened into stable employee Z Xamle acting on behalf of Trainer S J Snaith attempting to present Star Chestnut to race in a set of leather reins.

Star Chestnut – had his reins replaced (Pauline Herman Photography)

On enquiry, the leather reins were discovered prior to the start of race 7 in the saddling enclosure.

The Stipendiary Board advised Mr Snaith that leather reins were prohibited in terms of Rule 58.7.2 and issued an admission of guilt for a contravention of Rule 58.7.2 in that Trainer S J Snaith presented Star Chestnut  to race equipped with leather reins which are prohibited. A fine of R1000 was imposed.

Star Chestnut subsequently won the Fairview Mile.

Leather reins were deemed dangerous and banned 15 years ago.

Have Your Say

Comments Policy
The Sporting Post encourages everyone to feel free to comment in the spirit of enlightening the topic being discussed, to add opinions or correct errors. All posts are accepted on the condition that The Sporting Post can at any time alter, correct or remove comments, either partially or entirely.

All posters are required to post under their real and verified names, you can adjust your display name on your account page or to send corrections privately to the Editor. The Sporting Post will not publish comments submitted anonymously or under pseudonyms.

The views of any individuals that are published are NOT necessarily the views of The Sporting Post.

15 comments on “Leather Reins And Forfeits

  1. James George says:

    Jockey Collen Storey is punished by having to forfeit R 4887 for lodging, in the Stipes opinion, a frivolous objection.
    But at another time a Stipendiary Steward Mr. T Khanyile is promoted to Chief Stipendiary Steward for upholding a wholly groundless and frivolous objection.

  2. Graham Hurlstone-Jones says:

    We all thought the jockey on Being Fabulous had pulled the horse just before he was about to win the race……He did come across but was straight on the run in……We have seen that shift before….

  3. Graham Hurlstone-Jones says:

    Interesting, the next race it looked like the 2nd horse did not know Emily Hobhouse was coming…..seen that before as well……

  4. Graham Hurlstone-Jones says:

    Now we watch an Apprentice on Fort Amber ride a brilliant race……and life is all good in the racing world….

  5. Steve Reid says:

    Taken from the minutes of the 2015 NHA AGM

    Mr Reid said that in the last racing year, the following number of objections
    per race by the stipendary stewards were lodged in the respective countries for the racing year 2014:
    – Mauritius 1 per 26 races
    – Singapore 1 per 41 races
    – France 1 per 57 races
    – Japan 1 per 57 races
    – South Africa 1 per 430 races…

    Mr Witts-Hewinson explained that an Admission of Guilt system was used in South Africa which, to a large extent, alleviated the need to deal with racing infringements by way of objections. Mr Reid responded, saying that these penalties were not publicised widely. Punters were therefore not able to see that justice was being done and that the stipes were policing racing as they should be. Mr Witts-Hewinson answered, saying that the publication of penalties had to be done carefully as too many penalties gave the (wrong) impression that there was a problem with the integrity of racing.”

    Things have not improved since this little gem was shared and my sympathies lie with the jockeys and connections of horses affected by infringements in a race. Simply put, we either have the cleanest racing in the world, or we have in most inept and/or myopic stipes. Whatever has happened to the race review function that the stipes have at their disposal? To review and take no further action is in my opinion a far better option than forcing jocks and/or connections to lay the objection and then run the risk of losing deposits. This punitive and short sighted punishment will result in even fewer objections.

    Recent events that have shown swift and comprehensive action by the UAE and Hong Kong Jockey clubs show our NHA to be the Mickey Mouse outfit that they are. To have roughly 1 objection for the 16 that Mauritius does in a racing year, tells a very clear and unambiguous story as to the ineffectiveness of the current system.

  6. Chief says:

    Now i see why Woodruff use Chase because he is an honest trier of riding horses to win for him and give real effort every time, go ride them Chase, i wish the rest can learn

  7. Niran says:

    Mr Reid have you also taken into account the fact that Mauritius race pnce a week and they have closed season for a few month,Singapore and japan race at most 2 times a week ,in south africa we race everyday of the week,why not compare the numbers with another jurisdiction like Australia, im not defending the nha or stipes ,racing in south africa is a ticking time bomb ,there are so many indiscretions its almost unreal.

  8. David says:

    Blessing in disguise,, they cant even get the simple straitforward decisions right as is,,,

  9. The Dark Duke says:

    Can someone ask what the official policy regarding Stipes and objections are please? Surely this is their responsibility and area of expertise? For the life of me I do not understand this admission of guilt nonsense when you take into account how quickly they approve press releases damning those that have been found guilty of infringing rules in other areas.

    A second and final question – what training is given to stipes to identify infringements during a race. I agree with Steve Reid the stipes are woefully inadequate in policing the running of races. Send a few to Mauritius for training.

  10. The Dark Duke says:

    Niran the way I understood the post was how many races per objection. In our case the average was an objection every 430 races while Mauritius had an objection every 26 races. The effect of racing seasons or how frequently horses raced becomes irrelevant. Hope I have this correct but it seems pretty straightforward.

  11. Steve Reid says:

    Hi Niren. The Duke is correct in his summation. I contact a number of regulatory bodies in various 1st world racing countries and asked them to provide the number of races run in their jurisdictions and the number of objections lodged by their Stipes in that period. The ratios I published were pure mathematical outcomes rounded to the nearest number.

    The reason I didn’t include Australia, USA, UK, Ireland and Canada is because I received no response from the relevant authority. A blind man can see how pathetic our 3rd world regulating is when compared against 1st world racing countries. The problem stem with personnel, in particular personnel tasked with the management of the Stipes here. The man is **edited**)

  12. Rod Mattheyse says:

    Niran, the comparison with France should serve to quell your concerns. A pirate named Witz has on numerous occasions displayed for us that objections by stipes at certain courses cannot happen as there are not enough stipes on duty to object and then preside over said objection.

    The powers that be have the power, 17 disgruntled people are not compelling enough to make changes, and who can blame them all but 17 seem content. When looking from space all is hunky dory, except that turnovers are dropping, jobs are shedding and interested parties are disappearing. Smooth it over with grabbing some royalties from booming Hong Kong, hopefully you don’t cock it up too badly, hopefully sell a couple of horses to sparrows and it does not look so bad at all. But please don’t scratch the scab, the blood may not be stemmed.

    This has nothing to do with the economy, but even the addicts are struggling to pay for the middle finger. The funding model demands that each participant pays its dues, it requires transparency and it requires its pound of flesh from the Isle of Man.

    I no longer sigh when race programmes are unsuitable or feel disappointed when horses run poorly. I only sigh now when the truck does not arrive on Monday to take the glorious beast to it’s new happy home, And hopefully it arrives on Tuesday or Wednesday. I no longer concern myself with the probable loss of income to some poor souls, I take notice of good advice that perhaps there is nothing left for me, so now I concern myself with my pension fund – me myself and I.

    Alternative interest groups have tried to get off the ground. The roaring laughter by the powers that be when these organizations launch must be heard in the next galaxy. They never get locus standi even when the barrier is set as low as 240 members. In hindsight 17 to 240 is a stretch.

    Good on the operators the critical people do not matter, they are so far in the minority and the attention given to them has far exceeded their mandate.

  13. Hogan Govindsamy says:

    I have not come across a situation where the Stipes lodged an objection and it was overruled.Has there been any such cases and if so does the stipe/s also forfeit their deposit.Just asking as I dont know how they can lodge an objection on behalf of connections and still make a decision on it.

  14. Steve Reid says:

    @Hogan you would think as close to dammit one objection a month at all courses in the country and they would get it right every time wouldn’t you? To their “credit” some of their objections are overruled. The breakdown of objections can be found in the NHA Annual reports, typically available the week after the cut off for questions at the upcoming AGM. Integrity is a massive thing at this authority they even mention it on fancy Powerpoint presentations.

  15. Tex says:

    LEATHER REINS – In the early nineties racing had a spate of leather reins snapping in races which in some incidents jockeys were dislodged and those that managed to stay aboard rode without any control which are both very dangerous situations.

    The two incidents that come to mind that brought about the investigation and rule change was when Jeff Lloyd came off at Greyville and escaped serious injury by millimetres and the late Billy Harvey who had a near fatal fall at the Bloemfontein Turf Club spending over two months in ICU. Billy never fully recovered from that fall.

    The S A Jockey Association approached the Trainers Association and Jockey Club of SA to jointly investigate why the leather reins were breaking so often. The finding was that inferior local and imported leather was being used in the make up of the reins which had flooded the equine market.

    Nothing quite like a good English leather bridle and 3/4 inch rubber covered leather reins.

Leave a Comment

‹ Previous

National Yearling Sale (photo: TBA)

Koster And Kieswetter On TBA Council

Next ›

UK Equine Flu Spreads

Popular Posts