Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Ramsden may appeal over £1,000 fine

Greg Wood
Monday 06 August 2001 00:00 BST
Comments

Lynda Ramsden and Michael Hills are expected to decide this morning whether to appeal against penalties imposed by the stewards at Doncaster on Saturday over the running and riding of a six-year-old sprinter named Marweh.

Ramsden was fined £1,000 and Hills suspended from riding for five days after the officials decided that Marweh was given too easy a time when finishing fourth to Vision Of Night in a six-furlong conditions race.

They also banned the horse, who started at 6-1 yesterday, from racing for 30 days, from 7 August to 5 September inclusive.

The Doncaster stewards decided that Hills and Ramsden contravened Rule 158 by not taking "all reasonable and permissible measures to obtain the best possible placing".

Both Ramsden – who was not at Doncaster – and Hills are thought to be planning to watch and discuss video footage of the Stanley Racing Conditions Stakes before deciding on any appeal. Ramsden also said yesterday that she will consult with her solicitor, Andrew Chalk.

"I am not very happy about it," the trainer said. "The horse was doing his best. Michael said that the first three went so quick that if he had gone with them, he would have been beaten 10 lengths. He had not run for quite a long time, he went out to Dubai for John Hammond in the winter and, contrary to what it says in the papers, we have never had him before."

The Racing Post's in- running comment on Marweh yesterday was "in touch going well, headway two furlongs out, stayed on inside last, nearest finish". Its analysis of the race, meanwhile, noted that he was "not knocked about", and "left the impression that he is capable of better." Ramsden and Hills are far from being the first trainer or jockey to be punished this year under rules dealing with "schooling in public", but they are the most prominent names to be called to account.

The problem of alleged "non-triers" is one which racing's rulers have struggled to resolve since the sport was first regulated in the 1700s.

Back then, of course, it was far easier to get away with. Today's race-readers do an excellent job of reporting the efforts of every runner in a race, but only with the immense benefits of television and videotape. Their forerunners had one stab from the grandstand steps (if they were lucky). In a big field, the task of watching every horse was all but impossible.

Even the Jockey Club admits that non-triers will never be stamped out, if only because it is so hard to define what "trying" actually means.

For instance, a horse which needs a stiff seven furlongs on a right-handed track and fast ground might have four runs in a row over an easy, left-handed six with some cut. It will finish unplaced each time, its handicap mark will drop as a result, and its best form will be recaptured when it gets the right conditions.

Though a few punters might think this a dubious practice, the great majority will simply see it as part of the fun.

"It"s part and parcel of the game in this country," John Maxse, the Club's spokesman, said yesterday. "We recognise that, because the majority of races here are rating-related. If you back a horse, you presumably do it on the basis that all the conditions are in its favour. You take into account the course, distance, going and so on. All those may have been missing from its previous runs, but that doesn't mean it was not trying."

Where the Club draws the line – fuzzy though it may be – is when horses which might, or possibly should, have won a race are given no chance to do so. The power to ban a horse from racing, introduced in the mid-1990s, is, Maxse believes, a useful deterrent.

"It was felt that we should do more to stop people making the most of the quiet and easy runs which were being given," he said. "I think the owners may often feel a bit bitter, that they are being penalised when they're not the ones giving the instructions, but if owners aren't happy about it, it probably increases the deterrence."

One point, though, seems assured. Whether or not Ramsden and Hills appeal against their penalties, and regardless of how long it takes Marweh to get back to a racecourse, when he does so, thousands of punters will be ready and waiting.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in