Disappointment On The Downs

Well another Derby weekend comes and goes and I have to admit I’ve come away from the 2013 renewal feeling slightly flat and deflated.

It wasn’t all bad, of course, the horrible weather of the previous few days  finally relented and the sun shone on the Downs. The crowds were healthy, 120,000 on the big day itself but those large crowds bring inherent problems as an annoying minority seem to be unable to control themselves after a few drinks.

Friday didn’t get off to a good start as it finally saw the return of Frankie Dettori after serving a six month ban after being caught with traces of cocaine in his system after a drug test in France last September.

With the delays in the returning of his licence I was beginning to find the whole affair more than tiresome.

Of course when he finally did return the frenzy in certain parts of the media was frankly nauseating and one of the worse offenders was Channel Four.

You would think we were witnessing the return of some long lost hero – we weren’t.

Let’s get this straight Dettori was banned after taking a drug which it is a criminal offence to both possess and use. This is not the action of some immature youngster this is the action of a supposedly mature and responsible 42 year old man, father to five children – what a wonderful example to set to them.

He then moves the Dettori PR machine into overdrive claiming it was a moment of madness, a one of mistake. Towards the end of a ban he agrees to the softest of soft interviews with Clare Balding, who by her own admission has been a friend of his for years – so  no danger of a Paxmanesque interrogation there then?

Also, let's not forget Dettori has previous when it comes to cocaine .... he must be a very unlucky person to have only had the drug twice and to have been caught both times. 

Remember Dettori is a shrewd PR operator – switch on the TV cameras and he is the jolly chirpy Italian jockey, away from the cameras and the big meetings the story is different.

I have witnessed, first hand, the other side of Dettori and frankly I think he is an objectionable, obnoxious individual.

For me, after all the fuss about his return, I was actually two of his three mounts came home last.

One of the biggest smiles about his overblown return actually came courtesy of Channel Four.

Emma Spencer, clearly employed for her supposed good looks rather than her racing knowledge, interviewed Neil Callan the winner of Resurgent  and then proceeded to ask him about his “ride” in the next race on Sri Putra – a ride where he had been jocked off by one L Dettori.

He soon put Ms Spencer in her place but how ironic that one of the star presenters of Channel Four was unaware of the jockey change, when the broadcaster she is employed by were having the broadcasting version of an orgasm over Dettori’s return.      

Racing in Friday was good with the aptly named Talent winning The Oaks giving trainer Ralph Beckett an amazing 1-2 in the race, although not in the order expected and it gave Richard Hughes a second classic win in a few weeks.

Saturday dawned and the two feature races were starkly different.

In the Coronation Cup we had St Nicholas Abbey looking for an unprecedented third consecutive win.

With around £9.5k on offer for finishing fifth it was disappointing to see only five runners, especially when two of the five were simply in the race as pacemakers. With trainers complaining about the lack of prize money you would have thought more would have had a pop, even if it were for the decent place purse.

In the end the script worked out as planned with St Nicholas Abbey coming home, barely breaking sweat, followed home by Dunaden.

He can only beat what is put in front of him but with almost £5m in winnings he has been a credit to connections.

Before I turn to The Derby I must mention The Dash over the fastest five furlong course in the country.

Ryan Moore gave Duke of Firenze a sublime ride. I 9^th place and behind wall of horses a half-a-furlong from home, he weaved through rivals to go on and record a neck victory.

Even more impressive was the run of the runner-up, Smoothtalkinrascal, under  Daniel Tudhope, who was as far back as 14^th at the half furlong pole.

Well in the big race itself we had a well touted favourite in Dawn Approach. I have to admit he is a horse I have long admired and I really wanted him to do well in The Derby – as we now know it wasn’t to be.      

I think it's the worse Derby I can remember, a very messy race and I can't recall the last time there were six stewards inquiries into a single race.

Poor Kevin Manning didn't stand a chance in the race - Dawn Approach ran as if a pot of mustard had been shoved up his backside, he took off like a horse possessed and it would have been no surprise if Manning had not returned with arms six inches longer than when he had set out.

Full credit to Ballydoyle who employed perfect tactics, in not employing a pacesetter  they played on the perceived weaknesses of the favourite. Although looking at Dawn Approach I think he would probably have blown up whatever tactics had been employed.

French raider Ocovango probably would not have won but would have been possibly been placed were it not for him getting mullered twice. I wonder  would a jockey with more experience of Epsom have done better on him?

Mars, fancied in some areas, didn't get the best of runs either.

OK The Derby is always a rough race but this one just didn't seem right at all.

Did the "best" horse win - possibly but even that is open to debate.

It was a fantastic day for Ryan Moore though.

Moore often gets slated for “not having a personality” but I would rather have him ride a horse of mine than the coke snorting showman Dettori.   

For Sale - One Poisoned Chalice

Quite a few people have expressed surprise that John Smith’s have decided not to sponsor the Grand National after next year’s renewal.

My only surprise is that people are surprised at the decision.

John Smith’s will have sponsored the race for ten years and it is a sponsorship which does not come cheaply and they cannot deny their association with the race has, generally, been well worth the investment in terms of publicity.

Times, however, are changing and it is very easy to see why pouring so much money into the race is looking to be an investment which makes poor business sense, indeed it is in great danger of becoming a liability.

I don’t always agree with the BBC’s racing correspondent Cornelius Lysaght but in an analysis piece on the BBC Sport website he wrote:-

“With the ex-course boss Julian Thick out after the re-structuring of Aintree's parent company, and the British Horseracing Authority's articulate top vet leaving too, this news just adds to the difficulties facing the home of the Grand National.

"It looks like John Smith's has made what is a surprising decision mainly for commercial reasons, though the public image of the race - in which two horses have died in both of the last two runnings - must have been in the brewer's thinking as well.

"With that in mind, it remains to be seen how easy finding a replacement turns out to be."

Whilst the first paragraph may not be a fundamental reason for the withdrawal it is a consideration. If they have had a good working relationship with Thick a new appointee could well change the dynamics of the relationship between the sponsors and the racecourse. Personal relationships in business should never be underestimated.

The departure of Tim Morris from the BHA is also a bad move for Aintree and the Grand National. Morris has been a credible defender of the race in the face of vociferous and mounting criticism of the Grand National – indeed he is probably the only credible spokesman the BHA has available to field. Yet his services are no longer required.

Now I have been the first to argue that the BHA needs to cutback in the face of diminishing income but I have to say the removal of Morris and before that Paul Scotney does, along with other decisions made this year, seriously call into question the judgement and competency of BHA chief Paul Bittar.

More pertinent in Lysaght’s analysis is the public image of the race. I know this topic has been done to death and I have no intention of rehashing the arguments again here but, like it or not, the Grand National does have a serious perception issue in the eyes of the general public.

Now it is completely and utterly irrelevant if said perception is right or wrong – it is there and, thus far, racing has done little to dispel the perception and with the departure of Morris it looks as though the BHA is giving up on the PR front.

With such a poor perception is it any wonder sponsors are going to look again at committing huge amounts of money to a race which has the potential to alienate so many members of the public? Members of the public who ultimately contribute  to the profitability of the organisation.

It is commercial suicide to be so intrinsically associated with a product which has already alienated many and could well continue to alienate people further.

There was one other factor which Lysaght, understandably, failed to mention.

That is, of course, television coverage of the race moving from the BBC to Channel Four.

Even though the viewing figured on the BBC have plummeted over the past  thirty years, the race still attracted a domestic TV audience of around nine million ….. a tasty prospect for any big name sponsor.

It is highly unlikely the viewing figures when it moves to Channel Four will be even half that number, I predict they may, if they are lucky, attract around 2m viewers. Channel Four’s biggest ever viewing figures are 11.2 million and that was for the Paralympic Opening ceremony which came hot on the heels of the main Olympics (and bear in mind the BBC picked up a record 26.3 million viewers for the Olympic closing ceremony).

Channel Four’s best ever racing audience stands at a relatively paltry 1.4 million.

Also the BBC gave massive advance advertising to the race across its television and radio networks – C4 may well also run trailers but to a far smaller audience. The BBC trailers reminded viewers the race was coming, it bought the race into the public consciousness.

So from a sponsors perspective the move to Channel Four from the BBC is a massive negative.

Aintree and John Smith’s may well reach their aim of a £1m Grand National next year – if they do I suspect it will be a one-off.

I think Aintree will struggle to find a sponsor prepared to commit the same amount of money John Smith’s were, indeed I think they will struggle to find a sponsor who wants to be associated with a potentially damaging product.

My strong suspicion is the new sponsor will come from within the industry and if I was tempted to have a bet (which I’m not) my money would be on the Betfair Grand National in 2014.

Thank You For Your Feedback

Whenever I write the blog I’m never sure what sort of reaction I’m going to receive, sometimes it’s the complete opposite of what I expect.

Many a time I have written something I’ve perceived to be innocuous and it had generated an almost thermonuclear response, other times I’ve written something I thought would be really contentious and most of the feedback has been positive and supportive.

I was surprised with last week’s blog when I was expecting some backlash, the surprising aspect was the strongest backlash came against my criticism of Channel Four and their not giving the real reason for Michael Hills “retirement day” absence.

One of my correspondents indignantly called on me to “remove my snide comments about C4” after pointing our C4 and RUK had simply repeated a statement issued by Hills.

I responded thus:-

"The comments are not snide at all.

"C4 chose to broadcast Hills statement at face value and then chose not to correct what they had broadcast when the real reason came into the public domain.

"The real reason for Hills not racing was freely available. I wasn't even at a racecourse and I had access to the official explanation well before C4 went off air.

"Indeed instead of correcting what they said C4 repeated the Hills version of events, well after the real reason was in the public domain.

"At best it shows a lack of fact checking on Channel four's part at worse, which I suspect, a cover-up so as not to piss on Hills farewell.

"You know as well as I do there is a tendency to close ranks in racing and this is a prime example.

"So I stand by what I said, 100%, indeed I think I was actually very restrained."

It also transpires the same story about Hills being unwell was broadcast over the PA at Newmarket, so although my criticism was directed at Channel Four it should, perhaps, have been directed more widely as it seems Newmarket Racecourse may also have been part of the conspiracy to “protect” Hills.

Some of the feedback is quite surreal, like the following example:-

“HAD IT UP TO HERE WITH YOU osterpaulmeyer. Do you even LIFT? “

I suppose in the old days of pen and paper it would have been scrawled in green ink.

 I wasn’t too sure how to respond to that one, not least because, unsurprisingly, it was anonymous.

One response could be does your Mummy know you are playing with her computer? Alternatively I could respond about care in the community clearly not working very well.

Clearly whoever sent the well thought out response does have some literacy issues.

Now I don’t actually mind getting responses which are critical of me or which choose to verbally attack me. After all I’m more than happy to dish out criticism where I feel it is justified and on those grounds alone it would be hypocritical of me not to accept criticism myself.

I recall in a previous job where I was effectively an “enforcer” and it had been a torrid week, the end of which had seen four formal “complaints”, including one from a very senior director, about my “direct” approach. Normally such complaints were like water off a ducks back but even I was surprised with four so I had a chat with my boss.

Two things stuck in my mind after that conversation, the first was “nowhere in your job description does it say you have to be popular, I employ you to get results and you do that” and the other was “if people are complaining about you, it means you are doing your job properly. People don’t like having their shortcomings pointed out. The day I stop getting complaints will be the day I start questioning you are doing your job properly.”   

However the two examples I cited above do show a marked contrast. The first comment about Channel Four was signed, it was from someone who actually broadcasts themselves and someone whose opinion I respect although, on this occasion, I don’t agree with.

At least we are able to debate the issue and, if need be agree to differ.

What I do take exception to is the anonymous snipers, as in the case of the second example. I have no time for those who will only attack or criticise from behind a cloak of anonymity, even if their criticism is seemingly valid and accurate. Why should any respect be shown to someone who isn’t prepared to openly say who they are.

So to any of my readers who take issue with what I have to say bring it on, let’s discuss and debate the issues but if you want a debate don’t be a coward and hide behind a cloak of anonymity – grow some balls and have the courage to make your point openly.

Jockey James Millman is a breath of fresh air, he has embraced social media and is one of the most open jockeys out there and is one of the most honest. Last week, even by his own admission, he had a bad day at the office at Wolverhampton and who of us hasn’t had a bad day at work. However the abuse he was subjected was out of all proportion and, unsurprisingly, the most vitriolic came from the anonymous posters.   As a result he was threatening to walk away from Twitter, hopefully he will reconsider as he shouldn’t let the bullies win.

Too many people think they can write what they want on social media outlets and they can write with impunity. They are so mistaken as some found out last week as they were before the courts for revealing the name of a rape victim, which is protected by law. In my view they were very lucky to get away with a modest fine.

More recently we have had the wholly unfounded allegations made against a former senior Conservative Minister which have been discussed on Twitter and in blogs. Hopefully those who named him will be suitably and punitively punished and this unsavoury incident will result in a change in the way people approach social media and people will think before they post.

One final thought for those who chose to post anonymously. Unless you are technically very, very clever and reading what they frequently post intelligence isn’t a dominant attribute, then your posts will not be anonymous and you can be traced. 

Champions Day & Channel Four Presenters

There are, I admit, times when I’m standing in the pouring rain, on a wet Monday afternoon with a couple of hundred other racegoers when I wonder why I bother following this sport of horse racing.

Then again there are days, like last Saturday, when I know there is nowhere in the world I would rather be. 

I’m referring, of course, to British Champion’s Day at Ascot last Saturday, where I experienced one of the best atmospheres at a racecourse ever. For one it seemed over 90% of those present were actually there for the racing.

Although there were five championship races most were there to see the one race, indeed the one horse, the mighty Frankel who was there to make his last appearance on a racecourse.

However it almost didn’t happen as the wet weather threatened the horses participation in the race and was dependent on connections walking the course on Saturday morning.

As Racing For Change’s Rod Street put it to me afterwards it was “squeaky bum time” – imagine the sense of anti-climax has Frankel not run.

Both the pre-parade ring and parade ring were surrounded by massive crowds wanting to get a glimpse of the unbeaten wonder horse, something that added another irony to the day.

Excelebration after winning the QEII

The race before Frankel’s was the Queen Elizabeth Stakes over the mile, the very race Frankel won last year and it was won in devastating style by the horse who has lived in Frankel’s shadow, Excelebration. A brilliant, gutsy horse in his own right who would have been an undoubted superstar had he not been of the same generation as the once in a lifetime horse.

Even on Saturday, the day he wasn’t racing against Frankel he still managed to be overshadowed and many at Ascot missed the brilliant turn of foot, reminiscent of Sea The Stars in his Arc run, which salvaged the race from a seemingly impossible position.

As Frankel entered the parade ring he was greeted by applause, not unprecedented at Ascot, what was unprecedented was the cheers and applause as he came out onto the track, although there was an amusing moment when some racegoers applauded his brother Bullet Train as he led the runners out in the second colours of the owner.

After the parade the runners set off to the start, all apart from Frankel who held back and slowly cantered past the packed stands to milk the appreciation of the fans, it was almost as if he was doing a lap of honour before the race.

Of course the race itself was heart stopping as Frankel almost fell out of the stalls, giving four to five lengths to his rivals and Ian Mongan on Bullet Train, supposedly in as the pacesetter, had to do som quick thinking to drop back and find his stablemate.

Of course the worries were unfounded and the roar of the crowd told you what was happening as he pulled upsides the defending champion Cirrus Des Aigles before edging clear to make it 14 wins from 14 races.

The crowds went mad, looking from my high vantage point you could see people running towards the rails so they could get a glimpse of the superstar.

One thing I really like though was the second and third, Cirrus Des Aigles and Nathaniel were both given a rapturous welcome back from the crowd, who appreciated what good horses they were and their contribution in making it a competitive race.

It was a brilliant atmosphere, it’s a shame it cannot be bottled.

Channel Four have finally announced their presentation team for next year, a mixed bag with some surprises.

It is, of course, no surprise Nick Luck will be there as a main presenter alongside Clare Balding. There were some surprises in the “supporting” team.

The biggest surprise for me was the inclusion of Emma Spencer, who for me is the most lightweight member of the team, both physically and as a presenter. I’m told by many that she is considered pretty and “eye-candy” although that is something I fail to see, as the saying goes beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Graham Cunningham was the surprise inclusion in the team, he’s an astute analyst not afraid to have an opinion and I can envisage some chippy exchanges with Jim McGrath and Mick Fitzgerald who will be the other paddock commentators.

The dropping of John McCririck has sparked some debate but it cannot really be a major surprise, he really is past his sell-by date and, unfortunately he has become a caricature of himself.  His rant at being omitted from the line-up exemplifies why he was omitted.

Three of the other droppings from the team are more questionable.

Alastair Down isn’t everyone’s cup of tea, like an avuncular Uncle, sometimes tetchy he wasn’t really a TV natural but his way with words and his passion for national hunt racing was unsurpassed.

Mike Cattermole is a very accomplished presenter and a very decent chap, as demonstrated by his very graceful reaction to his not being included in the line-up (Take note McCririck) and I think his omission is a mistake especially when Spencer is being retained.

The dropping of Derek Thompson is also something of a mystery, yes he is a Marmite man, but from a TV producers perspective he is an absolute Godsend. He will do the interviews nobody else wants to, he can get across the atmosphere and work the crowd and, most importantly from a TV production perspective if you need somebody to fill for 23 seconds he will give you exactly 23 seconds, not a second more, not a second less.

This brings us onto the other Marmite character, Matt Chapman – who isn’t in the team. This may come as a surprise but I am slightly disappointed by this.

Yes I know I have been Matt’s biggest critic over the years but a “tamed” Matt would have been a good addition to the team.

I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again, when he plays it straight Matt is one of the best interviewers we have in the sport, he can get even the most reluctant of trainers to open up.

However Matt is his own worse enemy in that he tries to be controversial, he always denies this, but he does and it is so frustrating. If he could just calm himself, reign himself in, he would have been a shoe-in for a Channel Four role and a great addition to the team – it’s a terrible waste.

It’s good to see Simon Holt and Richard Hoiles will continue to be in the team, Richard once again showed why he is head and shoulders our best commentator with his excellent call of Frankel’s race as Ascot.

I am also disappointed there is no role for Stewart Machin in the line-up.