Jockey told his Fortune

QJubbs Ndlovu, Germiston In your 13/3 Racing Express edition under the heading ‘Jockey, trainer at NHA inquiries’, I would like to understand as a racing purist why the following has occurred. And perhaps I can elaborate further on the incident. The Citizen are perfectly correct in their assessment of what occurred with jockey Fortune. However, on that particular day, an objection was lodged by the stipendiary steward/s into the misconduct of Fortune and to the horror of the public, the objection was overruled. Perhaps the stipendiary steward/s on duty that day, or a member of the NHA, could explain to the racing public how the objection was overruled and then the NHA imposed a R25 000 fine and 100-day suspension on Fortune. SA racing is already on its knees and is continually shrouded in controversy. What further message are they sending?

AJack Milner, ‘Racing Express’ managing editor

In order for an objection to be upheld, the stipes have to be confident that but for the interference, the other horse would have won. In this case, it was clear that while Fortune hit the other horse repeatedly with his crop, his attempts were to no avail. The horse did not even flinch as the crop hit him. As a result, the objection was correctly overruled. However, that does not mean that Fortune was innocent. His action, whether intentional or not, was in breach of the rules and the stipes had to take action. That is why he received the ban and a fine.