WE MUST COME CLEAN ABOUT THE TRAGIC COST OF RACING

AS THE field sped towards the second at Aintree, the death throes of Up For Review could clearly be seen. Brought down at the first, he was thrashing around on the turf in the distance, unable to rise. No context was offered in the commentary. No mention beyond the news of a couple of fallers. On the second circuit, we were told the runners were bypassing the first fence, but not why. It took a small degree of knowledge to notice the bleak green screens in the corner of the picture, and imagine what was unfolding behind them, and no one was about to let the two-quid-each-way viewers in on that horrific detail. When ITV later reshowed the race, the coverage started from the second fence, again without proper explanation. Yet if national hunt racing is so easily defensible, why the secrecy? Why not tell people what they are seeing? Why sanitise events for the home audience? It does not matter whether you love the sport, deplore it, or are just feeling increasingly uncomfortable — there were three equine deaths at the Aintree meeting, and the same number at Cheltenham — we should at least be honest about consequences. And then, unlike tragic Up For Review, we can make up our own minds on participation.