BHA disciplinary panel papers over the cracks in Danny Brock whip case
The independent disciplinary panel which considered Danny Brock’s use of a modified whip on a horse that was found to have been marked by its use decided it was a “case of mistake rather than deliberate conduct” according to the panel’s written reasons for its decision to ban him for seven days, which were finally published on Monday.
Brock used the whip, which had two rubber bands wrapped around the flap, when riding Resurrected, a three-yearold filly, to victory in a low-grade race at Chelmsford City in September. Resurrected had been backed down from an early price of 100-1, then from 25-1 on course, before starting the race at 10-1 and was found to have suffered “minor weals” in three places as a result of Brock’s use of the whip.
He was banned for seven days at a hearing in October, having initially been fined £140 for using a modified whip before the weals on Resurrected were discovered.
Brock’s explanation of how the elastic bands came to be attached to his whip is detailed is the panel’s findings. The jockey told the hearing he sometimes uses bands around his wrists to hold his silks in place and keeps these on the gear stick of his car before taking them into the course.
He believed he had transferred some bands on to a spare whip “on some previous occasion to his Chelmsford ride in an absent-minded way” and then took this whip into the course by mistake. “He entirely accepted he was to blame for this but insisted it was just negligent error on his part.”
In its reasoning, the panel suggests that while its members were “initially cautious” about Brock’s explanation, amid fears he “had been trying to give himself an edge”, it decided “a number of factors provided reassurance that this was not the case”.
These included the fact the British Horseracing Authority had “checked CCTV footage before and after the race to observe Brock’s behaviour” and “had made other inquiries to see if there was any evidence of deliberation” by the jockey. “These all demonstrated he behaved in a normal way without any actions or steps taken to try to conceal the rubber bands attached to the flap of the whip.”
The panel also points out the BHA “did not make any positive case that the addition of the rubber bands had been the cause, in whole or in part, of the horse’s wealing”.
Despite this, a suggestion by representatives of both the BHA and Brock that a five-day ban would be appropriate for his offence, the panel decided instead that seven days was more appropriate, on the ground that “[Brock] and for that matter other jockeys, need to be fully aware of the damage to the reputation of racing that can arise if non-compliant equipment is used”.
Brock, who said last week he feared for his career owing to the furore over the incident, has already served his seven-day ban but whether Monday’s publication finally draws a line underneath it remains to be seen.
The betting patterns surrounding the race, in which Resurrected improved to win having finished unplaced in three previous starts this year, were not considered by the panel but may yet prove to be the subject of a BHA investigation.
The BHA has also said it will consider the current penalties both for marking a horse (with a regulation whip) and for the use of a modified whip, on the grounds that these do not “seem sufficient”.
It remains puzzling, though, that the regulator did not seek to link these aspects of the case at the disciplinary hearing, given that the first proven case of a modified whip being used in a race for at least five years was also accompanied by only the second recorded instance of a horse being marked by a whip in 2019.