It's Silly Season

When people argue for 'culture change' it's often safe to assume they're bluffing for the sake of saying something. It's the same with phrases such as 'mindset.' They're helpfully vague and can be unaccompanied by detail. They've certainly helped yours truly out more than once. But when it comes to helping the lot of female jockeys there really does need to be a change of culture and mindset. And if that seems too wishy-washy then early detail of the impact of French racing's allowance for female riders indicates such change can be tangible sometimes.

France Galop's decision earlier this year to provide female jockeys with a 2kg (4.4lbs) allowance in the majority of races provoked plenty reaction with accusations of sexism and tokenism included. In Ireland the majority view appeared to be that such an allowance is unnecessary and would even be unfair to male riders. In short things are fine because men and women laudably compete on an equal footing in equestrian sports.

And that is the case in some horse sports. But it is wishful thinking to insist it's the case with jockeys in this part of the world who are faced with the peculiar characteristics which make racing here very different from other admirably gender-blind jurisdictions. They've helped cement and institutionalise prejudices which make the accomplishments of Rachael Blackmore and the recently retired Cathy Gannon exceptions that prove the rule.

The perception largely remains that women are simply not strong enough physically to compete with men. Ireland is not unique in this. It's much the same in Britain despite the accomplishments of Josephine Gordon and Hayley Turner in recent years. And both countries, to judge by some comments, are beacons of equality compared to some of the more regrettable macho stuff floating around French racing.

It's in such a context that early examination of the impact of that French allowance proved notable. Female jockeys secured more rides. There was a 39 per cent rise in mounts taken by women over the first three months. There was a 12 per cent rise in the number of winners women rode. There was a 79 per cent increase in the number of placed rides.

The next statistical analysis will be interesting, as will any evidence of an increase in the number of licence requests from women. But Turner's decision to relocate to France this winter seems to testify to a new landscape there. It's one that has come about without the sky falling in on men too. Yet the attitude here appears to be to maintain the status quo. And that simply isn't good enough.

This is a sport struggling to attract people, and particularly young people, to work in it. More and more it is young women who are prepared to invest their futures working at racing's coalface. Yet the dream many of them have of making it as professional jockeys is made even more improbable than it already is by a lack of opportunity often rooted in deep-rooted gender prejudices.

Disillusionment is often an outcome and in broad employment terms alone racing really is cutting its nose off to spite its own face.

Insisting on the status quo effectively means nothing changes and racing has to change. Arguing it is perceptions which need to be worked on is all well and good but it's unlikely to happen unless the sport elects to alter the framework. Leaving things as they are is a cop-out. Arguing for talent to win out is fine but talent needs both opportunity and encouragement.

The French experiment is in its infancy and is hardly perfect. A 4.4lb swing seems too much for one thing. But some encouragement does need to be put in place to encourage owners and trainers to employ female riders and particularly those at apprentice level. There's no interest like self-interest so make it worth their while to change.

Given opportunity it might be no time at all before the idea of allowances for female riders will seem as ridiculous as the perceptions that are culturally swirling at the moment. But it's not going to come out of thin air.

Josephine Gordon was at the centre of yet another example of how ridiculous the running and riding rules are in Ireland and Britain when finishing runner up on Wall Of Fire in Saturday's Geoffrey Freer at Newbury. Andrea Atzeni was found guilty of careless riding on the winner Defoe after allowing his horse drift right across Wall of Fire, forcing Gordon to snatch up, and Wall Of Fire to lose momentum only to rally again and lose by less than a length.

Atzeni was justifiably a picture of confidence in the stewards enquiry. He knew he only had to say he was on the best horse on the race and Defoe would keep it. Maybe he figured he'd get a few days - which no doubt would be an acceptable swap for a Group 3 - and justify what anyone could see was an exercise in accidentally on purpose letting his horse cut the snot off a rival. In fact all Atzeni got was a caution for a manoeuvre which in many jurisdictions would result in almost certain demotion.

No one can blame Atzeni. If he didn't do what he did his owner could reasonably ask why not given the way the rules are set up. But it's these rules which encourage a culture that makes this sort of riding not only tolerated but expected. No doubt the hard men will say it's jockeyship and then make the most noise about safety when the inevitable happens and a serious accident occurs.

This sort of careless riding is happening practically every day of the week with dubious manoeuvres resulting in mere slaps on the wrist like Atzeni's or token one day suspensions. Yet last month Shane Foley got banned for seven days when caught on telly hitting an unruly mount with the whip before the start of a race. This is silly stuff. But this is silly season as Davy Russell's latest brush with controversy proves.

Russell looked to lose his cool aboard Kings Dolly at Tramore on Friday, appearing to hit the horse a punch to the head after she rushed into a hurdle she was being shown in the middle of the course prior to a race. The outcome has been a social media 'storm' on the back of which the Turf Club says it is going to investigate.

Russell almost certainly hurt his hand more than he did the horse's head. He also must know he shouldn't have done what he did and will probably wind up with some sort of suspension. But some of the response to this silly mistake really is storm-in-a-teacup stuff and completely out of proportion.

Anyone who's had even the slightest dealing with horses know they can take the mickey and debating the merits of a more Confucian approach with them often isn't a runner. In such circumstances presuming on perfect serenity all of the time is presuming too much.

Many moons ago during a brief real working life, I stupidly delivered a beauty of a right hook to an absolute cow of a mare who'd made it clear she wanted to get her retaliation in feet first. It was mostly borne out of funk and should ideally have been kept in reserve for some of the human bastards I'd yet to encounter. My hand hurt for days afterwards. On the horse the impact was nil.

Russell's problem is that he was caught on film. And while it doesn't look pretty, and I'm all about the importance of perception, this really is nothing. There are real welfare issues out there that need serious examination. This isn't one of them. Yet judged by Foley's experience, Russell could wind up with a bigger penalty than a jockey putting colleagues in real danger. And that's far from silly.

Finally, the European sales season starts this week in Deauville. It brings to mind Phil Bull's view on the jargon of selling bloodstock dreams.

"Tap roots, inbreeding, outcrossing, sires' lines, prepotency etc, overlaid with a dressing of genetics, mostly misunderstood - it is a world of fantasy," Timeform's founder once proclaimed. He wasn't far wrong