Never Let A Crisis Go To Waste It's debatable if Churchill ever actually said never let a crisis go to waste but the old chancer gets credited with it anyway so it's getting a good airing during this global public health emergency. Economically what will probably happen is that companies will take the opportunity to slash and burn. But as racing waits to return with some curtailed version of itself it could be interesting to examine if stewarding is at least one area ripe for more constructive change. The ultimate change required is professional stewards. The value of the thoroughbred sector to the national economy gets routinely portrayed in various billions. Parts of it operate to standards higher than any global competition. All of which only highlights how the shop-window of such a professional industry - the racecourse - is effectively policed by well-meaning amateurs. There are stipendiary officials to guide them but panels are ultimately in charge with different opinions and prejudices bound up in that. The evidence of how inconsistent the implementation and interpretation of the rule book can be as a result is littered through time. And the consequences of that are apparent in widespread, if unfair, public presumption of an old boys club expediently slaloming their way around potentially embarrassing situations. Such a change won't happen anytime soon but the realisation that such a system is increasingly redundant, and ultimately doomed, has been growing in recent years. If what most jockeys tell a panel is self-serving rubbish anyway - which it mostly is - and all the stewards ultimately do is examine various camera angles on a screen - which they mostly do - then the technology has long existed for the job to be done from anywhere at any time. It was interesting then to note speculation about potential British Horseracing Authority plans to resume racing in restricted circumstances possibly including how stewarding might be carried out remotely. It's important though to note that the BHA has poured cold water on that suggestion and insisted the matter is entirely that - speculation. Apparently there needs to be no more than 100 people on-site in the event of a limited number of tracks starting up again under strict quarantine conditions with no spectators. Among the hundred would be jockeys, stable staff and integrity officials such as a starter, a judge and a clerk of the scales. Surplus to requirements could be any need for a panel of stewards in their best tweed and tucker earnestly patrolling the weigh-room waiting for tea and cake. When racing starts up again in Ireland it will be with major restrictions, possibly even more so than the final few meetings held before the sport stopped last month. Public health guidelines, and common sense, suggest the least numbers of boots on the ground is best. Stewards panels were already reduced during the ten meetings before closedown. If increasingly professional stewarding can be carried out remotely in Britain there's little reason it can't be done here too. A couple of stipes in a room examining all the camera angles back at IHRB headquarters is all that is required in any running and riding enquiry. There's no reason for any evidence from jockeys or anyone else. Just coldly and dispassionately examine the evidence of one's eyes and judge it accordingly. A stipe on the ground can supply any extenuating factors. But most cases could be opened and shut before the horses have pulled up. If that can be carried out successfully in a time of crisis then there's little to suggest it can't be effectively replicated upon a return to normality. It would require the current pool of half a dozen stipes to expand a little but in the interests of consistency and accountability that should be regarded as an investment not an expense. The counter argument has always been a resources one, basically that not having to paying stewards frees up money to be spent elsewhere. Recently however there have been reports that it is becoming more and more difficult to find people willing to do the job. Numbers might start to get finite. There is also a view that an amateur element to proceedings brings a certain independence with it. But since credibility is already an issue that looks shaky. No one can argue that certain biases wouldn't exist under professional stewarding. That's just the nature of the beast. But even in terms of the message professionalism sends out, it looks an inevitable step eventually. So why not use these dreadful times to manufacture some sort of positive and try out something new. Just because you can do something isn't reason to do it. But failure to do something just because it interferes with tradition is no reason at all. Separately, it has come to something when racing professionals are reluctant to see the €500,000 Irish Grand National get rescheduled later this winter when the Covid-19 emergency has hopefully eased a little. Normally the cry is for big-money pots to be re-fixed as soon as possible, anywhere and anytime. But apparently not so here with Robbie Power arguing the Easter Monday date is sacrosanct and the plug should be pulled until 2021. That Power made his comments in an ambassadorial blog for no other than the National sponsor, BoyleSports, only made them more noteworthy. HRI get it in the neck quite a bit but in a matter such as this they look to be between a rock and a hard place. Tradition is valuable and taking it for granted can be presumptuous. But if there's any chance of running a half-million Euro pot at some stage then arguing for the programme book to be treated as some holy of holies looks a costly exercise. There's some history of flexibility in the past too as outlined here - Tipping Point: Pining Irish Grand National frivolity Finally, racing looks like being the first major sport back under starters orders in the event of a relaxation of the current restrictions. That's a good thing that will come with certain responsibilities, one of the most significant being that the sport gets the tone right. Given the backlash to the Cheltenham festival this is not an unimportant consideration whatever the jurisdiction. So it was dispiriting to read how the BHA is apparently urging a lobbying campaign by British trainers to get politicians to support racing. Fair enough you might say. Except one thing they reportedly want is tax relief for owners who make losses on a horse. Really? Thousands are dying and that's worth lobbying for? Yeah, the public will go along with that no problem. No way will that be seen as another supremely tone-deaf symptom of an entitled sector. Still, it's Britain. Such a gaffe could never happen here!
