Horse Racing

Melbourne Cup result stands

The world of horse racing has been caught up in a blaze of controversy and intrigue in the past couple of days over whether a horse that finished second in the Melbourne Cup should be allowed to retain this finishing place and the US $541,000 prize money that came with the placing. The controversy has arisen due to a difference in rules in different parts of the world and has once again called for more unity between different continents when it comes to the guidelines that owners must adhere to.

Bauer was pipped to the line by Viewed by a very small margin that had race fans on the edge of their seat and meant the difference in millions of prize funds. However, it was later announced that the owners of Bauer had broken the rules because the horse had received electro-shock treatment five days before the race took place, a time period which is illegal in Australia. Although the treatment is permitted in many countries around the world as long as it takes place before the day of the race, in Australia there is a seven day period and therefore, a major rule had been broken by the team who finished in second place.

The major factor in the decision to allow the result to stand appears to rely on the fact that it was the vet, and not the race horse owners who have taken full responsibility for administering the electro-shock treatment and the trainer of the horse was relying on the vet to know the local rules which all horses must adhere to.

Although it appears that the horse racing community, including the owner of Ice Chariot who would have finished in the top 10 and earn the financial reward for doing so if Bauer had been disqualified, seem satisfied that no advantage was gained by Bauer undergoing the electro-shock treatment, there has been a sense of bewilderment and anger amongst horse racing fans and even legal observers. It may not have been a particularly well known rule or even one that has had a major outcome of the final placings but rules are rules and many people are unhappy with the way that the breaking of the rules has just been ignored. With the current financial climate being what it is, there is a feeling that anything which can be seen to be harming the integrity of the sport may discourage investors from entering the sport and this has been the cause of much concern for many people involved in the sport.

Other race horse owners who have fallen foul of rulings like this in the past may seek out retrospective compensation after this latest ruling and in any sport, once rules start being overturned or ignored, the controversy is surely only beginning. Also, as is so often the case, the punters who may have had winning each way bets if Bauer had been disqualified have been ignored as the result stands. With the racing community comfortable with the ruling, there is unlikely to be any further action in this matter but no doubt the debate and controversy will continue but it is likely that foreign race horse owners and trainers will be checking the rule books a little bit closer before the arrive in Australia for their next race.