Much of Brexit Britain has been characterised by insularity, so perhaps it’s no surprise that cross-channel racing’s more parochial instincts appear to be stamped all over proposed limits on the number of horses any trainer can run in top handicaps there.
When news broke earlier this week about the British Horseracing Authority (BHA) having written to industry stakeholders seeking views on restricting trainers to a maximum of four runners in handicaps at Class One or Two level there was no doubt about the main targets.
In a “super trainer” era, no one’s more superior than Willie Mullins and Gordon Elliott. Elliott’s record 14 runners in last month’s Troytown Chase at Navan underlined the point and reinforced valid fears that exist about too much power residing in too few hands.
Ireland’s top two trainers, along with Henry de Bromhead, exert an unprecedented dominance over jump racing’s top prizes on both sides of the Irish Sea. With more success has come more ammunition in a self-perpetuating bandwagon that leaves rivals struggling to compete.
For the last two Aintree Grand Nationals, Elliott and Mullins have saddled a quarter of the runners between them. In 2019, Elliott saddled a record 11 runners in the sport’s most famous race. It would have been 13 if Michael O’Leary’s Gigginstown Stud hadn’t sold a couple on the eve of the race.
With entries for the 2024 National closing in February, and the maximum number of runners permitted in jump racing’s most valuable event reduced to 34 this year, motivation for the BHA’s furtive referendum on changing the rules is obvious.
Aiming for a more egalitarian National is an attractive goal in many ways. And handicaps by their very nature aren’t a meritocracy, but a construct designed to even things out. But taking back control to somehow try and recreate some twee National ideal of the past is delusional.
Just like Brexit, much of this looks like pandering to a domestic audience cheesed off by feelings of not being some sort of top dog any more. Jump racing on both sides of the Irish Sea may be two sides of the same coin but, regrettably, they are more distinct sides on the back of the BHA’s knee-jerk move.
Sections of Irish racing inevitably view all this through an unfortunate prism of them-and-us as well.
The view will be that competition fears weren’t expressed when Martin Pipe ran 10 horses in the 2001 Grand National. Talk of limits was non-existent when Paul Nicholls hoovered up the sport’s greatest prizes. Yet, it’s not a level playing field any more when the dominant forces are Irish.
It’s a simplistic analysis that nonetheless gets mixed into a broader Anglo-Irish context always liable to periodically bubble up into resentment. And as can be seen with this needless new controversy, pique isn’t confined to one side of the Irish Sea either.
It’s not only those eager to wrap the green flag around themselves that will put these BHA feelers into a wider context of plain cross-channel disgruntlement at the dominance enjoyed by Irish-trained horses over the last decade.
In parallel with that success story has also come a much more uncomfortable focus on Irish racing’s broader regulatory issues. The consequence of that has been belated but a much-needed acknowledgement that this country is no oasis of purity when it comes to doping, in particular.
The role of the Irish Horseracing Regulatory Board (IHRB) and the steady drip-feed of controversy emerging from the sport’s policing body, has also had an unfortunate reputational impact in terms of public confidence. Not even the most fervent IHRB apologist can deny that.
But, rightly or wrongly, there is a perception here that too many cross-channel voices have focused on such issues with a relish that doesn’t appear to extend to regulatory and reputational problems in its own backyard.
British racing has had drug scandals of its own. Its administrative sector is hardly immune from self-inflicted cock-ups. Anyone who thinks gambling shenanigans are some Irish preserve doesn’t pay attention to some of the stuff going on across the water.
However, the view that a range of establishment voices in Britain has been far too quick to revel in Irish discomfort is firmly rooted, accompanied by irritation at snide digs about some supposed corollary between success and regulatory shortcomings.
That is the climate into which this handicap grenade has been tossed. The BHA will say it’s a coincidence that it’s feeling people out about restrictions when Irish trainers are in such a powerful position. To which even those struggling day to day to compete with Mullins and Elliott will say, “right”.
History indicates sporting supremacy is often cyclical. The obvious invitation from Irish dominance is for cross-channel racing to up its game rather than examine reactionary options that amount to little more than taking the ball and going home.
There is a real competition debate to be had on both sides of the Irish Sea. But this smacks of little more than oven-ready opportunism.
Something for the Weekend
Emmet Mullins’s reputation means SO SCOTTISH (1.50) is unlikely to be missed by bookmakers in Saturday’s featured December Gold Cup at Cheltenham. He does look to have a lot going for him, though, including the presence of another JP McManus hope, Fakier d’Oudairies, as clear top weight. Frero Banbou could also go close for Venetia Williams.
Cheltenham’s Christmas dates start on Friday and DONNACHA (1.15) appeals as a progressive sort that could outrun his odds in a handicap hurdle.
