Re:It’s a NO, NO and NO from me.
- Bob Brogan
-
Topic Author
- Administrator
-
- Posts: 82473
- Thanks: 6449
It’s a NO, NO and NO from me.
3 years 6 months ago
It’s a NO, NO and NO from me.
On Tuesday 23rd November 2021 the NHRA is to hold a Special General Meeting to consider an amendment to its Constitution regarding the composition and functions of the Nominations Committee. A key element of the amendment would be the inclusion on that Committee of an elected representative from the ranks of trainers and jockeys. The arguments are inclusivity and democracy.
Also in the resolution is a clause which would lead to the demise of the Racing Control Executive – the NHA function which is charged with maintaining and enhancing the integrity of racing and currently headed by Arnold Hyde. The arguments are rationalisation and economy.
Whilst the NHRA and SANTA may well have had meaningful and constructive discussions to arrive at the position they have – and are calling for members to vote positively for their proposed outcome, they are wrong.
There can be no doubt that most trainers know more about racing, rules and regulations than the vast majority of owners – and thus have a powerful influence over the opinion of their patrons – however, their opinions can at best be described as parochial or at worst, grossly partisan.
I am comfortable that the views and opinions of trainers and jockeys should be considered by the NHRA in their deliberations and policy formulations – but I am equally certain that those decisions should not be defined by those views and opinions. In my view, the fundamental purpose of the NHRA is to staunchly protect the interests of owners and punters – that is the integrity of horse racing. Any attempt to modify, reduce or meddle in that functionality of the NHRA must be resisted at all costs. This isn’t rocket science.
The NHRA must formulate and implement the rules of racing without fear of favour. OK it must be open to constructive suggestions and rule modifications but at its core the NHRA operates a set of rules which are largely the same as those of all the world’s major racing authorities. Trainers and jockeys are fully aware of those rules and regulations before they are issued with licences – if they don’t like the rules, they have two options – accept them or leave the industry.
Including those who have the potential to disregard or compromise the rules, directly or indirectly, on the Board of the NHRA is fundamentally flawed as an idea – not to mention what such inclusion would have on the sentiment of punters.
I repeat – the idea of inclusivity and democracy in this matter is a red herring.
When it comes to the role of the Racing Control Executive, this is currently the team that monitors and enforces the NHRA rules on behalf of the owners and punters, Resolution 3 at the SGM implies that the ditching of the RCE is justifiable on the grounds that we can’t afford the current function as it stands and that it should be devolved back to the MD or a National Board Director of the NHRA.
I would argue most vehemently that we can’t afford not to have the RCE in place. I shudder to think what conflicts of interest might emerge if a Director of the NHRA has to adjudicate on matters relating to the rules and regulations of racing yet at the same time seek to support the interests of big industry players such as the big owners and trainers. Can you imagine the potential for inconsistency in the application of rules, fines and other disciplinary actions? Can you imagine how the smaller players might feel if rule implementation gravitated in favour of the bigger ones – as likely would be the case?
The whole thing would become a nightmare – and very possibly a pre-condition for Government interference or involvement – or even state capture. This is dangerous territory we are dabbling in. Don’t go there.
And then you have to ask yourself if devolving the function back to a Director would see a reduction in coverage and effectiveness – the answer has to be yes – which is a big problem for me - and it should be for every owner and punter. If it is no, then there can be no economies generated – the work is all about man hours, ideally experienced man hours of people of incorruptible character and reputation – those would be the current incumbents at the RCE.
For me, the RCE may appear to be a tough police force for the industry – but that is exactly what it must be if it is to have proper effectiveness, credibility and deterrent potential. In a previous column I drew a parallel with a Lancaster Bomber – the closer it gets to its target, the greater the flak. It seems to me that Captain Hyde and the RCE must be right on target most of the time to be getting so much flak – albeit only from social media’s Flugabwehrkanone.
Any attempt to dilute the power of the RCE, reign in its activities and/or to undermine its potency can only be damaging to an industry already battling with viability and credibility issues – especially now when instances relating to doping with “difficult to trace substances” are on the increase.
Having said all these things, I would also say that there might well be deficiencies at the NHRA and some staff may need to pull their socks up or change their attitude – but such matters can never be a good reason to throw the baby out with the bath water – all that is needed is counselling, a size 12 boot or the sack.
So at the SGM I would urge all voters to vote, even if only by proxy – and to vote NO, NO and NO to the proposed resolutions. These are the right decisions.
C John Smith MBE
Owner & Steward MTC
10th November 2021
On Tuesday 23rd November 2021 the NHRA is to hold a Special General Meeting to consider an amendment to its Constitution regarding the composition and functions of the Nominations Committee. A key element of the amendment would be the inclusion on that Committee of an elected representative from the ranks of trainers and jockeys. The arguments are inclusivity and democracy.
Also in the resolution is a clause which would lead to the demise of the Racing Control Executive – the NHA function which is charged with maintaining and enhancing the integrity of racing and currently headed by Arnold Hyde. The arguments are rationalisation and economy.
Whilst the NHRA and SANTA may well have had meaningful and constructive discussions to arrive at the position they have – and are calling for members to vote positively for their proposed outcome, they are wrong.
There can be no doubt that most trainers know more about racing, rules and regulations than the vast majority of owners – and thus have a powerful influence over the opinion of their patrons – however, their opinions can at best be described as parochial or at worst, grossly partisan.
I am comfortable that the views and opinions of trainers and jockeys should be considered by the NHRA in their deliberations and policy formulations – but I am equally certain that those decisions should not be defined by those views and opinions. In my view, the fundamental purpose of the NHRA is to staunchly protect the interests of owners and punters – that is the integrity of horse racing. Any attempt to modify, reduce or meddle in that functionality of the NHRA must be resisted at all costs. This isn’t rocket science.
The NHRA must formulate and implement the rules of racing without fear of favour. OK it must be open to constructive suggestions and rule modifications but at its core the NHRA operates a set of rules which are largely the same as those of all the world’s major racing authorities. Trainers and jockeys are fully aware of those rules and regulations before they are issued with licences – if they don’t like the rules, they have two options – accept them or leave the industry.
Including those who have the potential to disregard or compromise the rules, directly or indirectly, on the Board of the NHRA is fundamentally flawed as an idea – not to mention what such inclusion would have on the sentiment of punters.
I repeat – the idea of inclusivity and democracy in this matter is a red herring.
When it comes to the role of the Racing Control Executive, this is currently the team that monitors and enforces the NHRA rules on behalf of the owners and punters, Resolution 3 at the SGM implies that the ditching of the RCE is justifiable on the grounds that we can’t afford the current function as it stands and that it should be devolved back to the MD or a National Board Director of the NHRA.
I would argue most vehemently that we can’t afford not to have the RCE in place. I shudder to think what conflicts of interest might emerge if a Director of the NHRA has to adjudicate on matters relating to the rules and regulations of racing yet at the same time seek to support the interests of big industry players such as the big owners and trainers. Can you imagine the potential for inconsistency in the application of rules, fines and other disciplinary actions? Can you imagine how the smaller players might feel if rule implementation gravitated in favour of the bigger ones – as likely would be the case?
The whole thing would become a nightmare – and very possibly a pre-condition for Government interference or involvement – or even state capture. This is dangerous territory we are dabbling in. Don’t go there.
And then you have to ask yourself if devolving the function back to a Director would see a reduction in coverage and effectiveness – the answer has to be yes – which is a big problem for me - and it should be for every owner and punter. If it is no, then there can be no economies generated – the work is all about man hours, ideally experienced man hours of people of incorruptible character and reputation – those would be the current incumbents at the RCE.
For me, the RCE may appear to be a tough police force for the industry – but that is exactly what it must be if it is to have proper effectiveness, credibility and deterrent potential. In a previous column I drew a parallel with a Lancaster Bomber – the closer it gets to its target, the greater the flak. It seems to me that Captain Hyde and the RCE must be right on target most of the time to be getting so much flak – albeit only from social media’s Flugabwehrkanone.
Any attempt to dilute the power of the RCE, reign in its activities and/or to undermine its potency can only be damaging to an industry already battling with viability and credibility issues – especially now when instances relating to doping with “difficult to trace substances” are on the increase.
Having said all these things, I would also say that there might well be deficiencies at the NHRA and some staff may need to pull their socks up or change their attitude – but such matters can never be a good reason to throw the baby out with the bath water – all that is needed is counselling, a size 12 boot or the sack.
So at the SGM I would urge all voters to vote, even if only by proxy – and to vote NO, NO and NO to the proposed resolutions. These are the right decisions.
C John Smith MBE
Owner & Steward MTC
10th November 2021
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Bob Brogan
-
Topic Author
- Administrator
-
- Posts: 82473
- Thanks: 6449
Re: It’s a NO, NO and NO from me.
3 years 6 months ago
Had someone moaning about this post last night, said their yard was fined R2500 for an eye ointment that was 3 days our of date.
Not sure if that's really relevant on what's posted above, but it highlights the daily struggles yard have with the nhra
Not sure if that's really relevant on what's posted above, but it highlights the daily struggles yard have with the nhra
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Dave Scott
-
- Administrator
-
- Posts: 43867
- Thanks: 3338
Re: It’s a NO, NO and NO from me.
3 years 6 months ago
Dear the Scotts
Please find attached a brief on the upcoming Special General Meeting and votes at the National Horse Racing Authority.
I would be grateful if you could publish this view as I believe we are at a pivotal - if not a critical point in the history of horse racing in Southern Africa - we must not sleep walk into making a big strategic mistake.
Sincerely
C John Smith MBE
Owner and Steward of Mashonaland Turf Club
Zimbabwe
At least the man has the courage of his conviction to post an opinion, beats ,"Dave can you post this on the site but don't use my name"
We get used when it suits 😪
Please find attached a brief on the upcoming Special General Meeting and votes at the National Horse Racing Authority.
I would be grateful if you could publish this view as I believe we are at a pivotal - if not a critical point in the history of horse racing in Southern Africa - we must not sleep walk into making a big strategic mistake.
Sincerely
C John Smith MBE
Owner and Steward of Mashonaland Turf Club
Zimbabwe
At least the man has the courage of his conviction to post an opinion, beats ,"Dave can you post this on the site but don't use my name"
We get used when it suits 😪
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Over the Air
-
- Platinum Member
-
- Posts: 2948
- Thanks: 721
Re: It’s a NO, NO and NO from me.
3 years 6 months ago
SANTA stands for the SOUTH AFRICAN NATIONAL TRAINERS ASSOCIATION as far as I am aware. With all due respect, and I know that Zim are members of the Jockey Club, surely this has got nothing to do with Zimbabwe?
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Mac
-
- Platinum Member
-
- Posts: 12013
- Thanks: 940
Re: Re:It’s a NO, NO and NO from me.
3 years 6 months agoOver the Air wrote: SANTA stands for the SOUTH AFRICAN NATIONAL TRAINERS ASSOCIATION as far as I am aware. With all due respect, and I know that Zim are members of the Jockey Club, surely this has got nothing to do with Zimbabwe?
Zim falls under the auspices of the NHRA.
Sent from my Ferrari using Tapatalk
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Dave Scott
-
- Administrator
-
- Posts: 43867
- Thanks: 3338
Re: Re:It’s a NO, NO and NO from me.
3 years 6 months ago - 3 years 6 months ago
Just a reminder
16h00 hrs today
16h00 hrs today
Last edit: 3 years 6 months ago by Dave Scott.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Dave Scott
-
- Administrator
-
- Posts: 43867
- Thanks: 3338
Re: Re:It’s a NO, NO and NO from me.
3 years 6 months ago
Possible permutations not sure if you can box?
NO NO NO
YES YES YES
NO NO YES
NO YES YES
YES NO NO
YES YES NO
As far as the odds NO NO YES has gone money on
Good voting 🗳
NO NO NO
YES YES YES
NO NO YES
NO YES YES
YES NO NO
YES YES NO
As far as the odds NO NO YES has gone money on
Good voting 🗳
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Over the Air
-
- Platinum Member
-
- Posts: 2948
- Thanks: 721
Re: Re:It’s a NO, NO and NO from me.
3 years 6 months ago - 3 years 6 months ago
Dave you wouldn't get 1/1000 on the NO NO YES outcome from any respectable bookmaker.
The question that needs answering is why the details of the deal struck have not been made public? We have had public letters from both sides around this vote stating their positions but true to form, now that a deal is done, no one knows what the terms were. It remains a need to know inner circle wink wink say no more industry.
The rub comes when the SANTA representative gets onto the board. This is when the changes will start and the old board members will get picked off one by one until control of the board is achieved. Why change a winning formula? Just have a look at how Larry was ousted from the RA. This will be no different.
The question that needs answering is why the details of the deal struck have not been made public? We have had public letters from both sides around this vote stating their positions but true to form, now that a deal is done, no one knows what the terms were. It remains a need to know inner circle wink wink say no more industry.
The rub comes when the SANTA representative gets onto the board. This is when the changes will start and the old board members will get picked off one by one until control of the board is achieved. Why change a winning formula? Just have a look at how Larry was ousted from the RA. This will be no different.
Last edit: 3 years 6 months ago by Over the Air.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Bob Brogan
-
Topic Author
- Administrator
-
- Posts: 82473
- Thanks: 6449
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Over the Air
-
- Platinum Member
-
- Posts: 2948
- Thanks: 721
Re: Re:It’s a NO, NO and NO from me.
3 years 6 months ago
Couldn't be clearer than that. We all happy families now.
What odds Bloomberg on the NHA board shortly?
What odds Bloomberg on the NHA board shortly?
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Frodo
-
- Platinum Member
-
- Posts: 13118
- Thanks: 3032
Re: Re:It’s a NO, NO and NO from me.
3 years 6 months ago
As I understand it, a deal has been done, and this is just dotting the i's and crossing the t's - so for all practical purposes a non-event

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Bob Brogan
-
Topic Author
- Administrator
-
- Posts: 82473
- Thanks: 6449
Re: Re:It’s a NO, NO and NO from me.
3 years 6 months ago
Maybe there is a sacrifice taking place ?
I hear some guy that was sacked in PE has been reinstated after 18 months
That must be a bitter pill for the control team
I hear some guy that was sacked in PE has been reinstated after 18 months
That must be a bitter pill for the control team
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Time to create page: 0.123 seconds