Bernie got stuck in 🤬

Jockey B Fayd’Herbe was charged with a contravention of Rule 58.10.2 (read with Guideline M on the use of the crop) in that he misused his crop by striking AL MUTHANA (AUS) more than 12 times in the entire race. Jockey B Fayd’Herbe signed an admission of guilt and was fined R40000,00. In determining penalty, the Board took into account the distance over and manner in which Jockey B Fayd’Herbe used his crop, the number of strikes (16) and the value and status of this race.

well the winning connections WON 1,1 MILLION....... so i'm sure they will gladly pay his fine.

u have got to argue....... if he had counted to 12..... & STOPPED using the crop......... would the horse have WON ??? probably NOT........ & no one ever remembers who came 2nd in a FEATURE RACE . If I was a part owner...... I would gladly pay the fine along with my fellow partners.

It's time jockeys got disqualified when abusing the whip rule

.....a rather expensive panel beating job though....:S

Disgraceful...and not the first time he has panel beat a horse...

I think if a horse was disqualified, the owner and trainer will exercise better discretion as to who rides their horses...and it will reduce abuse...the penalties have to be severe to correct behaviour...

Rather "quiet" thread.Would`ve been an outrage if it was Khumalo.

Go look at the horses previous run over 1200m

Not easy to say anything but..... FUCK

I wouldn't put a cent on a horse ridden by a panel beater so there's a few jockeys I avoid...much rather having a losing bet than being on some-one winning with no regard to the rules meant to protect the very source of their income ...

.....although I am not an advocate of panel beating what is the difference between 12 or 15 smacks as these new modern day crops are not as whip like as those of earlier days.....and with the jock pumped with adrenalin to get his charge to the line he may lose count after 10.....much like firing a semi automatic pistol....a very big rush until the magazine is finally empty.....:oops:

I agree with Muhti - as far as I am concerned the rule-makers should re-consider these penalties (as the whips today imo do no inflict any meaningful 'injury'); there is always the case though about not being fair to the opposition who is not being subjected to the 'pummeling' - so either do away with crops completely (which imo is not practical) or adjust the limits - as can be seen by the many offences dished out regarding 'whip abuse', the limits are surely not practical