Blow to BHA as Heather Main wins appeal against fine for rider weighing in light

The BHA has suffered the embarrassment of being told its rules do not say what its officials believed they said, following a successful appeal by the trainer Heather Main against a fine levied by the Lingfield stewards in July.

Main was told to pay £500 when Jason Watson weighed in 2lb light after riding her Tindrum into second place, a discrepancy for which no explanation could be found.

The long-established procedure in such cases is that the horse is disqualified, the jockey receives a short suspension and the trainer is fined. But Main, insistent that she had done nothing wrong, challenged that orthodoxy and prevailed because all mention of trainers was removed from the relevant rule during a redraft in 2019.

The BHA disputed the appeal and said it had never intended, in its redraft, to acquit trainers of responsibility in this area, arguing that strict liability could be inferred from a reading of the rules, accompanying guidelines and knowledge of the previous rules. Charlotte Davison, presenting the BHA case, argued it was important for the sport's integrity that trainers and jockeys be strictly liable in such cases and should not be able to evade punishment by simply saying they could not account for any weight discrepancy.

Main's solicitor, Rory Mac Neice, countered that by pointing out no advantage was gained by a trainer in such circumstances, with the horse being inevitably and immediately disqualified. "There is no evidence that Mrs Main has done anything to compromise the integrity of the sport," he said.

"She's done absolutely nothing wrong. Mrs Main made no changes to the equipment while it was in her custody or control and nor did she neglect to put any part of it on the horse."

Mac Neice noted the old rule B67 expressly allowed stewards to act against trainers and jockeys in such cases, but its replacement G13 says merely: "A jockey's weight at weighing in must not be more than 1lb less than their weight at weighing out". Mac Neice told the appeals panel: "If B67 was still to be considered by you it would be in the rules of racing. And it's not. If the BHA intended that power [to fine trainers] was to be maintained, it should have drafted such a power and included it in its rules. And it hasn't."

Mac Neice added that other BHA rules, relating to anti-doping, spelled out very clearly that they were imposing strict liability. No such language was included in the rules on weighing in, he said.

The panel evidently accepted that reasoning, its chairman James O'Mahony saying: "Our verdict is to some extent based on what we consider as natural fairness in construing the rules. We don't accept the integrity of racing is at risk from the ruling we make.

"Indeed it might be said that integrity would be challenged by fining someone, unless there's very good reason, without fault being established. The crucial point in these cases, in our judgment, is that the horse should be disqualified."

Main welcomed the verdict, saying: "I appealed for the principle of the matter, that I should not have been fined, having done nothing wrong. The panel applied the principles of natural fairness, which gives me confidence that you can have a fair hearing.

"I'm so glad I appealed because they [the BHA] have to be held to account. They were using old guidance to interpret new rules. If I hadn't appealed, this would have carried on.

"It was completely out of my control that he [Watson] lost a pound and a half, which I still think was due to sweating. I should not be fined for that."

A BHA spokesman said: "We note the finding of the independent panel. During the rules rewrite process, all stakeholders were promised that the meaning of the rules would remain the same as the old rules unless a rule change was explicitly consulted upon.

"This was not a rule that was intended to change and no such consultation took place. We will therefore take steps to request a change to the wording of the rule in order to reflect how it has always been understood and intended to have operated. The BHA board will also be asked to determine a policy position regarding all breaches of the rule which have occurred since the rewrite."

At least five similar decisions by raceday stewards may have to be reconsidered in light of this verdict, other trainers having also been fined when a jockey weighed in light and no explanation could be found. Brian Barr, Karl Burke, Neil King and Nigel Twiston-Davies have all been fined since August 2019, as were the owners of Capitaine in relation to a hunter chase at Stratford in May.

Questions may now be asked as to whether the effect of any other rule has been unintentionally altered by the 2019 redraft.

Read more:

HRI reveals 48-hour declarations will remain permanent in Irish racing

Confirmed runners and riders for Saturday's Irish Champion Stakes

Newmarket's Guineas meeting to become three-day fixture from 2022

Miss Amulet to make final start for Condon in Kentucky clash with The Lir Jet

The Front Runner is our latest email newsletter available exclusively to Members' Club Ultimate subscribers. Chris Cook, a three-time Racing Reporter of the Year award winner, provides his take on the day's biggest stories and tips for the upcoming racing every morning from Monday to Friday