Time for action over infuriatingly inconsistent stewards' reports

Stewards' reports were in the news last week when the mighty gamble landed on I Doubt That at Kempton failed to yield one, but such baffling inaction was no surprise to me. I've long felt that there needs to be far greater scrutiny of what stewards decide to look into.

I Doubt That was backed from 33-1 to 11-4 before winning the finale at Kempton last Wednesday and there's no question that stewards should at least have questioned connections about the greatly improved form. However, it's become worryingly common for stewards not to bother enquiring into vastly improved performances, and even hugely disappointing displays.

One of the many tasks of the data department at the Racing Post is to log all the information contained within the stewards' reports from each meeting. These reports list the details of stewards' inquiries, permission that has been given to trainers to allow horses to wear hoods to post or go down early, post-race veterinary checks and reasons why horses ran badly or surprisingly well. In general, there are about a dozen items recorded on each stewards' report.