Fatalities highlight pressing need for reform

What we should have been talking about after the 2012 Grand National was the wonderful performance by winner Neptune Collonges, who rallied under a stirring ride from jockey Daryl Jacob to pip leader Sunnyhillboy on the line in one of the most exciting finishes in Aintree history. Instead, the death of two horses during the race, including Synchronised, the highly recognisable and hugely popular winner of the Cheltenham Gold Cup just a month previously, have dominated the post-race discussion and cast a dark shadow over the most famous race in the world. Four fatalities in the past two runnings of the increasingly controversial national have given fresh ammunition to those anti-horseracing campaigners to whom the race is barbaric, and the British Horseracing Authority (BHA) can expect to come under intense pressure and scrutiny in the coming weeks as they launch their investigation into yesterday’s events. Some emotionally-charged condemnation from many quarters followed the race, including the worldwide trending of ‘banhorseracing’ on Twitter, a roll off the tongue statement that ignores the unique nature of the national and the comparatively tiny ratio of horses that die in flat racing. However, the criticisms, reasoned or ridiculous, have highlighted the need for reform of the Grand National, and horseracing cannot take a lone stance against this turning tide of public opinion.

Making a handful of fences slightly smaller will not do this time; for the BHA, there needs to be a bold move in the direction of making the race much safer to minimise the risk of fatalities. If they do nothing, and next year’s national passes without incident, they will breathe a sigh of relief, thus prolonging the inevitable outcry when another horse perishes in the race. If they do nothing and more scenes such as those witnessed yesterday take place in future nationals, protests and boycotts could be mobilised, and horseracing will risk losing the support of the public, which of course sustains the Grand National. Therefore, action must be taken, and it must be decisive. For me, a maximum of 30 runners, a uniformly smaller height and less severe drop on all fences, and a stricter qualification process for horses are all measures that are realistic and could make the race a significantly safer one. While this may be relinquishing some fine Grand National tradition, it is vital that the BHA take a conciliatory approach to reform rather than a defensive one, which could isolate the racing community and alienate the British public. Society is moving on, with health and safety concerns taking on ever-increasing importance in modern sport, and racing needs to do likewise, both for the safety of the horses and to retain the support of a disenchanted public. 

Race row reignited by act of petulance

Despite some vintage Premier League entertainment today which included 29 goals, the events have been overshadowed by the pathetic actions of Luis Suarez, which have served to prolong the engulfment of English football under an increasingly dark cloud. Suarez had an opportunity to defuse the tensions surrounding the race row with a simple handshake at the beginning of the game, and a humble attitude on the pitch during it. Instead, the Uruguayan has voluntarily reignited an issue that could, and in the view of most football fans should have been put to bed.

Suarez knew the eyes of the world would be upon him when he refused to proffer his hand in response to Evra, and knew that the implications would be significant; no amount of cultural naivety can conceal that.  The explanation for refusing to shake Evra’s hand probably lies in a resentment of the Frenchman for harming his image by accusing Suarez of something he evidently believes he is not guilty of. But when your personal beliefs could have such damaging repercussions for a brand and an employer like Liverpool football club, it is better to keep those beliefs to yourself, rather than to take a provocative stance in the eyes of the world. Suarez’s actions have therefore dragged Liverpool’s proud reputation through the dirt, and this is why Sir Alex Ferguson’s comments that Suarez should never play for Liverpool again are entirely fair. The club must act to preserve their image. Their support for Suarez is becoming increasingly difficult to justify, and any continuation of this stance could land them in even hotter water. Despite his remorseless conduct, not many of the footballing fraternity believe Suarez is a racist; this is not the main issue. The point is that Liverpool’s staunch defence of the South American portray the club as representative of views that English football thought had been left firmly behind, chiefly that racism is an acceptable form of behaviour on the football pitch.

At the centre of this frankly shameful attitude has been Kenny Dalglish. The Liverpool manager’s evasive and defensive comments in the post-match interview compounded further the significance of today’s events for Liverpool, and contrasted with those of Ferguson, who even had the sensibility to deplore Evra’s excessive celebrations at the final whistle of Manchester United’s 2-1 victory over Dalglish and Suarez’s beleaguered Liverpool. Dalglish’s infuriating post-match interviews have been a recurring theme this season, and his intransigence over the Suarez affair has served to discredit his regime. Only Liverpool fans blinded by loyalty would say that Dalgish has handled the situation well. He and Liverpool’s conduct, from the infamous shirts sported before the match against Wigan Athletic to the badly worded statement in defence of Suarez, have been shocking throughout. In this way, the events of the past few months have transformed one of the most universally popular football clubs in English history to, at present, the most hated.

It remains to be seen how this sorry episode will conclude. It surely represents the darkest chapter in Premier League history. The book could have been closed on it today, but instead the issue has been reignited by an act of both selfishness and petulance. Liverpool’s next move is crucial, and will be thoroughly scrutinised by the footballing world and the media. Instead of digging themselves a deeper hole by persistently defending the undefendable, the club can make a stance by transfer listing Luis Suarez, thereby halting their growing isolation from the footballing community. Some issues are bigger than football, and this is one of them. Liverpool must strive to restore their reputation and put this sorry tale firmly behind them with a symbolic act, to show that their institution is not representative of attitudes of a bygone era.