Horse racing has seen various stories come to light about jockeys receiving fines over the years. Other punishments such as meeting bans and suspensions are not uncommon. These come about as part of disciplinary action when they break specific rules. The British Horseracing Authority (BHA) determines the rules and penalties in place.
Jockeys can either admit their guilt on the charges or deny them. As is often the case in such situations, pleading guilty tends to lessen the punishment. Yet it isn’t only riders that authorities can penalise. Sometimes, trainers can also be on the receiving end of such actions.
It’s rare that horse trainers are actually the centre of attention. Usually, this will only happen if one of their runners has finished in first position. For the most part, people focus on the horses and the jockeys in the races. This doesn’t mean that trainers don’t have the ability to break the rules, though. Far from it. There are certain rules and penalties in place that relate to trainers too. What are the punishments for offending trainers in the horse racing world?
One instance of a trainer suffering a severe backlash came in 2021. In February of that year, an investigation took place by the Irish Horseracing Regulatory Board (IHRB). This saw them review an image of trainer George Elliot. The image in question was in circulation on social media.
It depicted Elliot sitting on a dead horse while making a peace sign. The trainer himself confirmed that the photo was a genuine snap, and he issued an apology. Animal rights organisation PETA condemned the photograph, as did the BHA. It was in March of that year that the latter organisation banned Elliot from British meetings. His horses would be able to run if transferred to an alternate trainer, though. The IHRB convened a hearing and banned Elliot from training for 12 months on March 5.
Who Hands Out Punishments to Horse Racing Trainers?
If a prospective trainer wants to saddle horses in the UK, they need a licence for it. This comes from the BHA, but a mass of conditions come with the licence. A trainer has to meet those conditions and stick to them throughout. The converse of that is that they accept the BHA will regulate horseracing in the UK. They know that the organisation will also act on rule breaches. In Ireland, it is the IHRB that does the same thing. They, of course, determined the punishment for Elliot, who is himself an Irish trainer.
In that particular instance, the board determined he had breached Rule 2272 (i). That rule surrounds acting in a manner which is prejudicial to the good reputation of horseracing. The BHA has the same sort of rule in its own manual. Both regulatory bodies have a range of punishments they can enact. This includes suspensions and fines, as well as much more permanent action. Elliot actually got away with quite a light punishment, given how serious his offence was.
Racecourse Stewards (RS) and Disciplinary Panels (DP) can consider punishments for offences. Fines not exceeding £15,000 are possible by the former. Meanwhile, fines of up to £75,000 can come from the DP. The RS can suspend horses from running for a period of 40 days. They can also refer possible breaches to the BHA or IHRB. Different financial penalties are possible in different circumstances.
Meanwhile, DPs are able to disqualify people, as well as suspend licences or permits. They can also make any person ineligible for a licence or permit or registration. Cautions can also come from the DP. Meanwhile, in the case of a trainer, the DP can refuse to accept or allow the following:
- Any entries for horses in the care of the trainer except for races that will be run outside a specified period.
- Any horse to run in the case of the trainer, even if duly entered.
- Any horse that has left the care of the trainer and run in a race to return to the care of that trainer.
- Any horse already declared to run in the care of the trainer, except for races outside the specified time period.
Potential Offences by Trainers That Are Punishable
Trainers have the potential to suffer more than jockeys a lot of the time. That’s because they have a lot to do with the upkeep of horses. Their activities need to be adherent to the appropriate rules. Some of the offences that trainers can commit include:
- Entering an unqualified horse – fines of up to £3,000 and exclusion for up to 3 years.
- Prejudicial to the integrity, proper conduct or good reputation of horseracing – fines of up to £15,000 and exclusion for up to 3 years.
- Bloodstock code of practice – fines of up to £15,000 and exclusion for up to 3 years.
- Forged signature – fines of up to £2,000 and suspension of up to 1 year.
- Giving misleading evidence at an enquiry – fines of up to £5,000.
- Abusive behaviour – fines of up to £5,000.
- Violent or improper conduct between riders/trainers – fines of up to £5,000.
- Bribes – Disqualification/exclusion up to 10 years.
- Attending a meeting whilst a disqualified person – fines of up to £10,000.
- Trainer instructs rider to breach Rule (B)57.1 – fines of up to £15,000.
- Failure to obey stewards – fines of up to £10,000.
- Horse not in care of licensed trainer – fines of up to £1,000 for a mistake, and up to £10,000 for a deliberate breach.
There are many other instances where trainers can receive fines or other punishments. Generally speaking, the manuals from the BHA and the IHRB are quite similar. Trainers are not out of the woods under the rules of either body. The same is true around the world, with regulatory bodies having strict rules in place.
Instances of Trainers Suffering Fines & Punishments
Believe it or not, several trainers have fallen foul of the authorities for rule breaches. Such was the case in February of 2021 for Charles Byrnes. The case of this trainer dated back to October of 2018. Reports at the time suggested one of Byrnes’s horses had had an overdose of ACP in Ireland.
The horse, Viking Hoard, returned a positive test for the drug. The report stated that the dose in its body was over 100 times larger than the threshold. Authorities pulled the horse up in a race at Tramore. The IHRB accepted, in an initial hearing, that Byrnes had no direct involvement in the doping. Yet it all comes down to negligence on the part of the trainer.
He received a six-month training ban for “inexcusable” negligence. Authorities said that he left his horse unattended for “20 to 25 minutes” before the race began. There was a lot more to this case, though. The IHRB was first alerted to suspicious betting patterns in the race involving Viking Hoard. Pre-race betting odds for the runner drifted from 4-1 to 8-1. It was also laid in a heavy way on Betfair via an offshore “white label” site. One account on that site was also linked to an individual known to have linked to match-fixing. That person staked €34,889 (£30,200) to win €3,200 (£2,850) if Viking Hoard suffered defeat.
This suggested there was “substantial confidence” that the horse wouldn’t win. That same account risked a total of €30,279 to win €12,000 before the horse suffered defeat at Sedgefield. This incident occurred two weeks before the Tramore race.
An eight-year ban was what Mahmood Al Zarooni received in April of 2013. The BHA disclosed information about 11 horses that he had trained. In the report, the data said that all those horses tested positive for anabolic steroids. Such drugs are 100% banned, and Zarooni admitted his guilt in the outcome. He also confirmed that four other horses had also had the drug administered in recent times.
The first action of the BHA was to ban the 15 horses in question from racing for six months. It was then left in the hands of the authorities to deal with Zarooni. The disciplinary hearing at the BHA offices in London determined his fate. The eight-year ban was what he received. This meant he was unable to enter a racecourse or training stable until April 2021. He received his racing licence back from the Emirates Racing Authority. It was in November of 2021 that his first runner since the ban entered a race. His horse Major Cinnamon appeared at the Meydan Racecourse, finishing in 12th position.
There was little place for Eric Guillot to run in his disciplinary action. The trainer suffered a ban by the New York Racing Association and 1/ST Racing. Why? Because he changed the name of one of his horses to a racial slur! This was something he directed towards a black TVG analyst.
Guillot may have made $13 million across his career from training horses, but a 2021 Tweet sealed his fate. After announcing the name change “in honor of a TVG analyst”, he posted a follow-up Tweet. This revealed the horse’s new name as “Grape Soda”. That can be a racist term directed towards black people. The trainer said it was to honour Ken Rudolph, the black analyst for the network. This led to Rudolph responding via Twitter. He pointed out not only the name of the horse, but to the general racism across the racing industry.
As a result, several racing organisations banned Guillot for the racist name. He was also released from his position with Cypress Creek Equine, which owned the horse. TVG noted that they would no longer air any races involving the trainer. The new owner of the horse, Lawrence Roman, changed its name to Respect For All. He also said that 10% of the horse’s earnings would go to the Backstretch Employee Service Team.
Guillot said that Rudolph had criticised the training practices he enacted. Yet this wasn’t enough to save him. As things stand for the moment, Guillot’s ban is in place for an indefinite amount of time.
One final story surrounds the case of Hughie Morrison. The British trainer specialises in horses that compete in Flat racing. Yet in 2017, he faced a 10-year ban after one of his horses failed a drug test. Traces of the anabolic steroid nandrolone came to light in tests done on horse Our Little Sister. This came about following a race at Wolverhampton in January of 2017. After the Zarooni case, the BHA adopted a zero-tolerance policy on horse doping. It seems like Morrison didn’t get that memo, though.
Morrison insisted his confusion at the test result. He learned of it when the BHA conducted a dawn raid in early February. This saw them test all 77 horses in the stable at East Ilsley, Berkshire. The trainer said he would leave no stone unturned in finding the doping culprit.
Our Little Sister was one of the most lowly rated animals at the stables. This made it quite the odd choice of horse to single out for doping amongst the 77 there. This led Morrison to come to the conclusion that it may have been a deliberate doping from someone