Secondly, the acceptance of both jockeys of the original stewards' interpretation is at variance with their own earlier statements.

By calling both Marcus and O'Sullivan before them on Wednesday night, the Stewards, headed by Christopher Lee and not Bernard Hargreaves, admitted their own fundamental error in concluding the inquiry a week previously without hearing evidence from the central figures involved - the jockeys.

If it was felt important enough to re-open the inquiry a week later to hear from Marcus, why was it concluded in the first place? And what happened to Marcus' evidence in the reconvened inquiry that his horse slipped behind and then came down? Again nothing to do with clipping heels.

Sadly, for punters, what was not seen by the Stipes on the original night was a most questionable ride in another race which demanded an explanation.

The Stipendiary Stewards are also not acting firmly enough in cases of interference in races. There have been at least three recent incidents which called for careless riding charges - we can name them but seemingly the Stipes cannot.

ELSEWHERE, 'appeasement' went out of fashion a considerable time ago.

The following letter was sent by senior Jockey Club management to mafoo Kwok Siu-hing, whose removal as handler of Team Valour sparked the unseemly conduct at the Sha Tin stables complex on Friday morning: 'I refer to the action taken by you early this morning when you attempted to seek clarification from trainer I. Allan regarding your working ability in relation to taking care of the horse, Team Valour.

'Please note that: (a) The Stipendiary Stewards racing incident report clearly states that it is trainer Allan's opinion that you and the horse are not suited.

'(b) It is not at all unusual for a horse and its handler to sometimes not get on, and therefore remarks such as trainer Allan's at Para (a) should not necessarily be taken as a reflection on your working ability; certainly the Club does not take these remarks in that way.

'(c) It is the Club's duty to inquire into the improved performance of winners when an explanation is thought to be in the public's interests.

'In the Team Valour inquiry, the race-meeting stewards did not 'accept' trainer Allan's opinion; they simply noted his explanation and that the horse had received special attention from the assistant trainer, the trainer's assistant as well as the stable apprentice. (Management have since confirmed that extra duties were performed on Team Valour). I hope that the above explanation will remove any misunderstanding about your working ability. You can be assured that management will not be taking any sort of disciplinary action as a result of the Stewards' report.

'However, I have to warn you that in future if you have any complaints or grievances, you should follow the Club's procedures as agreed with your union, and seek assistance from the Stables Management instead of instigating your own action.

'I trust that the matter can be put to rest.' TRUST cher ami Patrick Biancone to extract a dose of humour from any situation.

In relation to the Friday contretemps, the Frenchman suggests an added aid for punters. 'I think it will have to be that as well as declaring blinkers, visors or hoods, trainers should also state that a horse's mafoo has been changed.'