bodyType

customContents

entityId

entityUuid

articlePageQuery

filter

article

articleBaseAdvertisingInfoArticle

articleListArticle

articleSeoArticle

helpersCheckIsPostiesArticle

hooksArticleAcknowledgementGateOverlayArticle

hooksTrackPageViewArticle

hooksContentInterestArticle

articleLinkingDataContent

hooksAmpRedirectArticle

articleSchemaContent

liveArticle

advertZone

sentiment

contentLock

topics

types

sections

moreOnThisArticles

urlAlias

commentCount

authorLocations

authors

paywallTypes

corrections

sponsorType

displaySlideShow

multimediaEmbed

printHeadline

seriesContainer

socialHeadline

headline

flag

firstTopic

glossary

flattenTypeIds

publishedDate

additionalInfoBoxes

images

image

relatedLinks

relatedNewsletters

__typename

createdDate

sponsor

pdfFiles

seriesReverseOrder

series

disableOffPlatformContent

published

updatedDate

summary

subHeadline

body

keywords

readingTime

customTimezone

liveContents

SCMP Reporter

Last week's Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) raids on a number of local apprentices and local jockeys is not something from which racing should cower.

 It was, I think, Gandhi who uttered the seemingly unpenetrable phrase 'fair is foul and foul is useful'.

 Seen in the context of the ICAC swoop, it could be argued that racing was previously chugging along in a fair period.

 Everything seems fair, nothing much needs changing. We're all, apparently, doing rather well.

 But beneath the surface, unnoticed in this seemingly halcyon period, there were other forces at work - forces which last week led to the jailing of apprentice Keith Kwok Ting for six months after he admitted receiving money not to try in a race designated for the local riders.

 Now that the foulness is out in the open, it can be used to work in racing's favour. Foul can, indeed, be made useful.

 There is a direct analogy here with evolution. The greatest periods of evolutionary development have tended to follow from some cataclysmic natural disaster.

 A classic example would be when the dinosaurs were wiped out by a comet hitting Earth and causing a significant change in the planet's temperature.

 The ICAC swoop is racing's comet, racing's evolutionary disaster. But racing should be able to make use of this disaster, this foulness, and usher in an era of extraordinary growth and development.

 Two areas clearly have to be looked at following the third ICAC swoop in little over a decade.

 The first is the way that apprentices are nurtured in Hong Kong. The second is the way that racing is policed.

 Probably the apprentices have had it too easy for too long.

 After three seasons, it is obvious which of them have a future in the game and which of them don't.

 It would be much better to lower the age at which apprentices come out of their indentures. This would help to maintain racing's integrity while still giving them long enough, if good enough, to make it.

 And don't feel sorry for those who don't make it. The Jockey Club remains a paternal institution and alternative, well-paid riding careers are open to the apprentices who fail to make the grade.

 The Club must also take a fundamental look at its system of policing races, as well as the individuals doing the policing - the stipes.

 Three current stipes were on the stipes panel during the period where a number of races are alleged to have been fixed.

 Their competence is naturally brought into question by the ICAC raids, especially as it is alleged on the charge sheet that Ricky Choi Chun-wai, in one race, deliberately rode his horse in order to cause interference.

 Someone should be called in to head a commission of inquiry into the way racing is policed and publish a report. Above all, it might help to compare Hong Kong's system of policing racing with that in place in Australia which, from a gambling point of view, is the jurisdiction most comparable to here.

 Such questions as the role of amateurs on the panel must be addressed.

 The whole judicial process is probably worth looking at, too.

 Should stewards' of the Jockey Club hear the appeals when two of their peers are among those who heard the original inquiry?  Should someone like a recently retired judge chair the appeals panel instead?  And, of course, should inquiries and appeals be open to the press as a way of promoting rigour and rooting out incompetence?  The Jockey Club's management and stewards may well have to take some very radical but long overdue decisions in this area.

 As for the way the Jockey Club responded publicly to the ICAC raids, senior management were conspicuous by their absence on television. They should have been there, giving frank and in-depth interviews because the general mood is one of sympathy towards the Jockey Club.

 It is the Club which has been let down. The Club itself, beyond perhaps the stipes, is not culpable. Quite the reverse is true as much of the intelligence work was done by the Club's own security department.

 Lastly, what about the role of government?  How about a word or two of support for racing from the SAR's Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa? After all racing, and the money efficiently collected by the Hong Kong Jockey Club, is a significant reason why direct taxation is so low and why so many grand social projects are completed.

 Tung could only make a fleeting appearance on International Day and the Chief Executive's Cup has to be run as the first race on the opening day of the season to fit in with his schedule. Maybe this cataclysmic episode can also be used to usher in a more responsive attitude from government.



The ICAC swoop is racing's comet, racing's evolutionary disaster