Today’s best bet, by Chris Cook
Another excellent column by Richie Forristal in today’s Racing Post suggests there may have been a development in the way stewards are applying the interference rules. Richie points out three recent examples of horses being promoted to first place after suffering interference from the ‘winner’ in circumstances where, over many years, we’d become used to the stewards making no move.
“The British stewards have seemingly begun to give the benefit of the doubt to the victim rather than the aggressor,” Richie writes and, oh Lord, let’s hope that’s true. But if it is, it’s been an organic process because the British Horseracing Authority tells me this morning there has been no recent directive to stewards on how the interference rules are to be interpreted.
I still don’t like the wording of our interference rules but there is room for interpretation when stewards ask themselves if they’re “satisfied that the interference…