Life of Brian

There's been plenty going on this week, but of course nothing compares to Brian, nor to Ben. Most of you will know what I am talking about, but any overseas readers will be forgiven for being baffled. Basically, the BHA wisely has an eye to the future, and wishes to ensure that racing thrives rather than declines, ie that it becomes more rather than less popular. So far, so good. To this end, it has decided to take specialist advice. Again, so far, so good. However, thereafter I fear that these good intentions might merely be in the process of paving the road to cock-up, if not quite to hell. Specialist advice can, of course, take many forms, and specialist advice in the area of making a sport appealing to all sections of society is inevitably going to be a fairly nebulous area. Anyway, the specialist advice chosen is coming from a firm of "consultants" called Harrison Fraser, and I fear that this firm is taking advantage of the BHA's desire to do good to take the BHA - ie all of us - for a ride. In defence of Harrison Fraser, it may be that the firm believes that it is delivering value for money, and that that which it is purveying as gold is indeed gold. To the uninitiated, however, it is base metal (at best).

So far, it would appear that Harrison Fraser has been paid quarter of a million pounds to come up with the fairly self-evident information that most people don't pay any attention to racing, and the expensively produced and generalized theory that the potential race-going public can be represented by Brian, an existing race-goer who is fairly traditional, and Ben, who sounds pretty much Tony Blair's beau ideal, who represents the future, and who as yet remains among the unconverted. Racing's future will, we hear, come up roses if Ben can be wooed to the fold. (In the likely event that my synopsis leaves you not much the wiser, let me tell you that Brian is a bit boring, traditional, set in his ways, out of touch, very British, old school, reserved, nice when you get to know him, sexist, not engaging, well educated and one dimensional; while Ben is approachable, athletic, a bit edgy (!), British, cool and fresh, instantly recognisable, likeable, powerful, smart casual, trusted, well groomed, aspirational, competitive, consumer centric (!!), driven, entrepreneurial, innovative, intelligent, intuitive, self assured, young minded, straight talking, well read, well rounded and good fun). Interestingly, Ben speaks many languages (although that is possibly as relevant as him being athletic) and stands out from the crowd - although this latter observation rather shoots down Harrison Fraser's assertion that Ben can be the key to racing's future, because by definition (if he exists at all) he must be a small minority, otherwise he would BE the crowd, rather than its glaring exception.

Anyway, for David Fraser and John Harrison, the downside of receiving quarter of a million pounds for doing very little (and seemingly nothing worthwhile) has been that on Monday that they had to stand in front of an audience of reasonably intelligent people and have a go at convincing them that they have given better value for their fee than this description of the bargain seems to suggest. They don't appear to have convinced very many, either among those who listened to them in person or among the wider public. Laura Thompson wrote a typically sensible analysis of their presentation in Tuesday's Racing Post, which was followed up by some readers' contributions the following day. The very successful businessman and racehorse owner Andy Stewart, who is surely well qualified to pass an opinion, was quoted as saying, "People were expecting good news. But they don't even get mediocre news; they just get the most ridiculous piece of nonsense that almost looks like it has come out of the Magna Carta. It's hundreds of years out of date. If racing were a publicly quoted company, after that announcement the share price would have fallen by 30 per cent ... If you were to take that marketing package to a world-leading brand they wouldn't even get past the doorman. They haven't got a clue". While Bill O'Gorman, as usual, got straight to the point with, "Just a thought: the history of Britain's fall from grace seems closely linked to the emergence of new man Ben and the demise of the more stolid Brian. Now racing, like the country as a whole, could do with a strong dose of common sense in order to purge these puerile initiatives and get back to basics".

Today we have had Brough Scott's view, which is summarized by his view that, "It's a nonsense. It won't wash. AS solutions go it's as convincing as the King's New Clothes. Everyone is supposed to look on in admiring wonder when there isn't actually anything there ... When people realise their nakedness they are going to ask how on earth they have allowed guys as good and sensible as Paul Roy and Nic Coward ... to get caught up in the whole thing ... Stop this nonsense now!". And that, I am afraid, seems to be a fair summary. It might be the case that Fraser Harrison will eventually come up with something constructive (by which time, we can assume, the bill will be considerably higher than the 250,000 pounds which it has so far reached), but so far they appear just to have come up with some spurious observations and laughable caricatures. I won't be holding my breath. In our favour is that we do have some bright, conscientious and well-meaning men supposedly running the show - Paul Roy, Nic Coward and Rod Street spring straight to mind - but just now, for whatever reason, it would appear that the whole project is going badly off the rails.

The good thing about this farrago is that it has taken the spotlight off what would otherwise have been the debacle of the week, which is the proposed vendor-funded sales incentive scheme (which will provide bonuses for the owners of winning graduates of yearling sales, but only if those wins come in two-year-old races) currently being cooked up by various bloodstock identities. I was sent a questionnaire yesterday to give my views (which I have done) and basically, while I am in favour (as I made clear in my Racing Post piece a few weeks ago) of some type of bonus scheme which would stimulate interest at the yearling sales to help vendors, one which only stimulates interest in yearlings which appear to have obvious two-year-old potential is clearly wrong, as it inevitably will make life even harder for the people who most need (and arguably most deserve) help, ie those who are not breeding the "commercial" two-year-old prospect but who are producing yearlings who might instead make stayers. As a purchaser of such a horse, the scheme would clearly suit me as these less obvious yearlings would become even easier to buy, but if I were a vendor I would be severely unamused by the proposals. I assume that the TBA will strenuously oppose the scheme (they will be badly letting a large proportion of their members down if they do not) and it will die a death, but one never knows! Of course, the proposers of such schemes have the ace up their sleeve of being able to say that something clearly needs to be done (upon which we all agree) and that at least they are trying to do something, while the opponents are just rubbishing any attempt at progress. I, at least, should be immune from such criticism, having written an article in the Racing Post a few weeks ago suggesting that the money currently given as breeders' prizes should serve instead as owners' premiums so that (a) owner/breeders still receive the bonuses anyway when their horses win and (b) the stock being offered for sale by British commercial breeders would become more attractive as the horses would come with the bonus that, if they go on to win races, their new owners will get extra prize money over and above that provided in the race's prize fund. Having come up with a scheme (which received widespread approval, but censure from the TBA) I think that I am in a position to pass criticism on another similar scheme when I believe that one of its aspects (that the bonus is only available for two-year-old victories) renders it unsound.

Having disregarded the 'little and often' principal of blog-writing yet again, I can only apologise to the few readers who have got this far. Before closing I shall just return briefly to Planet Earth and say that Emma and I had a lovely day at Exeter yesterday. My father has been a steward there, at Taunton and at Newtwon Abbot for several years, but sadly has now had to give this up, as one has to do when one reaches the age of 70. He'll miss it a lot and this will leave a big hole in his life, but the ending of his role was hugely sweetened by the kindness of the management at Exeter in giving him a really good send-off. Thus yesterday saw the Claude Berry Mares' Novices' Hurdle Race, which was why we were there. It was a lovely day. I found it very moving, so I am sure that my dad found it even more so. We were among the guests at a lunch in the directors' room, at which the chairman, Major General Nick Vaux, made a lovely speech thanking him for his work, and presented him with an engraved salver, something which I know he will treasure. I was so pleased to be there, and in the unlikely event of anyone involved in Exeter Racecourse reading this, I would like to pass on the assurance that the racecourse's hospitality and kindness were hugely appreciated and that the occasion meant a great deal. Thank you.

Mention of Nick Vaux prompts me to write that he was one of several people I was honoured to meet yesterday. I will know more about him in due course because, on reaching home last night, I ordered his book 'March to the South Atlantic' on Amazon. I am very much looking forward to reading this, which is his account of leading the marine attack in the Falklands War. (I've finished Tim Vigors' outstanding book and am currently broaching Charlie Brooks' novel 'Citizen'. I will start Nick Vaux's book when I either finish 'Citizen' or admit defeat on it; time will tell which alternative it shall be). Another man whom I enjoyed meeting was the former crack amateur rider Derek Scott, who used to ride a very good horse called Duke Of York, on whom he won the Mildmay Memorial Chase at Sandown and finished fourth to Mandarin in the 1962 Cheltenham Gold Cup. He too is a former Exeter steward, and I was delighted to hear that he now stands two stallions at stud who used to be trained just round the corner from this stable: Lincoln winner Babodana and Yorkshire Cup and Lingfield Derby Trial winner Franklins Gardens. They are two lovely horses, so it is good to know that they have each found a place at stud and are in such good hands.