Thirsk racecourse clerk could face disciplinary action after misleading punters and trainers

A clerk of the course who admitted amending a GoingStick reading before a race meeting could face disciplinary action.

James Sanderson, who is chief executive at Thirsk in Yorkshire, is also responsible for providing details of the ground conditions ahead of and on the day of racing, vital information for trainers and jockeys as well as punters. It has been a mandatory requirement since 2007 that clerks use a GoingStick to measure the firmness of the ground and provide a reading which ranges from 0 to 15, with 15 being firmest. Most results vary from between 5 and 10.

Sanderson was asked to explain his approach by the Barstewards Enquiry podcast, which was also sponsoring at the track, when he admitted that he had knocked a point off the track’s GoingStick reading for the April 12 meeting.

READ MORE:

READ MORE:

He said: “The GoingStick is a controversial instrument. You have some clerks that swear by it and rely on it. They think it’s a very useful instrument. The BHA have become more insistent on it being used.”

Sanderson said he was one of a number of clerks who have “never really trusted it”.

He said: “My GoingStick this morning, 8.6, and my Goingstick for declarations, 8.9. If I put 8.9, I’d get a lot of non-runners and I’d get a lot of punters saying, ‘That’s not good, that’s bloody firm. You’re a nutter.’

“I published the reading. Do you know what I’ve done? I’ve taken one whole point off it to put it where people can interpret it better. The reason I’ve done that is because I think the actual reading, going off a stick that’s just been serviced, is misleading. That is why I don’t like the GoingStick.”

Sanderson has subsequently defended his comments since the interview was released but the BHA confirmed they are being examined over a potential breach of the rules.

Acting BHA chief executive Brant Dunshea was asked about the comments during a media conference on Wednesday.

He said: “Is it something we can take action against? Yes. The matter is being considered by the disciplinary department at the moment. I don’t want to go into any further details about it, but yes we absolutely can.”