THE BACKING OF RACKETEER

Southland Times, Issue 23378, 9 December 1937, Page 10

THE BACKING OF RACKETEER

DID PUBLIC HAVE WINNING CHANCE? DE SOTO INCIDENT AT NEW BRIGHTON (United Press Association) CHRISTCHURCH, December 7. Backers of Racketeer in the Electric Handicap at New Brighton on Saturday made a very bad investment for, while the horses did not run into a place, it is doubtful whether they ever had a chance of winning and, in the sporting world, a bet is not a bet if there is not a chance of winning.

After the Mace Memorial Handicap, De Soto, his owner (Mr C. Johnston), and his driver (J. Pringle) were disqualified for three months for allegedly not trying to win. Mr Johnston is the owner of Racketeer, who has been leased on the basis of 25 per cent, of the winnings. On the win machine Racketeer carried £455 and on the place machine £360.

Rule 383 of the Rules of Trotting says: “No person who is disqualified other than for a particular race or races shall during the period between the time the disqualification was imposed and the expiration or removal of the same be qualified to enter, nominate or race any horse.” Rule 386 provides that no horse of which a disqualified person was owner at the time of disqualification shall be entered, nominated or started for any race. Under the Rules of Trotting it appears that Racketeer was not eligible to start in the Electric Handicap and the question arises as to whether the holders of tickets are entitled to a refund of their investments. Cases have been known in New Zealand of a club having to pay out on two winners of one race and it is not so many years ago that Lightning won a mile saddle race and was afterwards declared ineligible to start in the race. In this case first dividends were paid on both the disqualified horse and the runner-up.

CHANGES IN COUNTY SYSTEM URGED

RECOMMENDATIONS BY M.C C COMMISSION LONDON, December 7. Important recommendations dealing with various problems of county cricket have been made by a commission from the Marylebone Cricket Club consistting of Messrs W. Findlay, R. C. N. Palairet and R. H. Mallett, assisted by Mr H. D. Bessemer, a financial expert.

The report states that inter-county cricket from 1934 to 1936 lost £26,873 a year; the receipts from county cricket in 1935 declined by £2600 compared with those of 1934, and in 1936 they showed a further decrease of £l6OO, The recommendations include a reduction in the number of first-class counties from 17 to 15, which will allow extra representative matches and permit the best players to play together in preparation for Tests, thus raising the standard of English cricket. The report recommends different championship scoring to produce more finished games. The commission contends that much dull.play is the fault of bowlers rather than batsmen. It‘condemns fast bowlers bowling persistently short with only two fielders in front of the wicket and believes it would be beneficial if captains agreed to discourage negative bowling. If there is no improvement it may be necessary to resort to a line or lines across the wicket, beyond which bowlers will be required under penalty to pitch the ball. The commission suggests that county authorities instruct groundsmen to provide wicket conditions more equal to batsmen and bo'«Urs without being dangerous.