Alphonse Le Grande loses Cesarewitch after jockey breaches whip rules

“There is simply no excuse for using the whip four times or more above the permitted level [of six],” Brant Dunshea, the British Horseracing Authority’s chief regulatory officer, said on Tuesday, after the regulator’s Whip Review Committee (WRC) had disqualified Alphonse Le Grande and Jamie Powell from first place in Saturday’s Cesarewitch Handicap at Newmarket. “[Disqualification] sends a clear message that we do not tolerate misuse of the whip.”

But if it is not excusable then the fact that Powell has now been stripped of the most valuable and high-profile success of his career is, to some extent at least, explicable.

Related: Arena Racing CEO urges reform to save racing from gambling tax fallout

He was a 3lb-claiming apprentice, making only the eighth start of his career in Britain, the 18-furlong Cesarewitch is one of the longest races in the calendar and Powell was in front, on the other side of the course to Manxman, the runner-up, from over a quarter of a mile out. Victory in a £175,000 race was within his grasp if he could only keep Alphonse Le Grande going.

Powell also picked up a 28-day suspension on days when there is Flat racing in Britain between 29 October and 6 December. Whether he tried and failed to count up to nine, or simply forgot about the 10-stroke trigger for automatic disqualification in the heat of the action, it is a lesson learned the hard way.

Of course, as Dunshea also pointed out on Tuesday, the rules are there for a reason. “Disqualification was introduced as a deterrent against flagrant misuse of the whip,” he said, “in order to safeguard the fairness of race results and perception amongst the sport’s fans.” And given that Alphonse Le Grande was first across the line on Saturday by the minimum possible margin of a nose, it is highly likely that Powell’s breach of the rules made the difference between finishing first and second.

On that basis, and though it has taken three days to emerge, justice has now been done, with the owners of Manxman receiving the £90k first prize and the winner’s trophy, albeit without being able to pose for post-race photos on the podium. The next five home, including Anna Bunina, who was five lengths behind Alphonse Le Grande and Manxman but now picks up £2.6k for finishing sixth, have felt the benefit of Tuesday’s decision too.

But while the individuals in one of the sport’s two key revenue streams – the owners – have received their due, those in the other one – the punters, and those who backed Manxman in particular – will feel that they have had no justice at all. He was one of the best-backed runners in one of the most popular and competitive handicaps of the season, and while his name now joins a roll of honour that dates back to 1839, their “win” bets remain in the bookmakers’ satchels.

There were, understandably, many backers on social media on Tuesday asking why it was not possible to make the decision on the day, which was also a point that Dunshea addressed.

“We understand that some customers will question why this matter cannot be resolved on race day, especially those who backed the on-the-day runner-up, Manxman,” he said. “However, this would present its own challenges, and the consultation process of the whip review revealed a strong preference from several key audiences that these matters should be handled away from raceday.

“The WRC was introduced to ensure consistency of decision-making around whip decisions. This has already proved invaluable as on more than one occasion a ride has been referred to the WRC carrying potential disqualification, but subsequently one or more uses of the whip [have been] discounted by the WRC and the ride therefore not disqualified.”

As soon as disqualification was introduced as the ultimate penalty for a whip offence, a “DQ” in a feature race was pretty much inevitable at some stage. But while, on the face of it, an on-the-day decision simply requires the stewards to count to 10 twice – once to determine if the limit has been reached, and once more to be sure – even something as seemingly clearcut as a stroke of the whip can, in the end, be far more complex than expected. Did it connect? Was it used only for reasons of safety? A hurried decision could lead to the even greater embarrassment of a DQ being overturned on appeal.

No solution is ideal, and that is before anyone wades into the argument over whether it would have been fair to let the result stand if Powell had stopped at nine – three over the limit, a nose in front but just short of the trigger-point. But if it avoids, as much as possible, an additional layer of controversy on the day, the current approach is probably as good as we will get.