Harness: With rules, it's different strokes for different folks

Like any other harness racing junkie, I listened to more than two hours of the Elitloppet broadcast as I drove to Harrah's Philadelphia on May 30. OK, perhaps I'm the only person who made that audio selection over music or maybe 'Sports Talk' on the drive.

Perhaps I have a harness racing addiction disguised as a job, but that is a column for another day.

The simulcast show was certainly well produced as two gentlemen -- one was driver/trainer Wim Paal, who I recognized from a meeting at the International Trot a few years back (my apologies for not knowing the other man) -- discussed the racing. They reviewed each race and looked at the warm-ups for upcoming races -- something I certainly wish we got more of here. Interviews were done on the backstretch and an English race call was provided. The announcer was reminiscent of John Sterling in style, for those New York Yankees fans out there.

The above is simply background to a pair of interesting conversations that took place between the two hosts after each of the Elitloppet eliminations. After both races a discussion took place on drifting and stretch interference.

In the first elimination, Vivid Wise As was on the lead and drifted almost a full path to his right with Don Fanucci Zet drifting equally to avoid contact. While it was a "nothing to see here" event for anyone in North America, the commentators talked about how the driver of Vivid Wise As (Alessandro Gocciadoro) would certainly face a fine for the infraction.

Elimination two saw Gelati Cut on the lead in the stretch and again coming out ever so slightly into Ecurie D. There was a long delay waiting for the results as both men again discussed the incident and the possibility of a disqualification.

Each instance of stretch movement was something that wouldn't even result in the inquiry sign being posted in North America. I have doubts as to whether most Judges in the U.S. would've even have noticed since there really was no contact as the horse to the outside simply drifted with the horse to the inside.

Ultimately Gocciadoro was not fined for drifting in the stretch but for making noise during the race. He was given a $120 penalty for basically shouting or making noises that would disturb other horses or drivers. It was his second infraction on the card as he was fined $60 in the first race. Gabriele Gelormini driving Gelati Cut didn't get off quite as easily. His punishment for failure to keep a straight path was $1,200 and a three-day suspension.

For those keeping track, the 12-race card included 10 fines and they are clearly notated on the results page rather than reported separately at a later date.

The entire situation got me to thinking about drifting in the stretch. Why is it considered such a bad thing in Sweden but completely normal in North America? Why would fines be necessary for drifting in Sweden and here we often just write it off as "that's what tired horses do" in the stretch?

According to the USTA Rulebook section 18.01: ". . . neither the driver of the first horse nor any other driver in the race shall do any of the following things, any of which shall be considered a violation of driving rules . . . (j) Change course after selecting a position in the home stretch or swerve in and out or bear in and out in such a manner as to interfere with another horse or cause him to change course or take back."

There it is in black and white that horses are not permitted to change course after selecting a position in the stretch. Yet this happens in every race, every day.

Why does it bother me so much?

Other than changing lanes being against the rules, it removes the consistency from the game. I've mentioned it before and it bears repeating, if a passing lane doesn't exist then horses shouldn't be allowed to "drift" off the cones and create one. If one race doesn't have a passing lane then none of them should have one. I will throw in one exception, and that is when a horse is stopping badly and could create confusion or an accident.

What's even more interesting is that section 18 of the rulebook has other similar rules which are never enforced. Section (h) says that drivers may not: "Let a horse pass inside needlessly or otherwise help another horse to improve its position in the race by opening up a hole without then promptly pulling to re-pass the horse, unless the failure to re-pass is necessitated by safety reasons."

Turn on any track right now and you will certainly see a driver grabbing a hold of their horse to allow another horse to take the lead and they will not retake that position. Quite frankly, this is a strategy decision and it has no place in the rulebook.

In the end the sport is conducted differently in North America than other jurisdictions and that is fine, but if we are going to have rules, shouldn't they be enforced? A thought to ponder . . .