Jamie Kah suspension divides horse racing as jockey found to have cost punters $214,000

Horse racing fans and experts have been left heavily divided after Jamie Kah was hit with a three-week ban for her controversial ride in the McNeil Stakes at Caulfield last month. Kah was charged by stewards and had to front the Victorian Racing Tribunal on Thursday for failing to take all reasonable and permissible steps to improve her position on Let’sfacethemusic.

Stewards found that Kah didn't try hard enough to make up ground in the final straight, which she said was due to windy conditions and the unpredictability of younger horses in the race. The star jockey failed to take a gap that had opened up and faded from third to fifth.

On Thursday, the Victorian Racing Tribunal imposed a three-week suspension, which will see Kah miss the Turnbull Stakes, Caulfield Guineas and Caulfield Cup. But crucially, she'll be back in time for the Melbourne Cup.

Stewards had called for a six-week suspension at minimum, but Judge Kathryn Kings decided on a three-week ban despite finding Kah guilty of the charge. It was found that Kah's actions cost punters an estimated $214,000.

Is Jamie Kah's suspension too lenient?

While some believe Kah didn't deserve to be suspended at all, others think the three-week ban is lenient. Miles Pfitzner of SEN radio suggested on Thursday evening that Kah would have received a bigger ban at any other time of the year, but the tribunal was lenient because the Melbourne Cup is coming up.

"Jamie Kah should be treated like so-and-so in the bush. There has to be consistency," Pfitzner said. "If the stewards have asked for a minimum of six weeks and they've given her half [they need to explain that]. It's a slap on the wrist. If it's any other time of the year..."

Fellow expert Cameron Luke said it sets a dangerous precedent that any jockey who commits a similar offence will only get three weeks. "If a similar rider gets found guilty the precedent is now three weeks," he said. "And they can't lean back on the reasons why she didn't take the gap because she's been found guilty."

Jamie Kah's arguments about safety fall on deaf ears

Other experts had previously defended Kah, saying just because she showed caution it shouldn't mean she deserves to be suspended. Others pointed out that Kah suffered a horrific fall in a race last year that kept her out of racing for months, and the fact she didn't try to make a split-second decision should be applauded for safety reasons.

But stewards and the tribunal disagreed. Judge Kings said in her findings: “We are satisfied that between the 175m and approximately 50m mark there was sufficient gap and opportunity to ride your mount with sufficient vigour or purpose to improve your position."

Kah said she didn't want the horse to lock its jaw, which is what occurred last year when she fell. “Basically when a horse locks it’s jaw it pushes the bit to the back of his mouth, if you go to pull the horse away from heels he’ll go the other way,” she said. “You don’t have much control of the horse until the horse puts it’s head down again and relaxes.”

The star jockey also argued she didn't want to risk a suspension for careless riding, which doubles during the Spring Carnival due to the higher profile of races. “This time of year, with spring time and Group 1 races, the penalty for careless riding doubles, going from eight meetings to 12 meetings because it’s in a higher prize money race and Group 1 events," she said.

On social media, punters were left heavily divided. Some labelled it an "absolute joke" that Kah seemingly got off lightly, while others suggested she didn't deserve a ban at all.