The decision to abandon racing at Huntingdon today raises many questions, not least questions surrounding the actions of Clerk of the Course, Fiona Needham.

First of all let us look at the sequence of events on the day.

It was announced that the course was to hold a “precautionary” inspection at 9:30 following colder than expected overnight temperatures.  However the course were optimistic about racing going ahead.

The 9:30 inspection took place and it was announced there would be a further inspection at 10:30 as there had been early morning fog and the sun had only just broken through.

The 10:30 inspection took place and the course was passed fit for racing. There was no mention of any further inspections.

I arrived at the course around 11:30 and it was immediately clear to me that the ground was not fit for racing, it still had plenty of frost in it.

I was, therefore, not very surprised when I was told there was to be an inspection at 12:00.

I was also totally unsurprised when, following the inspection, racing was Cancelled. When the announcement was made an explanation that temperatures “had not risen as expected” was given.

Let me take issue with that point first of all. When I returned to my car the temperature was showing as six degrees, precisely within the range that had been forecast in the BBC weather reports earlier in the morning. So how they can say the temperature did not rise as expected is beyond me.

Let me stress that I have absolutely no issue with the racing being called off, the track was not fit to race.

However I do have the following questions:-

Why was the first inspection called a “precautionary” inspection, when it was abundantly clear there was a severe frost in the ground?

On what basis were the comments about being optimistic to race made?

Why after the 10:30 inspection, when it was abundantly clear the ground was not fit to race, was it announced that racing had passed an inspection. Why wasn’t a further inspection announced instead?

The BHA need to hold an inquiry into this abandonment.

Now I have no issues with Fiona Needham as a person, by all accounts she is a very likable and pleasant lady. However she is fast turning into the Jane Stickles of Clerking.

This is the clerk who announced on Channel Four that racing would go ahead at Warwick only for the meeting to be Cancelled shortly afterwards.

The same clerk responsible for the debacle at Warwick this autumn, where overwatering led to the abandonment of all but two of the scheduled races.

She may be having a run of bad luck. However to mislead racegoers and trainers, as I believe she has done today, that racing was likely to go ahead, when in reality there was no prospect of racing taking place, calls her competence seriously into question.

In fairness to Ms Needham she isn't the only clerk guilty of overconfidence, however clerks need to realise that they achieve nothing by being overly optimistic. When it backfires they alienate the paying public. In the current climate racing needs as many friends as possible.

In defence of the clerks I realise they are under a great deal of pressure to ensure the meeting goes ahead if at all possible, after all if the fixture is Cancelled the courses lose money. That is still no excuse for messing around with racegoers and connections.

A simple answer would be for the BHA to introduce an instruction stating that if the course is not fit for racing two hours before the scheduled first race time then the meeting must be Cancelled. It won't help everyone but it will prevent a significant number of wasted journeys.

There were a large number of angry racegoers at the course today, all of whom had made wasted journeys, yet there is no recompense for the wasted time or money spent travelling to the course.

Speaking personally I had a wasted journey and as a freelance journalist I only get paid for the work I sell, this abandonment was effectively a wasted afternoon for me. Had they announced at 10:30 that there was be a further inspection I would have diverted to Ludlow instead.

Do you agree with the Beast?  Click here to feedback your views.