It does seem a bit unfair that a horse wins because a jockey cheated. If the second horse is beaten by illegal means, justice has been denied. Why won't the powers that be change it? What are they afraid of?
I think it's subjective, if something wins going away by 6L and the jockey accidently hits the horse one time too many because he lost count then that's one thing. There are, however, times (eg rewilding & swincombe ect) when the result standing makes a mockery of the rules. For the good of the sport this needs looking at and I think it would be very easy to give some sort of authority to the stewards.
To play Devil's Advocate . . . 1. I am a crooked jockey being paid to throw the race. I can ride normally arousing no suspicion. Every time the horse might win all I need to do is hit it once too often and I get thrown out. Simple. 2. Who determines whether the whip makes the difference between victory and defeat? Just because a jockey has used his whip more than the allocation and won by a head, that does not necessarily mean that the horse would not have won otherwise. 3. How would you feel if you had backed the winner of a race who was disqualified? I doubt you would be thrilled, especially if you thought they would have won anyway.
Zenyatta, your points are excellent, but nevertheless Sport shouldn't allow winners to break the rules like Kennedy did on Swincombe Flame. As I see it, rules like civil law itself are by definition correct. If a law is bad, it needs changing; and this one is bad! As for using the whip to get disqualified (your first point), surely there are easier ways to lose. In this case the lawmakers yielded to pressure following last year's Grand National . They are now trying to save face by amendments which will not resolve the situation. They are not being very noble within the Sport of Kings, and there is a strong argument for their dismissal. Also, it's sad that the jockey's representative, Kevin Darley, was weak and ineffectual from the start.
2. That would be up to the stewards to decide just like they do for interference. 3. Maybe, but not as annoyed as backing a horse who came 2nd to a jockey/horse that's cheated.
