The papers may be more accustomed to criticising members of the public for not working, but today The Telegraph seems intent on going after a man for doing the job he's paid to do:
"The Princess Royal's daughter was left unimpressed by the actions of overzealous security who appeared not to recognise her on the opening day of the [Cheltenham Festival]."
Of course, there is every chance the security guard did recognise her, but that wouldn't change the fact his job is to stop people walking across the Parade Ring as the horses are coming in.
"The 31 year-old... was prevented from crossing the parade ring after one race...and was seen in animated discussion with the guard, who refused to budge."
And the kids in Africa think they've got it tough.
Fortunately this non-story had a happy ending for all concerned:
"She was eventually let through..."
...presumably once the horses had passed.
However, that didn't stop The Telegraph contacting the security guard's employers:
"Organisers tonight backed the unnamed guard who was "doing his job" by keeping the safety of guests paramount."
By the way, it seems very unlikely the man is actually "unnamed". He is probably not a latter day version of Clint Eastwood's Man With No Name, wandering the Wolds of Gloucestershire looking for horseracing meetings to steward. Rather, it seems more likely The Telegraph wanted a name and the event's organisers quite rightly declined to provide it.
"A Cheltenham Festival spokesman said: "After each race we have a line of security guards in the middle of the parade ring, whose job it is to stop people walking from one side to the other in front of the horses... That is what happened in this case. We would support the actions of the stewards 100 per cent."
"He was doing his job and looking after the safety of the public, which at that point she is a member of."
Nobody likes over-officious security guards or stewards who make you walk the long way around because "rules is rules" but stopping people walking out in front of horses seems a reasonable rule to enforce, as these things go.
She was "unimpressed", which is why she and her husband are clearly smiling. I doubt that the Telegraph would have been impressed if they had been trampled underfoot. Incidentally, why has the Telegraph not told us who the designer of her hat is, falling down on the job?
Posted by: David | Mar 13, 2013 at 11:31