THERE are few spectacles in sport as inspiring and dramatic as the Grand National, which has richly earned its status as the World’s greatest steeplechase.

Yet the tragic deaths of two horses during this year’s race have once again raised the issue of whether the race is simply too dangerous and therefore too cruel to these noble animals.

The more extreme voices of the animal rights lobby discredit their own case through wild overstatement. There has been talk this weekend, for example, of the National being akin to bullfighting.

Anyone who cannot distinguish a race between horses from an event in which bulls inevitably die as the intended outcome is probably not worth engaging in debate.

Those involved with racing will tell you that a horse will not do anything it does not want to do, and these horses are bred for jumping.

And yet, when you hear of horses dying in these circumstances, it has to make any reasonable person pause.

The Grand National is a massive money-spinner for the city regional economy, and a much-loved, colourful spectacle enjoyed by tens of thousands of people.

If it was truly as barbaric as some are suggesting, all of that would count for nothing, and it would be unacceptable for any civilised society to allow it to continue.

But we do not believe that remotely to be the case. Much has already been done over the years to reduce the threat posed by Aintree’s fences, without diminishing the spectacle and excitement. Now is not the moment for hysterical, knee jerk reactions. But it is the time for a calm re-examination of the Aintree course, to see once again what can be done to make it safer for the horses, and in doing so preserve the good name of this great event.