Ex-trainer Todd Balfour has five-year ban for 'dacking' official slashed in sensational circumstances

A former trainer who was banned for five years after 'dacking' a racing compliance officer has sensationally had his time slashed to four-and-a-half months after an appeals panel slammed stewards for handing down such a strong sentence, saying it was not "objective."

Todd Balfour will be free to return to racing on July 13 this year after the South Australian Racing Appeals Tribunal found that South Australian stewards acted far too harshly, saying the fact it was "one of their own" that was dacked affected their decision making.

The former trainer, who is a registered stablehand and trackwork rider, dacked a Racing SA compliance officer who was conducting breathalyser tests at the famous Kangaroo Island meeting about 7pm in front of seven people on February 16.

READ: Inquiry opened after trainer blows over alcohol limit at the races

Balfour, who claims he does not remember the incident, returned a blood alcohol reading of 0.400, however the appeals panel found it was unlikely to be correct as he had just taken a drink of straight whiskey prior to the test.

Incredibly, stewards first considered a 10-year ban for Balfour, however reduced it to five years after considering his guilty plea and forthright nature.

While appeals tribunal president Tim Anderson KC considered the incident to be of a serious nature, they said it was the actions of "someone grossly affected by alcohol" and labelled it "totally disrespectful of someone in authority and caused the Official considerable embarrassment."

In handing down their Judgement, the appeals panel said a five-year ban would all but end Balfour's career in the industry and noted his remorse over the incident.

The appeals panel then slammed stewards over the initial disqualification, saying it was "manifestly erroneous."

"I think it important to remind the Stewards that they must judge at all times on an objective basis," Anderson KC said.

"In retrospect, I believe the Stewards may have taken such a strong view on penalty because the assault was perpetrated on one of their own.

"This should not have affected their decision-making.

"In saying that, as is apparent from my reasons, no right-minded person could have regarded Mr Balfour's behaviour as anything but serious and certainly improper. While a disqualification was appropriate, a five-year disqualification was manifestly erroneous."