Really interesting scenario...
I wonder where this would fall under the new guidelines issued by HRNSW.
Surely the trainer cant be held repsonsible for this
Really interesting scenario...
I wonder where this would fall under the new guidelines issued by HRNSW.
Surely the trainer cant be held repsonsible for this
Certainly a tricky one Harvey, I think we may need "The Mentalist" here to determine who knew what with regard to the mares "condition"!
Hollywood Hartley's RULE OF THE WEEK for mine. This is getting ridiculous. You can race on Regumate for starters so it's not a 'hormone' issue.
But you can under the rules only race a mare for 120 days after she conceives, Jan service date to June race wins equals more then 120.
Of course a further "secret liason" after Jan needs to be ruled out.
will the mare get DQ ?
While not wanting to pre empt anything that may come from enquiries into this one would expect she would be disqualified from any placings and earnings since her departure to Australia. She was last served on 19 Jan 2012 and exported to Australia 3 months later. (26 apr 2012). It is likely that she was exported to Australia to continue and improve her race record only after once again testing neg pregnant. As efforts have been made for 3 years to get this valuable mare in foal then one would expect that news of her being pregnant would be a more positive news to her owners than racing outside of the 120day limit. After all the primary focus of her owners is in breeding and to finally get this lovely mare in foal after much frustration must be a real positive.
I reckon it'll be a SUPER-WANK if they DQ her. Ridiculous.
But to quote yourself Jamie....the rules is the rules is the rules, you'd remember that surely mate?
having said that, this may be one of those rules where administrators need to get their heads out of their collective arses ?? and I'm certain you remember that as well.
now that we've established that you Jamie are allowed to adopt any stance that suits you depending on who knows what ??? maybe we can have a guessing competition around what that criteria might be ....things that make you Hmmmmm.....
[VVV] Instead of using quotes out of context and immediately saluting any old flag that gets run up the flag pole, any chance that you could explain the rule for me Danno?
What is the physiological case for it?
Why does it exist?
What is the basis for its application in this and any other such instance?
Why is there a mandatory 120 days in place...when, for example, the average pregnancy is some 345 days give or take?
What advantage, if any, is the Trainer of a mare pregnant beyond 120 days expecting?
If there is no actual or peceived advantage to be had then why the rule?
Inquiring minds would sure like to know.