One less

[Greg Hando]

Another one gone for a little holiday
http://www.harnesslink.com/www/Article.cgi?ID=101318

[barney]

Was thinking today after all the fallout from the Lance Armstrong furore what implications it will have for racing both harness and Thoroughbreds.He has never had a poitive yet we are hearing now how long he was using drugs for and despite what people on here say he must have been using masking agenst.My point is it was quite widespread and went undetected for a long time Epo.

[broncobrad]

Haven't seen any transcript of proceedings but the case has been proven. I would like to think that yes, Mitch has done the wrong thing and he got caught, but atleast he manned up, put his hand up and threw himself at the mercy of the stewards. His reputation just went up a few levels in my book. Do the time and come back a better person for it. Unlike some who keep coming up with the greatest cock and bull storys to get themselves out of the shit, you know the ones, that blame every other reason under the sun how a substance came to be in their horse, when all they really needed to do was look in the mirror or check the syringes in their kit bag. No appeal, no stay, no bullshit excuse, no further waste of industry $$$'s trying to prove the inevitable. So for mine, Mitch has done the right thing in the end, its a big call in this day and age to admit guilt. Good on him. See you in 9 months

[aussiebreno]

Haven't seen any transcript of proceedings but the case has been proven. I would like to think that yes, Mitch has done the wrong thing and he got caught, but atleast he manned up, put his hand up and threw himself at the mercy of the stewards. His reputation just went up a few levels in my book. Do the time and come back a better person for it. Unlike some who keep coming up with the greatest cock and bull storys to get themselves out of the shit, you know the ones, that blame every other reason under the sun how a substance came to be in their horse, when all they really needed to do was look in the mirror or check the syringes in their kit bag. No appeal, no stay, no bullshit excuse, no further waste of industry $$$'s trying to prove the inevitable. So for mine, Mitch has done the right thing in the end, its a big call in this day and age to admit guilt. Good on him. See you in 9 monthsI hope you mean like 5 steps back but then two steps forward type stuff.

[broncobrad]

Thats exactly what I mean Brendan. Nobody should ever think they are bigger than the sport, nor should they think the sport owes them a living. Mitch has been taught a tough lesson early in life for doing something stupid or knowingly allowed the animal to race whilst being treated by the vet for pain relief. We all make stupid decisions when we are young, I would hope he learns from it. If, however he chooses to persist in flouting the new racing regulations in NSW which got much tougher since June/July when he resumes training, then he only has himself to blame and will deserve everything he gets.

[Lenem]

I hope you mean like 5 steps back but then two steps forward type stuff.

...his reputation went up a few levels !!!!!!! What must you think of the non-cheats?

[aussiebreno]

...his reputation went up a few levels !!!!!!! What must you think of the non-cheats?


They are obviously losers who can't even win a race. No time for them.














Only joking. I don't understand what you mean by your post.

[broncobrad]

...his reputation went up a few levels !!!!!!! What must you think of the non-cheats?

Well, lets roll with that Lenny. You know exactly how I feel about cheats Lenny unless you don't read my posts (which is also understandable).

http://www.harnesslink.com/www/Article.cgi?ID=98108 is the link for the new penaltys since june 2012 in NSW. Ketorolac or Toradol falls into the Class 3 section of the new rules, or if you like, Bill and Triples close to the heart topics of therapeutic drugs in the sport. He was entitled to get 12 months first offence, he knew he was guilty and he accepted the consequences. He was given 9 months (I am guessing because he admitted guilt) knowing full well that the horse was being treated with ketorolac. Yeah , it might seem a bit of a oxymoron to say that his reputation went up in my eyes, but only in the fact that he accepted the charge and the penalty and the responsibility for presenting the horse for competition with a substance that falls outside the guidelines. He offered no phoney excuse or tried all those avenues of appeal that we now see on a regular basis from others who have been charged with much much more serious offences. There is no evidence of systemic wrong doing in this blokes case. He made a blue and now he is hopefully going to learn from it.

So my estimation of him went up as a man Lenny. I am not defending him for breaching the rules, he broke 'em and he is going for a holiay. Reckon when a young bloke makes a mistake they can do with some sort of support. Let he who casts the first stone Len

[barney]

I agree he has at least admitted that he did the crime and now must pay.Others have come up with every excuse except coming out and admitting that they were responsible for the positive.

[broncobrad]

Was thinking today after all the fallout from the Lance Armstrong furore what implications it will have for racing both harness and Thoroughbreds.He has never had a poitive yet we are hearing now how long he was using drugs for and despite what people on here say he must have been using masking agenst.My point is it was quite widespread and went undetected for a long time Epo.

Barney, the parallels into the will of administrative sporting bodies to pursue and prosecute these cheats is contentious. Contrary to your statement, Armstrong did indeed produce positive results to EPO/cortico steroids in 1999. Here are a couple of links, google it yourself, there is plenty of info available.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/cycling/2005-08-24-armstrong-samples-details_x.htm

http://www.iol.co.za/sport/cycling/nike-denies-armstrong-cover-up-1.1404709

The controlling body at the time chose to do nothing. Why? There were and still are, mega bucks on the line here, for competitors, sponsors, media etc. Apart from that, the technique to substantitively prove the presence of EPO wasn't approved at the time. He cannot admit guilt, he just can't. Four Corners ran a great story the other night, so much speculation, he said, she said stuff. When he chose not to respond to the charges back in August, that sealed it for me.

I can't be too critical of HRNSW at the moment. They are hamstrung with limited $$$'s, investigative powers, on-going police inquiries that limit their ability to get on the front foot, obtaining credible lab results that will stand up to scrutiny, having to fight tooth and nail to make charges stand at appeal...it just goes on ad nauseum. These blokes are on the back foot at every turn. For me the boldenone positive just does not go away, and there is a lot riding on THAT appeal.

I hope HRNSW will does not falter as the UCI's did back in 1999. Still got faith in Reid seeing this and the corruption charges through.

[Triple V]

Other aspects aside, it might only be a Class 3 BUT that stuff would shoot a Horse's liver to pieces.

[broncobrad]

Hard to find much on its use in horses VVV and in regard to liver although it can lead to an elevated protein level. But the risk of gastro-intestinal bleeding is significantly raised and contra-indicated in humans for renal impairment, chronic pain management, obstetrics etc. It can even contribute to odema and would be an undesirable side effect as well. Bottom line, it shouldn't have been there.

[Tangles]

Quite a difference in penalties between Harness racing and that being dished out to the Gallop trainers.
Gollan fined $4000 after positive swab (http://www.justhorseracing.com.au/news/australian-racing/gollan-fined-4000-after-positive-swab/172179)

Australian Horse Racing (http://www.justhorseracing.com.au/category/news/australian-racing)October 30, 2012 5:48 pm
Leading trainer Tony Gollan has been fined $4000 following a positive swab inquiry. Silver Command, trained by Gollan, returned a post-race swab sample containing the prohibited substance testosterone after he won at Doomben on September 5. At a stewards inquiry held at the Racing Queensland offices at Deagon on Monday


Read more: http://www.justhorseracing.com.au/category/news/australian-racing#ixzz2AmShRMtA

[broncobrad]

Reconciling differences in how penaltys are arrived at just does my head in. In contrast to Gollan winning a metropolitan race with a horse with more than the prescribed amount of testosterone allowed and copping a $4,000 fine, Coffs Harbour trainer Gordon Yorke went for the same thing last year at Grafton but he was fined $7,000 for a lowly country maiden. I'm sure someone can point out to me what it is that I cannot see. Is it a case of apples and apples or is it just a lucky dip?

http://www.racingandsports.com.au/racing/rsNewsArt.asp?NID=205127&story=Gordon_Yorke_Fined_$7000

[Danno]

Tangles, Brad,
has anyone consulted VOR on this?
cos if anyone can come up with a feasable answer it'll be VOR. I also find it completely bewildering the difference between penalties for the two equine sports for the same substance, alah recent lengthy suspensions/disqualifications for the "red hots" versus a piddling fine for the "sport of kings".

as stated VOR will come up with a plausible answer to this, just haven't heard from him recently, maybe he's been busy moving or something like that.

Cheers,
Dan

[broncobrad]

He does add clarity in his own inimitable way to all things above us we mortals, however I doubt he could convince us with any degree of certainty in just how seemingly miniscule variations in almost identical situations can lead to such massive chasms in determinations of penaltys.

But more importantly Dan, whats this you say about TVOR possibly on the move?

This no doubt, can only be in response to his impending loss of a $5 lottery ticket wager with moi drawing closer. Thats right, watch this space because 13 November is D-Day for Boldenone Case Part 2, if yet another adjournment doesn't materialise. Then when the dust settles and penaltys are meted out, we can again gasp in awe at the variations handed down as opposed to the fines, costs and disqualification period already paid and served by Mr Lew.

[Thevoiceofreason]

Brad

You are 100% not only can I not convince you I will not even try to convince you that the penalty structure between the two codes in NSW can be justified because it can not, I only try and explain things when I think you "mere mortals" are heading off an an incorrect tangent.

The issue here is penalties and the simple yet not totally explainable facts are this, NSW harness have always been tougher than the Gallops with swab penalties , personally I think there could be an argument that is should be the other way round when you consider the stake money both are competing for and the amount of turnover each will generate.

In relation to Queensland in both codes they have always been under NSW.

The problem in some way becomes self supporting from a legal standpoint in relation to consistency in penalties. If say the Queensland Stewards had fined Gollan $7000 for the positive and the last 20 penalties in Queensland had all been under $5000 they would have rightfully got smashed at appeal and Mr Gollan's fine would have been varied to be inline with similar Queensland penalties.

In NSW gallops the penalties be they right or wrong are pretty consistent, most gallops trainers keep accurate treatment records and those that do not are usually penalised an additional amount at the inquiry. Two gallops trainers were fined this week in NSW for such offences.

Consistency in penalties in each code is all we can ask for and expect, given that different boards make the policy it is the stewards job in each state to uphold the policy in their own state.

This is part of the reason the HRNSW Board made their new swab penalties policy such a public document so the stewards would have something tangible to hang their collective hats on when they upped the penalties, that way they were some hope of holding them at appeal.

I will have to check that bet Brad I can not see how I will possibly owe you a ticket..... and Danno no movement here just no need for any clarity for THEVOICEOFREASON.

[broncobrad]

G'day Bill

You certainly hit the nail on the head with the disparity between harness and gallops, I take your point re: prizemoney v penalty. But as a harness fan, I can only see this in a good light for our sport. People would shake their heads in disbelief if you were to tell Joe Average that harness penaltys in relation to drugs is dealt with in the harshest of terms compared to their thoroughbred brothers, especially in NSW since July when the new extremely tough (but warranted) penaltys were introduced.

You raised a good point with those two gallops trainers being fined for two very interesting reasons. Financially inadequate in the case of Brett Bellamy who was found to have an unmarked and unidentified substance in his stable $2,400 in total for what could have been the latest rocket fuel available or just plain water, the public will never know. See the link http://www.racingnsw.com.au/default.aspx?s=latest-news-display&id=13034

Then old mate Luke Griffith gets pinged $5,300 in total for presenting Dysturb to the track with Prednisolone in its system, a drug most of our older relatives take as a given for their arthritis. Don't make 'em go faster but they sure feel better in themselves. http://www.racingnsw.com.au/default.aspx?s=latest-news-display&id=13036

Hard to follow isn't it? They train under the same jurisdiction, but anyway thats the thoroughbreds.

Now Bill that little lapse in your memory relates to the Luke McCarthy thread, in particular posts #103 and #106. Now, I don't just give 'em away Bill, its 50/50 down the line, thats just the gentlemens way. Tune in to 13 November.

[Thevoiceofreason]

G'day Bill

You certainly hit the nail on the head with the disparity between harness and gallops, I take your point re: prizemoney v penalty. But as a harness fan, I can only see this in a good light for our sport. People would shake their heads in disbelief if you were to tell Joe Average that harness penaltys in relation to drugs is dealt with in the harshest of terms compared to their thoroughbred brothers, especially in NSW since July when the new extremely tough (but warranted) penaltys were introduced.

You raised a good point with those two gallops trainers being fined for two very interesting reasons. Financially inadequate in the case of Brett Bellamy who was found to have an unmarked and unidentified substance in his stable $2,400 in total for what could have been the latest rocket fuel available or just plain water, the public will never know. See the link http://www.racingnsw.com.au/default.aspx?s=latest-news-display&id=13034

Then old mate Luke Griffith gets pinged $5,300 in total for presenting Dysturb to the track with Prednisolone in its system, a drug most of our older relatives take as a given for their arthritis. Don't make 'em go faster but they sure feel better in themselves. http://www.racingnsw.com.au/default.aspx?s=latest-news-display&id=13036

Hard to follow isn't it? They train under the same jurisdiction, but anyway thats the thoroughbreds.

Now Bill that little lapse in your memory relates to the Luke McCarthy thread, in particular posts #103 and #106. Now, I don't just give 'em away Bill, its 50/50 down the line, thats just the gentlemens way. Tune in to 13 November.

Now Brad

Here is a quote from the McCarthy thread your comment not mine I hasten in post number 102 ......

"If he beats this charge Bill or indeed gets it downgraded I will buy you a $5 lottery ticket."

In reply in post number 103 I say

"$5 to nothing is about the same odds I think Luke is of beating the charge as well, you can however rest assured if he does I will be waiting for the ticket."

As I have said on many occasions you have to look at the detail of the evidence .... and on that evidence I can not possibly ever owe you a ticket because I never bet against you.

Sorry but evidence is evidence and this lot is impossible to dispute.

[broncobrad]

You are a hard man to pin down Bill...all the same I think I am pretty safe.

[aussiebreno]

The seeming disrepencies from thoroughbreds to harness is amazing.

Cam Fitzpatrick and co stood down, Oliver riding a winner today.
Greg Kelly scratched straight away when tubing equipment found, today a galloper is allowed to run.

Before Bill pipes in with the intricies and differences of each case, they don't mean a lot. It's the look to the general population. Glad to be in our game rather than the gallops.

[Gtrain]

The seeming disrepencies from thoroughbreds to harness is amazing.

Cam Fitzpatrick and co stood down, Oliver riding a winner today.
Greg Kelly scratched straight away when tubing equipment found, today a galloper is allowed to run.

Before Bill pipes in with the intricies and differences of each case, they don't mean a lot. It's the look to the general population. Glad to be in our game rather than the gallops.

Painiting out for 6 months for a $100 bet. Olly had 10k on. Sounds fair.

[Thevoiceofreason]

The seeming disrepencies from thoroughbreds to harness is amazing.

Cam Fitzpatrick and co stood down, Oliver riding a winner today.
Greg Kelly scratched straight away when tubing equipment found, today a galloper is allowed to run.

Before Bill pipes in with the intricies and differences of each case, they don't mean a lot. It's the look to the general population. Glad to be in our game rather than the gallops.

Your kidding Brendan and I will not even go to intricacies just simple stand out facts that make the cases so different.

Fitzpatrick charged by the police with being party to a corrupt action. ........ Oliver not charged by anyone not even sure police are investigating. Apples and Pineapples.

Kelly caught stopping on the way to the races and going into the trailer with tubing equipment and a liquid in a container.

Karakatanasis found to have tubing equipment .... no liquid capable of being tubed and no evidence horse was to be treated.... Again Apples and Pineapples.

For the record John McNair was caught in similar circumstances to Kelly by the gallops stewards and his horses were scratched.

Its simple you need some sort of prima facie evidence to proceed.

[Tangles]

Bill,

Would'nt the first step in the investigation be to test the residues in the bucket and tube and pre/ post race test the horse concerned as well as all other runners the trainer had entered on the day.

[aussiebreno]

Your kidding Brendan and I will not even go to intricacies just simple stand out facts that make the cases so different.

Fitzpatrick charged by the police with being party to a corrupt action. ........ Oliver not charged by anyone not even sure police are investigating. Apples and Pineapples.

Kelly caught stopping on the way to the races and going into the trailer with tubing equipment and a liquid in a container.

Karakatanasis found to have tubing equipment .... no liquid capable of being tubed and no evidence horse was to be treated.... Again Apples and Pineapples.

For the record John McNair was caught in similar circumstances to Kelly by the gallops stewards and his horses were scratched.

Its simple you need some sort of prima facie evidence to proceed.
FFS

Legally yes you are right (and you weren't actually telling me anything I don't know, it was apathy not ignorance), not everything is a freaking law textbook Bill.

I'm quite happy that to the eye of the general public (who don't even really know what tubing equipment is let alone the rules around it and legal procedures) that harness is seen to come down harder in recent times. In the long run that is good news.

[Thevoiceofreason]

Bill,

Would'nt the first step in the investigation be to test the residues in the bucket and tube and pre/ post race test the horse concerned as well as all other runners the trainer had entered on the day.

Yes Tangles I agree and I assume this is what has happened as the first step.

[Thevoiceofreason]

FFS

Legally yes you are right (and you weren't actually telling me anything I don't know, it was apathy not ignorance), not everything is a freaking law textbook Bill.

I'm quite happy that to the eye of the general public (who don't even really know what tubing equipment is let alone the rules around it and legal procedures) that harness is seen to come down harder in recent times. In the long run that is good news.

Unfortunately Brendan it is all about the law the stewards have to act within the law to be any hope of a conviction.

This is not the first time Racing Victoria Stewards have caught a possible breach of race day treatment rules this carnival. A couple of weeks back they scratched one because it had a puncture wound on it jugular vein, another horse from the same trainer was still allowed to run because there was not enough evidence it had been treated to support the decision to withdraw it.

It is a simple fact, like it or not the decisions will always be governed by the facts of each individual case.

[aussiebreno]

Unfortunately Brendan it is all about the law the stewards have to act within the law to be any hope of a conviction.

This is not the first time Racing Victoria Stewards have caught a possible breach of race day treatment rules this carnival. A couple of weeks back they scratched one because it had a puncture wound on it jugular vein, another horse from the same trainer was still allowed to run because there was not enough evidence it had been treated to support the decision to withdraw it.

It is a simple fact, like it or not the decisions will always be governed by the facts of each individual case.
You don't get. Yes those individuals will be treated by formal legal processes and rightfully so. I'm all for that and the RV stewards handled it (to my knowledge) properly. I know why Howmuchdoyouloveme was allowed to run and have been telling other people why, but many Joe Blows don't understand.
The bigger issue is how it looks to Joe Blow. Joe Blow, rightly or wrongly, is angry at how Howmuchyouloveme was allowed to race yesterday. Joe Blow wasn't angry when Greg Kelly was scratched. Joe Blows emotions might not be backed up by the law process, but to the image of racing and harness racing Joe Blows emotions are pretty bloody important.
I'm happy with how this rubs off on harness racing.

[Thevoiceofreason]

You don't get. Yes those individuals will be treated by formal legal processes and rightfully so. I'm all for that and the RV stewards handled it (to my knowledge) properly. I know why Howmuchdoyouloveme was allowed to run and have been telling other people why, but many Joe Blows don't understand.
The bigger issue is how it looks to Joe Blow. Joe Blow, rightly or wrongly, is angry at how Howmuchyouloveme was allowed to race yesterday. Joe Blow wasn't angry when Greg Kelly was scratched. Joe Blows emotions might not be backed up by the law process, but to the image of racing and harness racing Joe Blows emotions are pretty bloody important.
I'm happy with how this rubs off on harness racing.

No Brendan you are the one that does not get it .... there is no doubt the RV stewards would have withdrawn Howmuchdoyouloveme if they had one shred of evidence it had been treated.... As I said before long gone are the days when stewards just ran ruffshot over licensed people.

Also there is a rule in Harness Racing that permits the stewards to stand down a horse once an inquiry is opened without charges being laid and the stewards rightfully so use it whenever it is appropriate.... The same or even a similar rule does not exist in the Gallops in Australia so as much as you and many others might have wanted it to happen the stewards needed solid ground to stand on clearly they did not think they had it.

One thing Terry Bailey has proven in both codes over a long period of time is he will make the tuff decisions.... if he was not confident enough in the circumstances to order its withdrawal I am very happy to support that decision.

I agree in part with your perception argument however the trouble is you can not have perception at the cost of a conviction or even worse a court case where the connections of Howmuchdoyouloveme sue RVL for a loss of prizemoney if they were withdrawn without just cause.

[aussiebreno]

No Brendan you are the one that does not get it Get your head out of Law 101 for a minute, open your eyes and see the real world .... there is no doubt the RV stewards would have withdrawn Howmuchdoyouloveme if they had one shred of evidence it had been treated Yawnnn. I already know that.... As I said before long gone are the days when stewards just ran ruffshot over licensed people. Still yawning.

Also there is a rule in Harness Racing that permits the stewards to stand down a horse once an inquiry is opened without charges being laid and the stewards rightfully so use it whenever it is appropriate.... The same or even a similar rule does not exist in the Gallops in Australia so as much as you (did you forget to read the part where I said "I know why it was allowed to run") and many others might have wanted it to happen the stewards needed solid ground to stand on clearly they did not think they had it. Did you miss the part where I said stewards handled it correctly

One thing Terry Bailey has proven in both codes over a long period of time is he will make the tuff decisions.... if he was not confident enough in the circumstances to order its withdrawal I am very happy to support that decision. Did you miss the part where I said stewards handled it correctly. I'm not having a go at stewards you princess.

I agree in part with your perception argument however the trouble is you can not have perception at the cost of a conviction or even worse a court case where the connections of Howmuchdoyouloveme sue RVL for a loss of prizemoney if they were withdrawn without just cause.Im not saying racing can do anything legitimate about, its just the way, rightfully or wrongfully, it rubs off to Joe Blow. I've raised the same compensation argument with both Howmuchdoyouloveme and Damien Oliver, but Joe Blow just doesn't get it.
Legally you are 100% correct. Stewards have acted properly I'm not doubting that.
But I'm not talking about that. Joe Blow has no idea about the legal procedures. Joe Blow out on the street is, rightfully or wrongfully, seeing harness racing doing a good job while thoroughbred racing has copped it recently because Joe Blow doesn't understand the legal processes.
I'm not saying Howmuchyouloveme should have been stood down, I know the rules and have told others - I know perfectly well stewards have done the right thing. But Joe Blow just doesn't get it. Thoroughbred forums are going mad. They are also going mad Damien Oliver is riding in the Melbourne Cup. Oliver has full right to be riding as I've told others, but that doesn't stop Joe Blow getting peeved off (even if its mostly through naivety or being uninformed or lack of brain cells or whatever). And Joe Blow being peeved off is what matters, while the law textbook does not matter.

[Thevoiceofreason]

No Brendan you are the one that does not get it Get your head out of Law 101 for a minute, open your eyes and see the real world .... there is no doubt the RV stewards would have withdrawn Howmuchdoyouloveme if they had one shred of evidence it had been treated Yawnnn. I already know that.... As I said before long gone are the days when stewards just ran ruffshot over licensed people. Still yawning.

Also there is a rule in Harness Racing that permits the stewards to stand down a horse once an inquiry is opened without charges being laid and the stewards rightfully so use it whenever it is appropriate.... The same or even a similar rule does not exist in the Gallops in Australia so as much as you (did you forget to read the part where I said "I know why it was allowed to run") and many others might have wanted it to happen the stewards needed solid ground to stand on clearly they did not think they had it. Did you miss the part where I said stewards handled it correctly

One thing Terry Bailey has proven in both codes over a long period of time is he will make the tuff decisions.... if he was not confident enough in the circumstances to order its withdrawal I am very happy to support that decision. Did you miss the part where I said stewards handled it correctly. I'm not having a go at stewards you princess.

I agree in part with your perception argument however the trouble is you can not have perception at the cost of a conviction or even worse a court case where the connections of Howmuchdoyouloveme sue RVL for a loss of prizemoney if they were withdrawn without just cause.Im not saying racing can do anything legitimate about, its just the way, rightfully or wrongfully, it rubs off to Joe Blow. I've raised the same compensation argument with both Howmuchdoyouloveme and Damien Oliver, but Joe Blow just doesn't get it.
Legally you are 100% correct. Stewards have acted properly I'm not doubting that.
But I'm not talking about that. Joe Blow has no idea about the legal procedures. Joe Blow out on the street is, rightfully or wrongfully, seeing harness racing doing a good job while thoroughbred racing has copped it recently because Joe Blow doesn't understand the legal processes.
I'm not saying Howmuchyouloveme should have been stood down, I know the rules and have told others - I know perfectly well stewards have done the right thing. But Joe Blow just doesn't get it. Thoroughbred forums are going mad. They are also going mad Damien Oliver is riding in the Melbourne Cup. Oliver has full right to be riding as I've told others, but that doesn't stop Joe Blow getting peeved off (even if its mostly through naivety or being uninformed or lack of brain cells or whatever). And Joe Blow being peeved off is what matters, while the law textbook does not matter.

I have learnt one thing from this post you can type in red

As I said in my first post the issues I raised are not intricacies but the reason process has to rule over perception, your first post was about "The seeming disrepencies from thoroughbreds to harness"

I simply explained why they were not discrepancies and whilst you may well have known all of this it was you who pointed out "Joe Blow" does not and this forum should at least be in part about sharing understanding and information.

I do however remain of the view that process has to hold sway over perception every day of the week.

The princess

[aussiebreno]

[QUOTE=aussiebreno;23723]

I have learnt one thing from this post you can type in red

As I said in my first post the issues I raised are not intricacies but the reason process has to rule over perception, your first post was about "The seeming disrepencies from thoroughbreds to harness"

I simply explained why they were not discrepancies and whilst you may well have known all of this it was you who pointed out "Joe Blow" does not and this forum should at least be in part about sharing understanding and information.

I do however remain of the view that process has to hold sway over perception every day of the week.


"Seeming' discrepancies. Good reason for differences in final outcomes but they 'seem' like discrepancies to a lot of people.
I did make mention I didn't want you to butt in. I done this because you are the reason I now get lawyer jokes.
Process over perception every day of the week. I am with you. I am not arguing the rules are wrong or stewards handled it wrongly, I am saying its just an unfortunate situation for racing, whereas it shines harness racing in a positive light to Joe Blow. It might be unfairly so at racings expense but its happened and nothing can change that, not you not I and certainty not this forum for the 98,000 that went to Flemington on Saturday.

[Thevoiceofreason]

"I did make mention I didn't want you to butt in"

Gee Brendan it is tuff luck you did not want to read my opinion but while ever this is a public forum and I am not barred I will make comment on any post I wish.

Perhaps you should get over yourself.

This will be my last post on this issue because its now getting boring to everybody.

[broncobrad]

On the contrary Bill, I think it has been an interesting thread for forum readers.

Brendan, I totally get what you on about and agree 90% (just to be different). It is about perception for Joe Blow. If the general public were aware of the leaps and bounds the sport has made in toughening up penaltys (in general,) in the wake of the doping and bribe scandal, one would reasonably believe the new found cleaner image of our sport would translate to more bums on seats. I think that is going to take a bit longer to eventuate. For example if a TV program with some clout was to do an in-depth investigation on how the sport in NSW has accepted its responsibility to turn itself around and present a product that is as clean as is humanly possible and get that message out to an audience that has previously only ever known the game to stink to high heaven, maybe, just maybe we might see more numbers through the turnstiles. Lets face it, if there is more confidence in the sport, everyone benefits right the way back to the breeders who might start seeing an improvement in yearling $$$'s.

I think its all about perception and until our sport is perceived as something different to what it is known for it will remain just the little cottage industry it is, supported by industry participants and close friends with a genuine fondness for harness and propped up by the blind punters that can't tell the difference between a dog and a horse.

For the simple reason that harness does not enjoy the exposure that horse racing does, we will always be a long second to it, but to be fighting the dogs off for that spot is hardly a ringing endorsement for us. So everytime our sport can hold a light to its virtues in regard to dealing with untoward matters it should. Unfortunately it rarely gets reported in the general media.

[broncobrad]

Painiting out for 6 months for a $100 bet. Olly had 10k on. Sounds fair.

Yeah the double standards just gets better. If you believe this report.

http://wwos.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=8559657

[Thevoiceofreason]

Yeah the double standards just gets better. If you believe this report.

http://wwos.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=8559657

I am happy to be corrected but my recollection is the Jackson Painting inquiry started in July and he was allowed to continue to compete until he was convicted in September .... seems like an exact same standard to me... but if you can explain the double standard please feel free to do so.

[aussiebreno]

I am happy to be corrected but my recollection is the Jackson Painting inquiry started in July and he was allowed to continue to compete until he was convicted in September .... seems like an exact same standard to me... but if you can explain the double standard please feel free to do so.
VOR,

Haven't heard much about this, too busy complaining Ryan Moores ride and ridiculous betting %s at Griffith, but apparently a QLD trainer was nabbed down in Melbourne today and got caught red handed. Stewards asked to search his car. He denied them access for personal reasons.
What is the ruling there. Are stewards allowed to freely search cars? Possibly allowed with permission, possibly allowed even if the trainer denies them access?

[broncobrad]

Laughing out EXTREMELY loudly, I just noticed Brendans 'current' location.

Bill, back in the game so soon, talk about an Indian giver. Certain it said above that your last post on this issue had been made. Welcome back, I have missed you.

The double standards relates (from memory) to Jackson placing approx 5 bets (including multiple combination bets) on races he was competing in. Most of those bets were 'insignificant' in comparison to Ollies, but the double standard is patently obvious, in most of the bets he was betting on the horse he was driving, unlike Oliver who backed the winner of the race while he rode the second horse.

More troubling here is if the police were aware of the bet that Oliver has allegedly admitted to placing, why weren't charges laid, why didn't stewards take action, where was the new racing integrity mob of Victoria in all of this, why hasn't the Minister for Racing acted? On Melbournes day of days, how can the nations most famous race include a jockey that has allegedly admitted such a transgression occurring, be afforded the opportunity to ride and not only just ride but be put on board one of the favourites. From the limited media I have seen on this story today (for obvious reasons), might I direct you to catch up with the NSW 7.30 Report on the ABC tonight that will show some leading media personalitys embarrassed by and for Racing Victorias disgraceful blind eye, sweep it under the carpet attitude.

If only the story hadn't broken before the Cup, they may have escaped unharmed, but in reality its been a dirty great big black eye sustained by our southern cousins, thinking the story would have been lost to the masses, drowned out by the glitz and glam of the day. No, they f***** up, and most of us didn't miss it, nor will any of the symantics change our PERCEPTION of what has indeed happened. A cover up has been exposed. We all know that further down the road a lot more is going to come to light on this very complicated affair, but I will bet my arse at the end of the day, someone's reputation is going to be sullied, someone will be stood down or lose their job, and I am not talking about jockeys, trainers or bookies. I am talking about those who are charged to run the sport and whose responsibility it is to protect some of us mug punters. Those who are paid to ensure that dubious or corrupt actions are eliminated as they surface, not allow to let slide and become run of the mill normal behaviour.

[broncobrad]

Have provided the 730 Report link for you http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/

Perception v Rules They are both as important as each other, but its sort of weird how they can work against each other at the same time.

[Thevoiceofreason]

Laughing out EXTREMELY loudly, I just noticed Brendans 'current' location.

Bill, back in the game so soon, talk about an Indian giver. Certain it said above that your last post on this issue had been made. Welcome back, I have missed you.

The double standards relates (from memory) to Jackson placing approx 5 bets (including multiple combination bets) on races he was competing in. Most of those bets were 'insignificant' in comparison to Ollies, but the double standard is patently obvious, in most of the bets he was betting on the horse he was driving, unlike Oliver who backed the winner of the race while he rode the second horse.

More troubling here is if the police were aware of the bet that Oliver has allegedly admitted to placing, why weren't charges laid, why didn't stewards take action, where was the new racing integrity mob of Victoria in all of this, why hasn't the Minister for Racing acted? On Melbournes day of days, how can the nations most famous race include a jockey that has allegedly admitted such a transgression occurring, be afforded the opportunity to ride and not only just ride but be put on board one of the favourites. From the limited media I have seen on this story today (for obvious reasons), might I direct you to catch up with the NSW 7.30 Report on the ABC tonight that will show some leading media personalitys embarrassed by and for Racing Victorias disgraceful blind eye, sweep it under the carpet attitude.

If only the story hadn't broken before the Cup, they may have escaped unharmed, but in reality its been a dirty great big black eye sustained by our southern cousins, thinking the story would have been lost to the masses, drowned out by the glitz and glam of the day. No, they f***** up, and most of us didn't miss it, nor will any of the symantics change our PERCEPTION of what has indeed happened. A cover up has been exposed. We all know that further down the road a lot more is going to come to light on this very complicated affair, but I will bet my arse at the end of the day, someone's reputation is going to be sullied, someone will be stood down or lose their job, and I am not talking about jockeys, trainers or bookies. I am talking about those who are charged to run the sport and whose responsibility it is to protect some of us mug punters. Those who are paid to ensure that dubious or corrupt actions are eliminated as they surface, not allow to let slide and become run of the mill normal behaviour.

Sorry Brad I still do not see the double standard this story on Oliver broke a few weeks back RVL stewards said they were investigating no stand down available to them so the investigation continues.

Painting investigation started in July finished in September in the time of the investigation no stand down ordered.

I am sorry but to me that looks completely consistent. with no double standard.

[Thevoiceofreason]

VOR,

Haven't heard much about this, too busy complaining Ryan Moores ride and ridiculous betting %s at Griffith, but apparently a QLD trainer was nabbed down in Melbourne today and got caught red handed. Stewards asked to search his car. He denied them access for personal reasons.
What is the ruling there. Are stewards allowed to freely search cars? Possibly allowed with permission, possibly allowed even if the trainer denies them access?

I will have to search the current rules but I would think the trainer is in a fair bit of drama.

[broncobrad]

Well Bill, maybe you could explain this double standard to me.

Danny Nikolic was banned from race riding solely on the evidence provided by steward Terry Bailey. Serious, but unproven allegations that no doubt stem from the long and ongoing investigations into race-fixing. Nikolic strenuously denied making these threats. Judge McNamara denied Nikolics appeal to resume riding until the full appeal is heard today 7/11/12, post Melbourne Cup (how convenient). You might take note of McNamaras observation of public confidence in stewards upholding racings integrity toward the end of the article. Here it is http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-10-16/nikolic-spring-carnival-clearance-bid-fails/4316518

It is alleged that Damian Oliver has admitted to police he DID place that $10,000 bet.

One bloke has denied unproven allegations and gets 2 years. Another bloke makes an admission and nothing gets done.

One bloke in the eyes of the public has a history of run-ins with stewards, the other bloke is an idol to some, a golden boy that they made a movie about.

[Thevoiceofreason]

Well Bill, maybe you could explain this double standard to me.

Danny Nikolic was banned from race riding solely on the evidence provided by steward Terry Bailey. Serious, but unproven allegations that no doubt stem from the long and ongoing investigations into race-fixing. Nikolic strenuously denied making these threats. Judge McNamara denied Nikolics appeal to resume riding until the full appeal is heard today 7/11/12, post Melbourne Cup (how convenient). You might take note of McNamaras observation of public confidence in stewards upholding racings integrity toward the end of the article. Here it is http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-10-16/nikolic-spring-carnival-clearance-bid-fails/4316518

It is alleged that Damian Oliver has admitted to police he DID place that $10,000 bet.

One bloke has denied unproven allegations and gets 2 years. Another bloke makes an admission and nothing gets done.

One bloke in the eyes of the public has a history of run-ins with stewards, the other bloke is an idol to some, a golden boy that they made a movie about.

I tend to agree on face value there appears to have been a very different approach taken with the D Nikolic case, having said that Nikolic appealed every decision taken against him and got loss after loss in relation to getting stays of proceedings so he could continue riding .... I suspect because of this there is more meat to the allegations than has been made public.

In relation to any admissions made to the police by D Oliver I think that given that the police have not charged him with any offence they are of little use and the stewards need to run an independent investigation that is assuming of course the police can even release that information to RVL which by the way my understanding is technically they can not.

I think the need for that approach has already been made clear by the ongoing investigation in NSW which has followed a similar path.

Interestingly Jockey Mark Zarah was also alleged back in August to have accepted a payment to influence the outcome of the "Smoking Aces" race neither he or Nikolic were stood down over this investigation which is ongoing, again in my view a consistent approach.

I have said many time quoting Judges from appeals that "every case turns on its own fact and circumstances".... There can be no better example of this than the decision of the stewards to scratch Beseech yesterday.

"Stewards scratched Beseech at 2.45pm after Schofield was caught preparing to tube the horse after telling stewards "it hadn't drank the best overnight".

The stewards compliance assurance team scaled a fence at the Geelong stables of Shane Edwards and caught Schofield with a "twitch, bucket, tube and funnel" in a hessian bag along with a "measuring container with 400 mils of warm water".

Even from this report taken from racenet the trainer has admitted he had or was about to drench the horse and even gave reasons as to why plus the fluid was there and ready with the horse. This is a far cry from the circumstances and evidence put forward by the Howmuchdoyouloveme team last Saturday and hence the different result in relation to the scratching of the horse... the devil is in the detail as they say.

[aussiebreno]

http://forum.thoroughbredvillage.com.au/smerdon-10000-fine_topic42096.html

[broncobrad]

In the attached article Peter McGauran, ARB CEO states "Recent wrongdoings by jockeys and trainers have damaged the image and public perception of racing".

I would say their snow job of keeping it all hush hush until the spotlight was finally off them (following the last race of the Spring carnival) and finally lifting the lid on all the dirty laundry that needed to be put through the wringer was nothing short of an outstanding success. Now it appears the dung heap just keeps producing more stench than the handy can of Glen Air 20 can cope with.

I find it laughable that after the carnival, the Minister for Racing, Dennis Napthine is now asking the question "when the allegations against Oliver starting gaining credibility why wasn't he stood down". Now I have already heard TVOR's explanation as to why. Can't wait till we hear what the Vic Racing come up with.

Now that the dust has settled and the once a year punters eyes are back on the cricket and other family orientated activity, new/heavier/public opinion weighted new rules are on the table. (Still piss poor in my opinion) Maybe for starters, they could refer to some of the new guidelines that HRNSW have adopted. And while they are at it they could look to HRNSW for a bit guidance in recognising how far a sport can fall before REAL action starts to happen. I am not saying our game is smelling like roses but it sure smells better than the dung heap over the border in Vic thoroughbred racing. Then again, who would have thought someone would have the temerity to make such a statement when comparing the two codes

http://www.news.com.au/news/racing-cracks-whip-in-wake-of-ollie-scandal-with-move-for-harsher-penalties/story-fnejlub9-1226521952323

[Thevoiceofreason]

In the attached article Peter McGauran, ARB CEO states "Recent wrongdoings by jockeys and trainers have damaged the image and public perception of racing".

I would say their snow job of keeping it all hush hush until the spotlight was finally off them (following the last race of the Spring carnival) and finally lifting the lid on all the dirty laundry that needed to be put through the wringer was nothing short of an outstanding success. Now it appears the dung heap just keeps producing more stench than the handy can of Glen Air 20 can cope with.

I find it laughable that after the carnival, the Minister for Racing, Dennis Napthine is now asking the question "when the allegations against Oliver starting gaining credibility why wasn't he stood down". Now I have already heard TVOR's explanation as to why. Can't wait till we hear what the Vic Racing come up with.

Now that the dust has settled and the once a year punters eyes are back on the cricket and other family orientated activity, new/heavier/public opinion weighted new rules are on the table. (Still piss poor in my opinion) Maybe for starters, they could refer to some of the new guidelines that HRNSW have adopted. And while they are at it they could look to HRNSW for a bit guidance in recognising how far a sport can fall before REAL action starts to happen. I am not saying our game is smelling like roses but it sure smells better than the dung heap over the border in Vic thoroughbred racing. Then again, who would have thought someone would have the temerity to make such a statement when comparing the two codes

http://www.news.com.au/news/racing-cracks-whip-in-wake-of-ollie-scandal-with-move-for-harsher-penalties/story-fnejlub9-1226521952323

Here are RVL reasons for oliver being allowed to ride .... cop the tip the Minister will be satisfied because of the legals.

The new penalties to be discussed by the ARB will not happen.

Committee releases sequence of events that transpired during the Damien Oliver investigation
The Racing Victoria Investigation Committee overseeing Damien Oliver's bet on Miss Octopussy at Moonee Valley on 1 October 2010 has released a chronology of the sequence of events that transpired during the investigation;

1. The Investigative Committee was initially appointed by the Board of Racing Victoria on 21 August 2012 under Rule of Racing AR 7(iii)(c) to investigate the race fixing media reports relating to the race won by Smoking Aces. On 30 August 2012, the Board extended the Committee's brief to investigate the allegation against Damien Oliver shortly after receipt of an Information Report from the Racing Integrity Commissioner, Sal Perna.

2. The Information Report centred on an allegation from an unidentified source, that Damien Oliver had placed a $10,000 bet on Miss Octopussy which was a rival horse in race 6 at Moonee Valley Racecourse on 1October 2010. Mr Oliver rode Europa Point in the race.

3. The Investigative Committee comprised Rob Montgomery, Deputy Chairman of Stewards and James Hitchcock, Stipendiary Steward. Tony Burns, Barrister, was engaged to assist with independent legal advice.

4. The Rules of Racing operate as a contract between Racing Victoria and licensed persons. The Stewards' powers have certain limitations in that there is no power to compel non-licensed persons to assist with investigations nor do the Stewards generally have access to police information. Within these constraints, the Committee began the substantial task of gathering evidence, including the interviewing of key witnesses.

5. On 16 October 2012, the Committee contacted Mr Oliver to make an appointment to conduct an interview. Through his solicitors, Mr Oliver was reluctant to be interviewed by the Committee having regard to his legal right to silence.

6. Notwithstanding Mr Oliver's initial position, on 22 October 2012, Mr Oliver's legal representatives contacted the Committee and requested a "without prejudice" conference, which was held between Mr Oliver's legal representatives and the Committee on that day.

7. Without prejudice discussions continued between Mr Oliver's legal representatives and the Committee up until 12 November 2012. As these discussions were held on a without prejudice basis, the Committee was obliged to maintain the confidentiality of those discussions and not to disclose the content of those discussions.

8. Throughout the period of without prejudice discussions between Mr Oliver's solicitors and the Committee, the Committee continued with the task of obtaining further evidence, and in this regard, the following key witnesses were interviewed on the dates as indicated:

· 25 October 2012: Mark Hunter, racehorse owner, form analyst and punter;

· 1 November 2012: Robert Smerdon, licensed trainer;

· 5 November 2012: Lee Freedman, licensed trainer of Europa Point; and


· 7 November 2012: Laurie Bricknell, racehorse owner, retired bookmaker, punter and resident in Queensland

9. During this time, the Committee gave careful consideration as to whether immediate action should or could be taken against Mr Oliver (including standing him down) prior to the laying of formal charges.

10. The Committee formed the view that its best prospects of securing a certain conviction was to obtain an admission of guilt from Mr Oliver. Accordingly, the option of standing Mr Oliver down prior to the laying of charges was not pursued by the Committee on the basis that this would have most likely jeopardised an admission being obtained which would be admissible in any Stewards Inquiry.

11. The Committee also took into account that an admission would most likely provide further evidence in relation to the actions of others.

12. The signed admission was provided to the Committee on the afternoon of Monday 12 November 2012 at which time the Committee was in a position to prepare a brief to support charges being laid against Mr Oliver.

13. The following day, on 13 November 2012, Racing Victoria Stewards charged Mr Oliver with breaches of the Rules of Racing. Also on 13 November 2012, the Stewards stood Mr Oliver down under Rule of Racing AR 193 pending the hearing and determination of the charges and scheduled a Stewards inquiry for 10.00 am on 20 November 2012.

14. It should be noted that the Committee's inquiries into the matters raised during the investigation are ongoing.

[broncobrad]

I wonder if anyone thought to brief the Minister whilst all the cloak and dagger stuff was being carried out. Maybe someone in Victoria could tell us for sure, but from where I sit, Napthine DOES seem to take an active interest in all things racing, loves a photo op and has been delivering on promises. It would be a tad personally embarrassing for him I would think to have been left out of the loop. Between the Stewards, the Integrity mob and the Minister, who is talking to who?

All that said, it has still been an exercise in hush hush, while Olly got to reap further rewards for his crimes. I wonder if the prizemoney he has earned over the carnival is rightfully his because of a deal that had been struck through this 'without prejudice' stuff (never heard of anything like this before, how common would this stuff be Bill). In other quarters these ill-gotten gains could be argued to be proceeds/profits from possible criminal activity, thats not an accusation, that is an observation.

Thanks for the facts Bill. Why do you dismiss outright that the new proposals will not happen?

[Lucky Camilla"s Lovechild]

Here are RVL reasons for oliver being allowed to ride .... cop the tip the Minister will be satisfied because of the legals.

The new penalties to be discussed by the ARB will not happen.

Committee releases sequence of events that transpired during the Damien Oliver investigation
The Racing Victoria Investigation Committee overseeing Damien Oliver's bet on Miss Octopussy at Moonee Valley on 1 October 2010 has released a chronology of the sequence of events that transpired during the investigation;

1. The Investigative Committee was initially appointed by the Board of Racing Victoria on 21 August 2012 under Rule of Racing AR 7(iii)(c) to investigate the race fixing media reports relating to the race won by Smoking Aces. On 30 August 2012, the Board extended the Committee's brief to investigate the allegation against Damien Oliver shortly after receipt of an Information Report from the Racing Integrity Commissioner, Sal Perna.

2. The Information Report centred on an allegation from an unidentified source, that Damien Oliver had placed a $10,000 bet on Miss Octopussy which was a rival horse in race 6 at Moonee Valley Racecourse on 1October 2010. Mr Oliver rode Europa Point in the race.

3. The Investigative Committee comprised Rob Montgomery, Deputy Chairman of Stewards and James Hitchcock, Stipendiary Steward. Tony Burns, Barrister, was engaged to assist with independent legal advice.

4. The Rules of Racing operate as a contract between Racing Victoria and licensed persons. The Stewards' powers have certain limitations in that there is no power to compel non-licensed persons to assist with investigations nor do the Stewards generally have access to police information. Within these constraints, the Committee began the substantial task of gathering evidence, including the interviewing of key witnesses.

5. On 16 October 2012, the Committee contacted Mr Oliver to make an appointment to conduct an interview. Through his solicitors, Mr Oliver was reluctant to be interviewed by the Committee having regard to his legal right to silence.

6. Notwithstanding Mr Oliver's initial position, on 22 October 2012, Mr Oliver's legal representatives contacted the Committee and requested a "without prejudice" conference, which was held between Mr Oliver's legal representatives and the Committee on that day.

7. Without prejudice discussions continued between Mr Oliver's legal representatives and the Committee up until 12 November 2012. As these discussions were held on a without prejudice basis, the Committee was obliged to maintain the confidentiality of those discussions and not to disclose the content of those discussions.

8. Throughout the period of without prejudice discussions between Mr Oliver's solicitors and the Committee, the Committee continued with the task of obtaining further evidence, and in this regard, the following key witnesses were interviewed on the dates as indicated:

· 25 October 2012: Mark Hunter, racehorse owner, form analyst and punter;

· 1 November 2012: Robert Smerdon, licensed trainer;

· 5 November 2012: Lee Freedman, licensed trainer of Europa Point; and


· 7 November 2012: Laurie Bricknell, racehorse owner, retired bookmaker, punter and resident in Queensland

9. During this time, the Committee gave careful consideration as to whether immediate action should or could be taken against Mr Oliver (including standing him down) prior to the laying of formal charges.

10. The Committee formed the view that its best prospects of securing a certain conviction was to obtain an admission of guilt from Mr Oliver. Accordingly, the option of standing Mr Oliver down prior to the laying of charges was not pursued by the Committee on the basis that this would have most likely jeopardised an admission being obtained which would be admissible in any Stewards Inquiry.

11. The Committee also took into account that an admission would most likely provide further evidence in relation to the actions of others.

12. The signed admission was provided to the Committee on the afternoon of Monday 12 November 2012 at which time the Committee was in a position to prepare a brief to support charges being laid against Mr Oliver.

13. The following day, on 13 November 2012, Racing Victoria Stewards charged Mr Oliver with breaches of the Rules of Racing. Also on 13 November 2012, the Stewards stood Mr Oliver down under Rule of Racing AR 193 pending the hearing and determination of the charges and scheduled a Stewards inquiry for 10.00 am on 20 November 2012.

14. It should be noted that the Committee's inquiries into the matters raised during the investigation are ongoing.
Sounds like the tail wagging the dog to me!

[Thevoiceofreason]

Brad

I think the big issue lies in the premise" that each case has to be dealt with on its own facts and circumstances".

Interestingly RacingNSW are now seen to be making all the noise, it should not be forgotten that not a lifetime ago Jockey Peter Robl was given 6 months for betting by RacingNSW stewards and Jockey Blake Shinn was given 15 months for the same offence there were a lot more bets in these cases and it was estimated at the time up to $500,000 had be wagered. The penalties for each breach or group of breaches were ordered to be severed cumulatively and on one occasion like Oliver, Shinn bet against a horse he rode.

The Oliver penalty in my view is in line with these penalties and at the end of the day they form a precedent.

I might be proved wrong, it will not be the first time but this is a storm in a tea cup... integrity issues that are much bigger are horses not being allowed to run on their merits or the gear falling off pacers in a race. ... under the law now days bloody hard to prove to the level a court of law requires..... if you doubt me read some of the judges findings at appeals.

[broncobrad]

Just a bit more in the Tele today which I found interesting and not that my opinion matters but I am fine with any jockey having a bet: As long as its the steed they are on top of or the horse they are driving for that matter.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/superracing/racing-industry-torn-over-whether-jockeys-should-be-allowed-to-bet/story-fn67r1j3-1226522301510

I thought some of the reasons put forward against this proposal by Ray Murrihy were a bit on the fantastic side of reality. What gun trainer John O'Shea has to say just makes sense.

[Thevoiceofreason]

I wonder if anyone thought to brief the Minister whilst all the cloak and dagger stuff was being carried out. Maybe someone in Victoria could tell us for sure, but from where I sit, Napthine DOES seem to take an active interest in all things racing, loves a photo op and has been delivering on promises. It would be a tad personally embarrassing for him I would think to have been left out of the loop. Between the Stewards, the Integrity mob and the Minister, who is talking to who?

All that said, it has still been an exercise in hush hush, while Olly got to reap further rewards for his crimes. I wonder if the prizemoney he has earned over the carnival is rightfully his because of a deal that had been struck through this 'without prejudice' stuff (never heard of anything like this before, how common would this stuff be Bill). In other quarters these ill-gotten gains could be argued to be proceeds/profits from possible criminal activity, thats not an accusation, that is an observation.

Thanks for the facts Bill. Why do you dismiss outright that the new proposals will not happen?


Report on RacingNSW today

REPORT ON ISSUES DECIDED AT ARB BOARD MEETING
ON 22 NOVEMBER, 2012
1. Reform of penalties
The Board considered a paper by Racing NSW on the introduction of minimum penalties
for serious integrity breaches given that penalties have been eroded over a period of time
by appellant bodies. Racing NSW rightly submitted that the customer must have complete
and continuing confidence in the integrity of the industry. The Board agreed to a new
regime of stronger penalties in 2013 noting that the rights and interests of all parties need
to be taken into account and penalties structured to provide procedural fairness as well as
a deterrent value. The level of penalties and their method of introduction will be
considered by each Principal Racing Authority taking into account the advice of their
integrity departments and stewards with a decision by the Board next January.

a slowing one thinks

[broncobrad]

As a slow learner (moi), do you read this as a handbrake to reform because of the timetable and various jurisdictions coming up with all sorts of reasons not to change? Because I read it as an admission by the ARB that the penalties of today do not fit the crime (considering the appeals processes) and a review is in order and they are taking the matter seriously.

[Thevoiceofreason]

As a slow learner (moi), do you read this as a handbrake to reform because of the timetable and various jurisdictions coming up with all sorts of reasons not to change? Because I read it as an admission by the ARB that the penalties of today do not fit the crime (considering the appeals processes) and a review is in order and they are taking the matter seriously.

I think they are worried how some of the appellant boards will view mandatory sentencing especially with the current penalties being in place for so long. also how does the penalty for betting on another runner in race in which you are riding, compare to the jockey who when on holidays and at the pub has $10 on one.... there is a long way to go and I think they recognise that,

[aussiebreno]

I think they are worried how some of the appellant boards will view mandatory sentencing especially with the current penalties being in place for so long. also how does the penalty for betting on another runner in race in which you are riding, compare to the jockey who when on holidays and at the pub has $10 on one.... there is a long way to go and I think they recognise that,
According to one bloke I had a run in with on another forum, they don't differ. He even wanted jockeys banned from licenced venues :o

[Thevoiceofreason]

According to one bloke I had a run in with on another forum, they don't differ. He even wanted jockeys banned from licenced venues :o

The trouble is Brendan is they do not vary and that is what makes the current proposal in my view unworkable. For goodness sake how can they be the same offence, this is officialdom gone mad.

[Thevoiceofreason]

Earlier in this thread there was some discussion in relation to the different approach taken in Victoria in relation to the D Nikolic case and the D Oliver case..... perhaps todays proceedings may shed even further light on the attitude of one D Nikolic.


Steward claims Nikolic made more threats

Former Tasmanian chief steward Wade Hadley has accused embattled jockey Danny Nikolic of threatening and intimidating him during the rider’s on-going appeal hearing at the Victorian Civil and Administrative Appeals tribunal.
Hadley, who recently joined the Racing Victoria stewards team was on the panel at Seymour on September 4 when Nikolic was accused of threatening chief steward Terry Bailey.

Hadley told the VCAT hearing on Thursday that Nikolic had sat next to the steward outside the VCAT office during a recess in evidence and said, "You are going up in the world. Let’s see where you end up. Look at you, you are a f****** fine specimen of a human being. You are all tarred with the same brush. You can't even make f****** eye contact."

Racing Victoria’s legal counsel Phillip Dunn also told the hearing that Nikolic had "clicked his tongue like a gun sound" on two occasions in the vicinity of Hadley.

Judge Michael Macnamara adjourned the matter until December 11. Racing Victoria’s legal counsel has requested CCTV footage from outside the VCAT office in an attempt to gain evidence of their allegations.