Their is a code of practice in this year i believe it had to be signed and sent back with the license renewal so i was told.
Printable View
Their is a code of practice in this year i believe it had to be signed and sent back with the license renewal so i was told.
See you in Romper RoomQuote:
Originally Posted by David Summers
[VVV] You know I don't like Cats. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Croatto
Thank you for the kind words David.Quote:
Originally Posted by David Summers
Jamie the days you speak of are long gone back in the good old days if you applied for a licence and the ruling authority did not want to give it to you or not not renew it so be it.Quote:
Originally Posted by triplev123
Gai Waterhouse changed that when she took the AJC as it was then on, when they would not licence her because she lived with Robbie, so those days are over.
I pretty sure you can not get even a strappers licence in either code in NSW without a criminal record check at least with the NSW police, you can check it out when you head to Meredith street to watch the movie I recommended.
CONTROLSQuote:
Originally Posted by Tangles
Hi Tangles, you make some good points. I have a few questions around controls. Where were they? Why did so many people in HRNSW know which horses were going to get swabbed beforehand? Why did O'Tool and Bentley need to know? Why didn't the HRNSW randomly change the swabbing schedule at the last moment to catch out this type of corruption? The system was so predictable and therefore rorted. Yes it is easy to say in hindsight, however there were rumors about this activity beforehand and one easy way to act on them would have been to mix up the schedule at the last moment.
Gents...please! My sincere apologies to you 2minuteman, my response was about Ron's question about the post put up by Alex123Quote:
Originally Posted by 2minuteman
http://www.harnessracingforum.com/im...quote_icon.png Originally Posted by alex 123 http://www.harnessracingforum.com/im...post-right.png
Hi there, just reading all the information that TripleV123 has written over the last 3 mths.
You could be a steward Triple, but Im sure you drink milk out of a saucer. I think your a big cat.
Jamie why don't you apply for a trainers licence.
Jamie why don't you apply for a drivers licence.
You have NO ability with horses.
Just stick to pouring beers Jamie
I thought that sounded a bit like Ringman having a go at Jamie! and Ron was too!
My apologies if Ive offended you Ron that was definitley not the intention.
Cheers,
Dan
Thanks for the thought Greg, s'pose I was looking for that coming at some stage and so just to clear the air.....none of the things one thinks of when ones mind is in the gutter. It's a product support role with the world's market leader in lubricants for mining, industry and transport.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg Hando
Kind a job you don't get rusty at!
I think I'll delete that detail from the profile it's bound to cause me angst again isn't it?
Cheers,
Dan
The reason Paul O'Toole had to know was that as starter he is the one to clear horses to pre race warm up, if a horse is to pre race blood tested it can not warm up first as it renders the swab useless.Quote:
Originally Posted by racefair
Looking at the meetings already listed I think you will find they were meetings where one of the two stewards either Bentley or O'Toole were in charge.
The only way would have been to not have them make the decisions on which horses to swab, if HRNSW knew enough to do that well they would not have been working at all.
As soon as HRNSW had any thing like proof the acted put the allegations to the accused and they resigned.
I have done some ruff calculations to show why it was not that easy to identify any pattern of horses not swabbed from raw data.
As I understand it the swab selection process in NSW at the time allowed the chief steward at the meeting to select 3 winners from 8 races to be post race tested (not considering HP or now Menangle where each winner is swabbed) this leaves approximately 50 winners a week untested in NSW, at 4.5 weeks a month, on average this is 225 winners a month not swabbed.
I do not think in those circumstances missing one post race a month would be hard to hide from your superiors.
Now lets examine TCO2 testing say an average of 70 runners per meeting (again discount HP or Menangle where more are tested up to 25% of the runners) TCO2 testing was conducted at about 70% of meetings at about 6 runners a meeting so it is then only 36 runners a week tested from 700 runners if you do the maths that is 3150 runners a month again not difficult to hide the missing of one, two or even three bloods a month in these circumstances.
I am not sure how anyone could identify a pattern emerging , there are just too many variables.
I am told it was part of the plan to also to test other stable runners who were not "helped" so again no pattern emerged because it looked like the Trainer was being tested all the time.
At most meetings in NSW there are only two stewards one has to make the decisions which horses to swab weather it be pre or post race.
We should also remember there have been in NSW over the past few years a number of Trainers disqualified for TCO2 positives after post race two hour blood tests were ordered by vigilant stewards who smelt a rat on the night or day as it may be, ironically one of the Trainers to be disqualified in those circumstances has already been charged in this investigation.
Its needle in haystack stuff without the whistle blower that led to the phone use and money trail.
Danno , it's probably best to leave your occupation blank. Some others on the forums post their occupation as a "joke" occupation ( I've got no problems with that - good for a laugh) but I think it might be best to remove it in your case.
[QUOTE=Danno;13611]Gents...please! My sincere apologies to you 2minuteman, my response was about Ron's question about the post put up by Alex123
No, I wasn't offended but you were on the money re Ringman having a go under a new nom-de-forum.
Just as in that other contentious issue, relegation, the rules already exist;Quote:
Originally Posted by triplev123
90. (1) The Controlling Body may by licence regulate any activity connected with the harness racing industry.
(2) An application for a licence shall be made by the persons in the manner and form and be accompanied by such documentation, information and fees as the Controlling Body may determine.
(3) A person applying to be relicensed with a Controlling Body shall, if previously licensed by another Controlling Body or recognised harness racing authority, provide a written clearance from that Controlling Body or recognised harness racing authority detailing the status of the person relating to current penalty, debt or other embargo.
(4) The Controlling Body may grant a licence for such period and upon such terms and conditions as it thinks fit.
(5)An application for a licence may be refused by the Controlling Body without assigning any reason.
(6) A licence may be suspended or cancelled:
(a) by the Controlling Body or the Stewards for breach of a term or condition of the licence, or
(b) by the Controlling Body where the Controlling Body is satisfied that the person holding the licence is not a fit and proper person to be associated with harness racing.
(7)The type, grade or class of a licence held by a person may be varied by the Controlling Body or by the Stewards.
(8) The terms or conditions attaching to a type, grade or class of licence may be varied by the Stewards or theControlling Body.
So it is just a matter of applying the rules and letting those that fall foul of them fight them in court if they so choose. I'm sure that most would baulk at the legal expense involved in that pursuit.
That's true Phil but as super wanky as it sounds, from a Law Talkin' Guy perspective having the racing rules written as such differs greatly to someone signing a Licence application/agreement with full awareness/understanding & by way of a signanture an acceptance of the conditions therein that clearly stipulate the same.
Jaimie
from memory, keep in mind I am getting old, we did sign such a document this year before licences were issued.
And for the record most licence forms include a clause that you agree to bound by the rules. Its like everything it can and will be appealed.Quote:
Originally Posted by triplev123
You been talking to my wife
Words of support from Harness Racing NZ for investigators currently handling the NSW harness scandal http://www.harnesslink.com/www/Article.cgi?ID=94245
Also, Sam Nati has just made the following statement about the current investigation http://www.harnesslink.com/www/Article.cgi?ID=94247
Congratulations to the moderators of this forum for so quickly removing the rubbish posted under the name of CEdwards81, where as is his usual rant he states rumors and his opinions as if the are fact and has pot shots at the establishment as they try to clean up the game.
At the risk of upsetting the moderators I have reposted a small section of what he had to say
"Good on the NSW Police for moving ahead and showing harness racing how to run an investigation"
Gee scoop thanks for the information, who would have possibly thought a police force of nearly 16000 officers were better equipped to run an investigation than HRNSW... what a goose.
Not sure if Admin were online , but I reported the outrageous post a couple of minutes after it was posted and it was quickly removed. Thank you Admin for your quick work.
Chris Edwards , now that you are on an enforced holiday from these forums (hopefully permanent) , time for you to wake up to yourself and stop posting libellous crap.
I have a couple of questions for those in the know:
1. The Daily Telegraph named 37 races under Police investigation stemming from the charges laid against Paul O'Toole. There are trainers and drivers who participated in those races and no charges have been laid against them as yet. If there is not enough evidence to charge these people, then why cant HRNSW stand these people down under Australian Harness Racing Rule 183, which states a trainer or driver may be directed not take part in a race "pending the outcome of an inquiry, investigation or objection, or where a person has been charged with an offence". There is obviously an inquiry and investigation into the races listed that those people participated in. So for the time being they can continue to compete in and win races as recently as last night, while others involved can still take the reins at Penrith tonight as well as at the Group 1 Truer Memorial meeting at Bankstown on Saturday.
2. Where is one M. Bentley in all of this? Paul O'Toole is copping all the heat thus far and this was not the man flashing his new found wealth around Sydney by wearing fancy suits and blowing stacks of cash at Star City Casino night in night out.
[VVV] Amen to that.Quote:
Originally Posted by David Summers
O'Toole has "assisted" and given his list of races that were fixed. Although his list is well short of how many were HOT.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Rainmaker
Bentley has not been so forthcoming with information so the Taskforce has to track these down.
To date those arrested have really only been fringe players as the Industry and its participants are crying out for action so these people have been named and arrested with enough evidence.
The "others" still racing particularly tonight are dreading every knock at the door....cos its coming.
Its only a matter of time but if these people are going to punished to be the full extent of the law they need to get all the relevant data to seal the deal. Betting activity has been very difficult to link with some of these clowns.
The phone calls are for all to see cos they thought it was safe on mobiles. I am aware of only one that used a prepaid mobile but even that wont help him.
I think everyone is aware of the ones still out there now with the exception of a couple of real surprises.....
If regularly on-course one can see the change in their demeanour and cockiness......Pleasant to view.
Cant wait til the day they are arrested as I for one will be letting them know exactly how I feel.
You might think that some of those racing tonight ( not just tonight) might be looking over their shoulders. No they are not looking to see what is coming to challenge , they are waiting for the inevitable tap on the shoulder that will lead to the end their corrupt careers.
Good riddance!! This lot who were so arrogant in the past and looked at the honest participants with utter contempt and spent a lot of time laughing behind their backs , can now not look anyone in the eyes and spend most of their time looking at the ground. You're gone you grubs.
G'day David,
I think the absolute contempt they've shown for their fellow participants is the very worst of it.
A slew of honest, hard working owners, trainers, drivers & punters who ask for nothing more & expect nothing less than a fair go have been extensively & repeatedly done over & that is deplorable. That is unforgivable. That is un-Australian.
No mind not in the gutter just didn't know what it was as many occupation's have name changes to make them sound more appealing i thought it must have been a new name for a driveway attendant ha haQuote:
Originally Posted by Danno
I've not been able to get out to Menangle too often , but in the past what I have seen clearly is the sheer arrogance and utter contempt shown by some of these corrupt stables to other genuine participants , trying to earn an honest buck , became so very obvious. Thank you to the whistleblower who got this investigation started.
Feeling volatile right now , but will keep my mouth closed ( for now) , but may these scum if found guilty rot in hell. How dare they do this to our beloved industry! Life bans if found guilty , there is no other option. May we never see these grubs names appear again.
having spoken to 1 of the 5 already arrested they are quiet confident of having charges dropped, beause there defence is "if my horse's were doped and the green light was given, well show me the results of the swabs......thats right there are no swabs so therefore all you have is zippo".......thats what he said to me.
Eric NRNSW got the names from the police on tuesday ? and have to run their own hearing so as to be acting inside the rules you have to be able to prove an offence was committed i think it will take a bit of time for Mr Murrihy (excuse the spelling )and the other 2 to go through the evidence thoroughly and that is good we don't want these fleas getting off due to shoddy procedure or hearsay.The way i see it it is the word of 1 man saying which horse's and or trainer's etc involved so a case has to be proven it is only hear say at the moment about some of them.
They migh thave forgot about the "gaining money by deception " or whatever the wording is perhaps.Quote:
Originally Posted by sharkie
Everyone keeps coming up with the same names to get a visit but the whistleblower doesnt get a visit....just a smack on the wrist at the conclusion
The big fish the police are after arent trainers or drivers. One is a former owner currrently on the HRA NSW suspension list and the other is a well known big fat punter.If i were them id be visiting the Skase family in Spain till the heat dies down a little
Greg, he is of the opinion that with out any evidence relating to the swabs nothing will stick, im not on his side i hope all the time in harness racing is over but thats what he is telling me...Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg Hando
I don't think they have been charged with doping , so the no swab defence would be not worth a pinch of sh-t . From what I have read they have been charged with making payments to induce corruption , If there is proof ( and it sure sounds as if there is ) that money has been paid for advanced knowledge, what they did after that is irrelevant.
Hi fellow posters...... I have been following the trots scandal for a while now but found it hard to sort out the facts from fiction! How many races were actually involved in the scandal and how many trainers/drivers are going to be charged? Also how could such corruption be allowed to exist without the bosses at harness racing keeping check on their staff??
This was posted earlier but it puts it into perspective.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dmoore
The reason Paul O'Toole had to know was that as starter he is the one to clear horses to pre race warm up, if a horse is to pre race blood tested it can not warm up first as it renders the swab useless.
Looking at the meetings already listed I think you will find they were meetings where one of the two stewards either Bentley or O'Toole were in charge.
The only way would have been to not have them make the decisions on which horses to swab, if HRNSW knew enough to do that well they would not have been working at all.
As soon as HRNSW had any thing like proof the acted put the allegations to the accused and they resigned.
I have done some ruff calculations to show why it was not that easy to identify any pattern of horses not swabbed from raw data.
As I understand it the swab selection process in NSW at the time allowed the chief steward at the meeting to select 3 winners from 8 races to be post race tested (not considering HP or now Menangle where each winner is swabbed) this leaves approximately 50 winners a week untested in NSW, at 4.5 weeks a month, on average this is 225 winners a month not swabbed.
I do not think in those circumstances missing one post race a month would be hard to hide from your superiors.
Now lets examine TCO2 testing say an average of 70 runners per meeting (again discount HP or Menangle where more are tested up to 25% of the runners) TCO2 testing was conducted at about 70% of meetings at about 6 runners a meeting so it is then only 36 runners a week tested from 700 runners if you do the maths that is 3150 runners a month again not difficult to hide the missing of one, two or even three bloods a month in these circumstances.
I am not sure how anyone could identify a pattern emerging , there are just too many variables.
I am told it was part of the plan to also to test other stable runners who were not "helped" so again no pattern emerged because it looked like the Trainer was being tested all the time.
At most meetings in NSW there are only two stewards one has to make the decisions which horses to swab weather it be pre or post race.
We should also remember there have been in NSW over the past few years a number of Trainers disqualified for TCO2 positives after post race two hour blood tests were ordered by vigilant stewards who smelt a rat on the night or day as it may be, ironically one of the Trainers to be disqualified in those circumstances has already been charged in this investigation.
Its needle in haystack stuff without the whistle blower that led to the phone use and money trail.
That explains a lot. What about the whistleblower? Is he an innocent party or one of those to be arrested??
Sorry I am not close enough to offer an opinion with any validity and I hate guessing, glad it cleared up how it could have happened tho.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dmoore
Bill, you seem to have an opinion or defence for the people you work for or did work for on everything said in this forum, maybe you could offer some advice on improving the current swabbing procedures
I think that is an easy question to answer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Macarthur
There is no doubt in my opinion that the best model is the current model operated by RacingNSW where every winner is swabbed, in Harness this could be confined to meetings covered by the TAB. In this instance I am talking post race swabbing only.
In relation to TCO2 testing which is a bigger issue for harness than the gallops, the current 25% of runners that are done at the Metro standard meetings could be rolled out to all provincial standard meetings.
I am aware this would constitute a considerable extension to the current cost structure.
The best alternative would seem to be one outlined in other forum posts by VVV where another machine be purchased and used to check TCO2 levels in bloods, it is clear this machine is not supported under the rules to declare a positive test, however it could be used to highlight high TCO2 findings that then require further testing with the approved equipment.The deterrent effect of this would be immeasurable because at many meetings every runner could be tested.
This approach would also clearly lessen the cost burden.
Whilst ever the situation exists that every winner is not post race tested and such a small percentage of runners are TCO2 tested it is too easy for cheats to sneak through, this is not in any way meant to suggest HRNSW should have done a better job. they have a limited budget and swabbing is an expensive exercise but if public confidence is to be returned and maintained then a very different approach needs to be taken and as stupid as it sounds regardless of the costs.
If Harness Racing loses public confidence long term, then turnover drops, which in turn leads to lesser payments from the TABCORP agreement which will lead to a drop in prize money and a shrinking industry.
I am positive I know the answer, but I am not sure how to fund it, it would be great if we lived in Utopia but we do not, we live in NSW.
Bill you know more about this topic than hrnsw and the stewards by the sounds of it! Did you ever consider becoming a steward and what is your background in the sport??