Scotch Thistle

I reckon the faults disclosed by this fiasco lie, in sequence, with the club (using clapped out stalls), the club (employing a starter with the reaction time of a comatose tortoise), the club (starters steward lacking energy with the red flag), the RIU (laying informations with the JCU in ignorance of the starter's decision on a false start being final) and the JCU for making a decision outside their powers. The most disturbing faults lie with the RIU and the JCU, as their incompetence impacts the operations and reputations of all 3 codes, across the country and beyond.

The Board of the RIU should be kicking Godber's arse, and farewelling it, given the scathing comments from the JCA. The embarrassment is surely of a level that it will penetrate even the capacious hide of RIU chairman Hughes. Unlike the representatives of the other codes on the RIU, Glenda is also directly above the odour emanating from Purcell's involvement. The RIU annual report in 2014 says that fines achieved by the RIU are transferred to the relevant code. Perhaps it follows that the $20K of costs awarded against the RIU in the Morton case will be recovered by the RIU from NZTR?

The stewards report from Matamata tells us mushrooms all we need to know as to why Waddell is not allowed to ride. Anderson makes a valid point about trainers being allowed to carry on presenting horses to race when they await hearings on breaches of rules (O'Sullivan/Scott with 3 horses tested positive for cobalt) whereas Waddell is banned on hearsay. After additional interviews were conducted J Waddell was stood down under Rule 207 from riding engagements today pending further investigations.

Trackside Friday afternoon showed an interview by Sweeney of the track manager, who said they put 16mm of water on the track during the week as it was Good 3. The idea was to have the track Dead 4 at the start of racing, and absorbent, so that if rain arrived as forecast on raceday the track wouldn't become a skating rink. Avoiding a potential problem created an unintended one.

Kevin Morton must be the hot early favourite to take out the award for the outstanding contribution to NZ racing for this season.

Will be good to see the strategy that the meeting on Thursday comes up with posted on Racecafe so we can poke a stick at it and see how it stacks up. Rogie may be sick of projections and spreadsheets from NZTR, but his crew need to come up with more credible ones or they will be urinating into the wind. It is one thing to get by in the judicial room with bluster and bullying, another to win arguments with facts and figures tested by all comers.

The RIU will leave no doubt of their incompetence if this takes until 2016 to be resolved. Maybe they are throwing all their resources into their persecution of a small trainer who has had the temerity to say what blind Freddy can see, i.e. that the NZTR boss is a blow hard, a man full of puffery and self-promoting exaggeration. I can't see what the O'Sullivan/Scott stable will gain by this continuing to hang over them. Can't be good for business.

The 3 positive samples were taken during race days on 5 February, 28 February and 11 March. That is a period of 5 weeks over which skulduggery/misadventure saw cobalt improperly administered to O'Sullivan/Scott horses who raced. It took 3 months for any of the positives to be notified. How does a testing regime which takes so long to confirm positives square with racing integrity? How can RIU squander huge sums on futile persecution of a small industry player who has the balls to challenge the veracity of a blowhard figurehead when tests on samples taken from horses racing loaded with cobalt aren't available for months? In the name of racing integrity we are notified ahead of race day of changes in gear of uncertain relevance to performance (changes of bits or racing plates, cheek burrs, bandages, shadow rolls). Clearly we would be way better off being notified of changes to what is going down each horse's throat or being injected into them.

You've given the game away as to how Purcell raced more than 90 horses?

I see that the videos of races at Hastings yesterday have been posted on the NZTR site, except for race 7. In that race a horse broke down and was later humanely destroyed. Possibly the video has been withheld in courtesy to connections and others who would prefer not to see footage which could distress them. Some might see that as too PC, and a denial of the realities of racing, but I don't want to go there. Please, NZTR, post video edited to remove any sensitive bits so that punters can get a fix on how good the winner, Huracan, might be. Also, there were several other interesting runners for the future, including a gelding for which $620K was paid as a yearling at Karaka.

What a pitiful state NZTR is in if that chap is good enough to be the head honcho. I noticed that he has learnt nothing from being ridiculed over his claim to have raced ninety. He claimed Wingatui is 1,200 km away from Castlepoint, an absurd exaggeration. What's the bet he exaggerates similarly with his claims for travel costs, entertainment expenses, etc?

You are spot on, bestbets, about how hopelessly incompetent Trackside can be at identifying the 3 leading runners. Anyone who doubts this should look at the video of the Group II Avondale Cup, where for half the race Saint Kitt was shown as leading, whereas George Simon was correctly calling Silk Chardonnay as in front (where she usually races) and Saint Kitt in the rear group (as tends to be his racing style). Adds to other embarrassments we put in front of overseas viewers, such as starting gate lotteries.

Aidan Rodley is good, but the woman whose hair keeps changing colour and the old bald coot should be moved on.

Ellis spent $4 million on 35 yearlings at Karaka according to Dillon. No doubt a few of the 35 will pay their way on the racetrack, or make hay in the breeding barn. Ellis's success with these will be trumpeted. Most will prove to be financially disappointing or catastrophic buys, for those to whom Ellis offloads shares. Imagine the tears when returns are as miniscule as from King's Rock, for which Ellis paid $1.75 million at Karaka in 2012. At the time he last raced in October 2014, King's Rock had been gelded, and had been a success to the tune of $10 thousand in stake money. King's Rock was going quite well in R65 company, and Ellis was saying he had a feeling the horse would win a really good race like the Waikato Cup, the Counties Cup or the Auckland Cup if he stayed sound.

Far too soon for retirement. He hasn't been tried over the jumps yet. Might leap like a stag.

INDUSTRY INTEGRITY Jockey wears unapproved gear = fined. Jockey overweight = fined. Trainer presents horse with wrong gear = fined. Trainer late declaring jockey = fined. Club deliberately waters track unevenly = yawn. Club not fined. Club uses stalls unfit for purpose = yawn. Club not fined. No automatic recompense to owners.

Is your point that the numbers for the two channels are wrong, and they should be 62 and 63? Workmanship like that, getting things only a little wrong, is pretty good by RIB standards, so would likely be rewarded to the tune of $350K or so a year (merely the stakes money for 50 midweek maiden races, @ $7K a pop).

Great point. The trainer of the $740K yearling which ran last, beaten 21 lengths, in a maiden at Taupo on Wednesday, will have to be mighty inventive to keep the owners happy. Especially as he had labelled it as the stable's best of the day on the website and talked it up on Trackside a few races earlier. The stipes didn't expect better from it, as there was no mention in their report.

The TAB calendar shows racing at Trentham on Saturday 14 March

What a waste of industry resources. What delicate flowers are these handicappers. The bad publicity from this hearing will do the industry more harm than the crime (of a trainer calling the apprentice handicapper a dickhead, in a non-public phone call).

Graham Richardson's winning strike rate this season is 17%, not 5%. The only trainers in the top 100 who have winning strike rates of 5% or lower are Jim Pender and Ralph Manning [see trainers' records on NZTR website].

Good news, they'll be selling the sections at bubble prices. Their track has provided excellent racing surfaces since the resumption, so it is to be hoped that "track development" doesn't jeopardise this.

If the presenters/comments people/racecallers had worthwhile coaching to smooth off rough edges, listening would in many cases be less painful. Full credit to Tom Wood, who I reckon has improved out of sight over the last couple of years. He is not yet a Tony Lee, but he could get there if assisted and encouraged by his employers as he learns the trade. Why, however, has no-one taken him aside and told him that "awaiting for" horse x to enter the gates is clumsy English, and "waiting for" horse x or "awaiting" horse x are more appropriate? I know this will sound snobbish, but I wonder how much of racing's loss of public interest is attributable to many in the industry given public exposure (as on Trackside TV) coming across as uneducated or thick to the mainstream Kiwi. The restricted vocabularies and uneducated expressions of presenters, trainers, stewards, and jockeys must turn potential owners and participants off?

A NZ Racing Desk article 2 days ago said he's been turned out and won't run in the Derby.

Correction: the second win was on a Good 3 track.