Hastings cancelled

[Peter Jenkins 2,120]

Has there been any mention of an independent investigation into this whole business ? It would appear given the statements by Castles and Neal that some serious questions need to be addressed about responsibility and the whole decision-making process after the jockey complaints. The availability of the "groundhog" and the inference that jockeys would have likely proceeded if the machine had been used on the track begs an explanation as to why this option was not utilized. While not second guessing the safety of jockeys in any sense the "slippage" did not appear to have been as serious as incidents that have caused previous meetings to be abandoned leading to the assumption that ;'groundhogging" may have been a successful solution. The whole watering procedure needs to be examined independently given that it seems to have been outside the normal practice for track managers in Australasia. Whatever, there is almost a sense of a show of power from the RIU. Some have suggested this is a bitter aftertaste in reaction to the Morton hearing. One would hope this is not true....

The subsequent re-jigging of major races will now impact many owners, trainers and clubs and will have a ripple effect throughout the Spring. In our days as sponsors of the Stoney Bridge Stakes (now Windsor Park Stakes) the HB Club led by John McGifford and his team were exemplary in the way they conducted the entire meeting. Current HB team members should be calling for an independent investigation to to protect their own interests and reputations and perhaps expose those of their colleagues otherwise everyone gets tarred with the same brush.

Edited September 20, 2015 by Peter Jenkins

[jess 1,244]

My prediction is the spin today will be to place the emphasis on welfare, safety etc and the need to call it off on the day for the sake of the horses and riders - as they are paramount etc etc.  Whoever is spoken to in any position of power/influence will try to deflect attention from the central issue - that sponsors, trainers, owners & punters fronted up on a big premier day of racing only to be presented with a track not fit to be raced on.  . 

[Leggy 4,089]

Has there been any mention of an independent investigation into this whole business ? It would appear given the statements by Castles and Neal that some serious questions need to be addressed about responsibility and the whole decision-making process after the jockey complaints. The availability of the "groundhog" and the inference that jockeys would have likely proceeded if the machine had been used on the track begs an explanation as to why this option was not utilized. While not second guessing the safety of jockeys in any sense the "slippage" did not appear to have been as serious as incidents that have caused previous meetings to be abandoned leading to the assumption that ;'groundhogging" may have been a successful solution. The whole watering procedure needs to be examined independently given that it seems to have been outside the normal practice for track managers in Australasia. There is almost a sense of a show of power from the RIU. Some have suggested this is a bitter aftertaste in reaction to the Morton hearing. One would hope this is not true....

The subsequent re-jigging of major races will now impact many owners, trainers and clubs and will have a ripple effect throughout the Spring. In our days as sponsors of the Stoney Bridge Stakes (now Windsor Park Stakes) the HB Club led by John McGifford and his team were exemplary in the way they conducted the entire meeting. Current HB team members should be calling for an independent investigation to to protect their own interests and perhaps expose those of their colleagues otherwise everyone gets tarred with the same brush.

That seems like a pretty good synopsis Peter and as you say, the implications are quite significant. Some answers are required with respect to the unusual irrigation practice and the groundhog issue as you say. I don't think there has been mention of an independent inquiry as you suggest. However, I would wholeheartedly support that. Unfortunately, the output from previous NZTR inquiries of similar incidents seem to have resulted in no accountability or responsibility being taken by anyone, nor a satisfactory response that might avoid similar situations in the future. As you also say, the whole matter seems contradictory to the previous exemplary performance of HB particularly in relation to track preparation and reporting. And that is for all racedays, premier and industry alike.

[Peter Jenkins 2,120]

Yep, good post Peter, 'show of power' is a good way of putting it.

This is from NZTR website, but you could not call it independent

A thorough review of the circumstances which led to the abandonment of the meeting on Saturday 19 September will be carried out as a matter of urgency.

 

Thanks Hesi. A thorough review ? by whom ? Sounds like the Police investigating a complaint against the police.

[gubellini 4,004]

Allan Sharrock first guest on Des's show.Absolutely brilliant. His dream of a Triple Crown victory with Kawi has been ripped away by human error.I totally agree with him that N.Z. Racing is in a terrible state. 

Disclosure: I have spoken to Allan on a number of occasions at Karaka but have no association with his stable.

[bloke 1,232]

Listened to Des interviewing Castles who  used the common ploy of waffling on and on. He claimed the track would have been  "Fast" if it was not irrigated. Well,  the Hawkes Bay gets heavy dews at this time of year so moisture would be is kept in the soil. In the unlikely event that it was fast, well its way better than an abandoned meeting. 

The Hawkes Bay Racing Club should be taking a hard look at themselves for appointing this fool.

 

 

[gubellini 4,004]

Allan

Listened to Des interviewing Castles who  used the common ploy of waffling on and on. He claimed the track would have been  "Fast" if it was not irrigated. Well,  the Hawkes Bay gets heavy dews at this time of year so moisture would be is kept in the soil. In the unlikely event that it was fast, well its way better than an abandoned meeting. 

The Hawkes Bay Racing Club should be taking a hard look at themselves for appointing this fool.

 

 

Sharrock first guest on Des's show.Absolutely brilliant. His dream of a Triple Crown victory with Kawi has been ripped away by human error.I totally agree with him that N.Z. Racing is in a terrible state. 

Disclosure: I have spoken to Allan on a number of occasions at Karaka but have no association with his stable.

[justadreamer 0]

NZTR & the T A B are owned and controlled by the N Z Government. They tried to run a race meeting at a unsafe venue and it was abandoned.

Do you see this happen with Cricket, Rugby, (did happen with a Springbok tour way back) Tennis, Soccer, Golf,or any other sporting event that the general public can bet on. Perhaps they need to place more emphasis on checking the venues before they stage the event -(horse racing)

The other option for the Government to face the fact that they are unable to run horse racing in New Zealand and privatize the whole outfit.

I am sure it could not get worse 

[Guest 2Admin2]

Fast F1, impossible, not at the beginning of Spring, the evapotranspiration rate is not high enough, he must have been confused and thought they were talking about his pie eating ability

They were aiming for a D4 which would supposedly improve to a G3 on raceday.  Given the amount of water the put on the track there was no way they would have achieved what they were aiming to acheive.  I wonder if they maintain a evapotranspiration water budget?

Lastly I don't see anything that wrong with an F1 however agree that it would have been unlikely to have been achieved irrigation or no irrigation at this time of year in Hastings.

Why is there never a Plan B created BEFORE there is a problem?  We always end up with this consultation BS and logistic issues - why wasn't Sunday an option?  Mind you they did get two inches of rain yesterday (nothing on Saturday!).

I notice Trentham quickly got their hand in the candy jar - what are the odds they have an issue?  So much for the iconic value of the Thorndon Mile!!!!

 

Edited September 21, 2015 by 2Admin2

[Ohokaman 5,842]

Castles certainly not very happy with Mr Neal, claiming official procedures were not followed.

( track inspection by group, trainers etc consulted, options to remedy agreed/ carried out then another inspection )

Sounds like the Hog was an option with jockeys happy to ride if it had been used...both ignored apparently.

This NZTR requirement to produce a certain type of track needs reviewing, if not scrapping...

[gubellini 4,004]

Allan

They were aiming for a D4 which would supposedly improve to a G3 on raceday.  Given the amount of water the put on the track there was no way they would have achieved what they were aiming to acheive.  I wonder if they maintain a evapotranspiration water budget?

Lastly I don't see anything that wrong with an F1 however agree that it would have been unlikely to have been achieved irrigation or no irrigation at this time of year in Hastings.

Why is there never a Plan B created BEFORE there is a problem?  We always end up with this consultation BS and logistic issues - why wasn't Sunday an option?  Mind you they did get two inches of rain yesterday (nothing on Saturday!).

I notice Trentham quickly got their hand in the candy jar - what are the odds they have an issue?  So much for the iconic value of the Thorndon Mile!!!!

 

Sharrock first guest on Des's show.Absolutely brilliant. His dream of a Triple Crown victory with Kawi has been ripped away by human error.I totally agree with him that N.Z. Racing is in a terrible state. 

Disclosure: I have spoken to Allan on a number of occasions at Karaka but have no association with his stable.

[gubellini 4,004]

Yesterday Snow Temperton rang Des on Trackside Radio. Snow has been in racing for over 70 years as a jockey/trainer/ course manager at Tauranga. He stated that courses should NOT be irrigated at this time of year and that nitrogen should NOT be applied at this time of the year either.The expertise is out there to remedy our tracks but the wrong people are being consulted.

[Grant R 348]

It was great to listen to Alan Sharrock he made extremely pertinent comments the main one was and i quote "Avoidable human error" as he said its not the" Horses fault , Its not the trainers fault, Its not the owners fault " " Its not the jockeys fault". Alan explained if he didn't have 2 young children he would pack his stable and head to Austrailia and he had spoken to alot of trainers who were of the same opinion here's another comment " We are the laughing stock of racing" . I am waiting for answer a serious answer to why it happened and why the groundhog couldn't have been used as by all accounts the jockeys would have been quite happy to carry on if this machine had have been used . 

[Leggy 4,089]

Castles certainly not very happy with Mr Neal, claiming official procedures were not followed.

( track inspection by group, trainers etc consulted, options to remedy agreed/ carried out then another inspection )

Sounds like the Hog was an option with jockeys happy to ride if it had been used...both ignored apparently.

This NZTR requirement to produce a certain type of track needs reviewing, if not scrapping...

Don't agree. The policy to produce Good 3 is similar to Australia. Works OK there. Ineptitude in track preparation is no reason to change the policy so we have horses racing on concrete. From what I heard, jockeys may have said they would ride, but at least some said they would only be doing so cautiously, so I don't think the groundhog was really an option somehow. It's a preventative not a remedial tool. Can't think of an example where it has contributed to fixing a slippery track on the day.

[Ohokaman 5,842]

Was used at Ellerslie a few years ago as Castles reminded us. The meeting went ahead with no problems.

There is always moisture deep in the soil at this time of the year and the Track Manager showed that on TV with the soil sample he took while talking to Bevan Sweeney. Adding water to the fast growing grass close to raceday is a recipe for slipping as there is no time for it to be absorbed. Stuffing around with natural conditions is not working and not the answer.

Good to hear David Walsh say exactly that this morning.

[rdytdy 5,343]

 

 

The problem started by having a good 3 track on Tuesday morning. Why was this?

 

They have got things around the wrong way. In my opinion all the water should have gone on before the Tuesday, that way the water has had the chance to soak in and then let the track improve through to dead 4 race day.

 

Instead they start off with a good track and put water on it to bring it back to dead footing leaving the top shifty and a not surprising result. It is arse about face! I have stated this numerous times "there should be no irrigation of tracks after acceptance time unless there are exceptional circumstances."

 

As others we never used to have this problem years ago, it has eventuated through the use of man induced irrigation and the shifting of the running rails.

Just what has come out over the last forty eight hours highlights to me to what I posted on Saturday is pretty much on the mark. On Tuesday, according to Butch Castles when talking with Des Coppins this morning, was that the track was a Good 3 bordering on a Good 2.

There had been hardly any rain in the three weeks since the first day of the carnival and the ground must have been pretty good on the Saturday, Sunday, Monday prior to the meeting. He stated they didn't water because there was some rainfall forecast on the weekend prior however this rain didn't eventuate. If nothing had arrived by mid afternoon on the Saturday apply some irrigation, ditto Sunday and Monday. That would have ensured a least a dead track on the Tuesday morning with the water at least starting to penetrate deeper and on the Tuesday depending on the reading putting the last amount of water on prior to the Saturday race day. That way all the water is on, with plenty of time to penetrate and letting the track come back to a a Dead 4/Good 3 on race morning. His excuse for not doing the irrigation prior to the Tuesday is at odds for doing it on Thursday with rain in the forecast for Friday.    As I stated above in my opinion they have done things arse about face and I reiterate my opinion of no irrigation of tracks past acceptance time.

Correct me if I am wrong but Butch Castles seems to have opted out of admitting any error re the irrigation and rather pointed the finger at the meeting being abandoned. However that matter comes after the fact as that decision wouldn't have had to been made if there was no problem with the track surface in the first place.

Unfortunately all the damage has been done, everyone has suffered, owners, trainers, punters, the club and the industry as a whole, no one escapes from what eventuated on the day. Over recent years this is not an isolated case however, but  it has been given far greater significance due to the importance of the day, both on the day itself and programming of the horses affected going forward.   

There has to be a comprehensive review of what has occurred both with what happened leading up to the day and what occurred on the day and that review has to be transparent and made public. If this results in any changes made to procedures/actions this needs to be clearly conveyed to all stakeholders and with approval implemented as quickly as possible. Clearly the staus quo is not working and as the saying goes "if you keep doing the same thing you are going to end up with the same results."  

I am clearly no expert on track preparation, but I try to take a commonsense approach combined with my observations over the years to formulate my opinions, but those that are qualified and charged with getting it right need to do so. However, they should realise that everything can't be learnt from the text books, they can learn plenty from experienced farmers and from older former (Retired) people who used to do tracks a few years ago when we didn't experience such problems. One should remember race tracks are for 500-600k animals hitting the ground with some force, the grass roots need going deep into the ground unlike a manicured grass stadium surface for humans running about on it. 

As stated, the damaged has been done, let's hope any remedies going forward can be identified and implemented. If not, as an industry, we are doomed. 

      

       

[Leggy 4,089]

Was used at Ellerslie a few years ago as Castles reminded us. The meeting went ahead with no problems.

I don't remember that. When was it? As I recall, there was a meeting at Ellerslie where they used the groundhog to remediate a similar problem but I'm pretty sure that maybe one more race was held and then the meeting was abandoned.

I agree that irrigation may not have been required for this meeting in order to produce a Good 3 track at this time of year.

[Kevan15 19]

Has there been any talk of the owners who took their horses to the meeting being compensated for the costs involved in getting their horses their?  The club should pay all costs involved, it’s always the owners that end up paying when there are stuff ups like this, the whole thing is a joke, why would you bother racing a horse in NZ?  Trial here and go to Oz and leave this muppet show behind.

[cantab matt 134]

Butch seemed like he was just waiting for Des to mention the RIU. As soon as Des did Butch jumped in.... looking to assign blame to anyone else perhaps??

Sorry Butch Issue wasn't what happened on the day, it was the day's leading up to raceday which are under YOUR control. If the groundhog was the solution why didn't Butch get out there before the first race!

Given all the pressure the RIU are under over tracks and jockey safety I think Ross Neal did the right thing by holding firm and calling of the meeting. Imagine the outcry if the groundhog was used and then a jockey and/or horse got injured or killed- the industry would want to lynch him.

The decision to race or not cannot always be made my jockeys- if this was an industry day then I bet none of them would have wanted to ride after the groundhog was used- ie money influences their appetite of risk. Sorry but the track is either safe or its not. G1 day or industry day isn't a determining factor.

[bloke 1,232]

I agree Matt it was like Castles had requested that question from Des  pre interview and once asked The Pie  Meister was right in there shifting the blame having previously accepted that he was accountable. Just another case of lack of integrity from him.

[rdytdy 5,343]

Correct Matt.

NZTR are about to hold Health & Safety Workshops through the country starting later this month and going through in October for Race Clubs, Trainers, Jockeys and Breeders. Club Presidents/committee members, Club Managers and Race Course managers (curators) are pretty much required to attend. This is partly due to the changes  in Health & safety Liability. Refer the attached:

Health & Safety lesson from the Australian courts
The first legal charge against a manager as an “Officer of a PCBU”, over the death of a worker under new occupational health and safety (OH&S) legislation in Australia has significant implications for New Zealand, says Frank Taylor GM for Securo.
New Zealand's proposed Health and Safety at Work Act is closely modelled on Australia's legislation and is intended to come into force in New Zealand in 2015.
One of the questions about this new legislation is; to what management level within a PCBU, can the term Officer be applied? The outcome of this case could assist us to answer this.
The Australian Capital Territory (ACT) recently became the first jurisdiction, to charge an ‘officer' under newly harmonised workplace health and safety legislation. A senior manager faces two charges for allegedly failing to exercise due diligence to ensure that the company (PCBU) complied with its workplace health and safety duties. The charges follow a workplace incident that resulted in the death of a 48 year old truck driver, Michael Booth. Mr Booth died from electric shock injuries sustained while he was operating a tip truck when the trailer made contact with a power line while off-loading gravel at a dumping station.

The senior manager has pleaded “not guilty” to the charges, and the preliminary question to be determined at a hearing this December, is whether the senior manager is indeed an ‘officer'. It appears that the senior manager was not a director of the PCBU but is a director of a related entity.
Under New Zealand’s proposed Health and Safety at Work Act, there is a similar personal due diligence duty on officers, to actively manage workplace health and safety and ensure that the ‘person conducting a business or undertaking' (a PCBU) complies with its health and safety obligations.
The concept of ‘officer' includes individuals with governance roles in an organisation (eg, directors or partners) and further extends to those who make decisions that affect the whole or substantial part of the business of the PCBU.
Due diligence duties under the proposed Health and Safety at Work Act will require an officer to be proactive in managing health and safety in their workplace, including taking reasonable steps to:

to: Acquire and keep up to date with knowledge of health and safety matters relating to the business and its activities; Understand how the business operates and the hazards and risks associated with those operations; Ensure resources and processes are implemented to eliminate or minimise risks and hazards; Ensure appropriate processes are in place for receiving and considering information about health and safety matters and responding in a timely way; Ensure that there are processes in place for complying with the PCBUs health and safety duties; and Ensure that the above processes are verified, monitored and reviewed.
Putting it another way, the due diligence obligation means that officers will need to be proactive in managing health and safety and not just reactive - as has commonly been the practice in New Zealand.
This prosecution sends three very strong messages:

Workplace health and safety regulators are prepared to prosecute individuals if they fail to meet their “officer” obligations. We can expect a similar approach from the New Zealand regulator, WorkSafe NZ. Liability for health and safety may not rest solely with directors but also with their senior managers. 

Health and safety duties can and do overlap -in the Australian case, the PCBU has also been separately charged.

  

[hedley 1,900]

what does a P.C.B.U. stand for?

[Leggy 4,089]

 

 

I have watched the replay of race 3 and I saw 2 horses slip not just riddell so pinpointing him seems unfair. Can someone explain to me how the groundhog machine works ? As jockeys wanted it used but stipes didn't

Now I've looked at it, seems like Kelly Myers' horse slipped too

[Leggy 4,089]

what does a P.C.B.U. stand for?

person conducting a business or undertaking

[puha 2,177]

With these new work safe regulations in my line do work I have to look over the worksite and list all potential hazards and take all reasonable steps to provide a safe word environment. Ironically by watering the track they supplied an unsafe work environment .  Racing  is dangerous enough without having a slippery surface so can understand the meeting being called off. . But that doesn't excuse the surface that was presented on the day. I worked within 5 kms of the track all week and the thur and fri where in the 20 to 22 c range with no rain for approx two weeks apart from some decent frosts.  I can't recall their being problems with a similar issue at Hastings before and I'm sure most participants  look forward racing on the track so why have we had this major balls up? Human error who's the track managers.?  Maybe higher up the food chain those that ask for a dead 4 surface race morning so the track has to be manipulated ? What won't change is the ones that pay and supply the horses, the ones that ride them and those that punt on them are the real losers while all those that make the rules and demands and are stuffing this industry will still  comfortable in the knowledge their wages will still be in the bank come Thursday morning while the rest have another lost opportunity  to earn some much needed money.