Midget

Lance O'Sullivan

369 posts in this topic

12 Premiership titles to go along with many records broken in his career.

ONZM awarded in 2003 and in NZ Racing Hall Of Fame.

Congratulations Lance on being inducted into the NZ Sporting Hall Of Fame also last night. A wonderful achievement.

Great to see racing getting some exposure in our sporting awards. It should have happened a lot more than it has.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A well deserved award but the timing is wrong. The cobalt situation should have been dealt with first. If in a worst case situation Lance is heavily penailised, then the press as they always do will hone in on it and then we will have headlines about the hall of shame.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bloke said:

A well deserved award but the timing is wrong. The cobalt situation should have been dealt with first. If in a worst case situation Lance is heavily penailised, then the press as they always do will hone in on it and then we will have headlines about the hall of shame.

 

its  all up to the press  if we  had media with lil  bit   of  brains,  they will look at  the  great stuff  hes achieved, 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gonsta I am a bit cynical about charges being laid TODAY. One week short of Sound Proposition running third in the Derby and returning a positive to Cobalt. No doubt the RIU will be patting themselves on the back for bringing the charges within one year!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FFS! Are you serious with those readings?

My article comprehension may be very poor , but what was the outcome of these trials?

 

An explanation provided by Wexford Stables was that their horses had been exposed to heavily cobalt dosed water troughs the horses shared with dairy cattle. As part of our investigation the RIU undertook a series of trials that proved that cobalt levels above 200ug/L can come about by the oral feeding of cobalt in high concentrations. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest 2Admin2

New Zealand Sports Hall of Famer and racing great Lance O'Sullivan has been charged with racing three horses with high levels of cobalt in their system.

O'Sullivan and co-trainer Andrew Scott have been charged by the Racing Integrity Unit on Friday. Lance O'Sullivan

The pair are the first New Zealand trainers to be charged with a cobalt offence.

Andrew Scott
Bruce Mercer

Andrew Scott

 

The Matamata trainers have three horses under investigation - Sound Proposition, Quintastics and Suffire. 

The cobalt threshold in racing is 200 micrograms per litre of urine.

READ MORE: Sports Hall of Fame special for Lance O'Sullivan

Sound Proposition was swabbed after he ran third in the New Zealand Derby at Ellerslie in February last year. The Racing Integrity said he returned 541. It also said Quintastics had a reading of 640 when tested after winning at Matamata in March last year and Suffire's swab following her win at Tauranga in February last year was 309.

The Integreity Unit's press release on Friday stated its investigation showed the circumstances surrounding the cobalt positives were "significantly" different to the recent Australian cases, where trainers were charged with the administratior of a prohibited substance. 

O'Sullivan and Scott told the Integrity Unit that their investigation into the swabs revealed the three horses "had been exposed to heavily cobalt dosed water troughs the horses shared with dairy cattle."

A former champion jockey, O'Sullivan had little to say on the charges when contacted on Friday.

"The [Integrity Unit's] press release says it all . . . there was no intent," O'Sullivan said.

Several attempts to contact Scott failed. His phone cut off before a message could be left.

 

 - Stuff

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Midget said:

It's new science, unchartered waters if you like, and justice has to be done, and to be seen to be done.

This looks like a minimum penalty situation based on the evidence in that article, and so it should be.

Are you on your "defend a pal  high horse" or do you truly believe what your saying?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Midget said:

It's new science, unchartered waters if you like, and justice has to be done, and to be seen to be done.

This looks like a minimum penalty situation based on the evidence in that article, and so it should be.

 well said

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ohokaman said:

Finally been charged by RIU today....administering to three horses.

The charge is not..."administering to three horses"....as I read it..

"The charges relate to presenting three horses to race with a prohibited substance, namely, Cobalt at a level above the threshold of 200ug/L. 
 
The investigation showed that the circumstances surrounding the cobalt positives in New Zealand were significantly different to the recent Australian cases, where trainers were charged with the administration of a prohibited substance. 
 
6. What is the difference in being charged with administration of a prohibited substance and charged with presenting a horse to race with a prohibited substance? 
The charge of administration is made where there is evidence that there was deliberate administration of the prohibited substance. The charge of presenting is where there is no evidence of deliberate administration or where the prohibited substance entered the animals system through negligence, contamination or some other means."
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Abide said:

The charge is not..."administering to three horses"....as I read it..

"The charges relate to presenting three horses to race with a prohibited substance, namely, Cobalt at a level above the threshold of 200ug/L. 
 
The investigation showed that the circumstances surrounding the cobalt positives in New Zealand were significantly different to the recent Australian cases, where trainers were charged with the administration of a prohibited substance. 
 
6. What is the difference in being charged with administration of a prohibited substance and charged with presenting a horse to race with a prohibited substance? 
The charge of administration is made where there is evidence that there was deliberate administration of the prohibited substance. The charge of presenting is where there is no evidence of deliberate administration or where the prohibited substance entered the animals system through negligence, contamination or some other means."
 

No evidence as administration , where does it say they looked for evidence of administration? 

Reads like a cop out for mine, which isn't a shock pretty much what most people were expecting.

Hopefully there is more to come from the RIU?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well well well [to coin a phrase] and pardon the pun.......well indeed, a dark and murky well, full of cobalt eh? then will the farmer be charged with cruelty by the RSPCA? for knowingly feeding such a toxic substance? were these cattle for human consumption, milk maybe? what a load of bollocks, small town NZ eh? we may as well be living in a Louisiana backwater where rednecks rule......any respect, gone now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/18/2016 at 10:15 AM, bloke said:

A well deserved award but the timing is wrong. The cobalt situation should have been dealt with first. If in a worst case situation Lance is heavily penailised, then the press as they always do will hone in on it and then we will have headlines about the hall of shame.

 

Well said, he has been an amazing jockey, what a shame he has blotted his copybook bigtime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well then........ now we are led to believe that this has been a rather unfortunate case of "accidental " administration can we have the details of the scientific analysis that is clearly warranted prior to a ruling on the fine and disqualification/suspension..

How much compound was routinely added to the troughs ?

What size and how much water and therefore the concentration within the water.

How much of this water needs to be ingested to give a reading beyond 200 and up to the levels present in these horses. and so on....

Only then can a just decision be made.

I note that cobalt occurs in high concentrations in meteorites and I suspect this is a more plausible explanation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Without knowing anything about Wexford Stables(never been there nor even to Matamata) and also having the highest respect for Lance(who they tell me is a great bloke) there is a question or two .....

Why were there dairy cows at Wexford stables(I know he is a farmer but presumably not right next door) and if there is a legitimate reason why they were there why would you introduce high doses of a prohibited substance to their water when you know that your racehorse(s), in one case primed for the richest race(bar one) in the land, have access to that water?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.