Midget

Lance O'Sullivan

369 posts in this topic

2 hours ago, gubellini said:
2 hours ago, Canelo said:
2 hours ago, Canelo said:

"That's a fail sir"

"But officer you see I never drank at the party, the alcohol must have been in the pudding" 

"Oh! I'm so sorry sir, off you go, enjoy the rest of your evening"

"That's a fail sir"

"But officer you see I never drank at the party, the alcohol must have been in the pudding" 

"Oh! I'm so sorry sir, off you go, enjoy the rest of your evening"

If this is the best defence that Wexfords high powered legal team can come up with I suggest the legal system in N.Z. is in a parlous state.

Indeed.  Put in legal terms - are we dealing with a strict liability offence in this case?  ie. does the prosecution need to establish intent? (or is presenting the horses with the elevated levels enough to make out the case - and any matters of troughs & dairy farms mitigation at best (in the event the judicial body believed it, that is)?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the horses sake, I believe cobalt or any other performance enhancing drug is akin to us shopping on LSD...Spaced out (un-natural) but fast.

I don,t know how widespread the practice is,in combination with feed regimes,paddock times,training times / administration time of drug etc.

I just reckon to stamp out its use,standard bans,fines and other penalties (strip name honers / knighthoods etc) would deter its use and put everyone 

back on an even playing field.(getting stuck 3 back on the fence,too far back, missing the jump,scouting wide on the turn) will determine the outcome of a race

without Drugs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh stop it you raving nutters and clowns.

Cobalt is an essential element for bodily function and NZ is notoriously deficient in it.

If you didn't supplement it as required you'd be guilty of animal abuse, causing suffering, and the health of the animals would be severely jeopardised.

It's also a critical part of the water soluble VB12, and you can't live without vitamins and minerals.

I sort of understand why you're consumed by jealousy and a rabid desire to see these two hung drawn and quartered but I don't understand how you can turn your back on irrefutable scientific facts to substantiate your septic agenda.

Science will determine the outcome of this issue, irrefutable peer reviewed science, and that's what should fashion your response and interpretation of the events.

JMO of course, and I accept that I'm different, because I'm driven by science and facts, unlike most others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From an article in the NZ Herald:

That is a lesser charge than Victorian trainers Danny O'Brien, Mark Kavangh and Peter Moody, who faced charges of administering cobalt in Australia. Kavanagh, a Melbourne-Cup winning trainer, was disqualified for four years and O'Brien for three years. Moody's case has not been heard.

O'Sullivan called the announcement of the charges a "huge relief" to himself and Scott.
"If I was done for administering then that is a serious charge, but this is not administering... we've been charged for presenting ... the horses went to the races with something in them that we were not aware of."

You could be excused for taking from this that Mr O'Sullivan is rather chuffed with the outcome to date (in so far as the charges laid) and in taking the "see no evil" approach, considers his integrity intact.

What about the RIU?  The middle ground for them I guess - a less serious charge, much easier to prove and  more palatable to the accused person/s.  Sort of the "route of least resistance" in a way. 

What's the name of that old Hot Chocolate song? - oh yeah - I remember -  "Everyone's a Winner" ..........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Trump said:

Two questions. (1) Who owns the cows ?  (2) Has Andrew Scott been disqualified in the past for any similar offences?

Don't know who owns the cows,troughs or the cobalt.

But re your second query - I rather suspect you know a little of the answer but here's some info from an old (2010) Stuff website article:

A racehorse part-owned by Chief Justice Sian Elias has returned a positive swab to a banned substance following a race win at Matamata on October 29.

Matamata trainer Andrew Scott has been charged with failing to present his galloper Fireside at the Matamata races free of a prohibited substance, namely ketoprofen, following its win in a $5000 event last month.

Ketoprofen is a form of analgesic commonly used in animals for musculoskeletal pain, joint problems and soft tissue injury, as well as laminitis.

If found guilty of the charge, Scott faces a range of penalties under the rules of racing including possible fines, suspensions or disqualification.

New Zealand Thoroughbred Racing (NZTR) chief stipendiary steward Cameron George confirmed that a charge had been laid against Scott, with the hearing set down for Te Rapa Racecourse on Monday.

Scott declined to comment about the charge when contacted by Waikato Times today and Dame Sian did not respond to requests for comment.

Fireside's ownership also includes Dame Sian's husband, businessman Hugh Fletcher, racing notables Bridgette O'Sullivan, the O'Sullivan Family Trust and Ian and Liz Montgomerie of Auckland.

Scott is no stranger to the judicial process. In 2003 he was fined $5000, and ordered to pay costs of $1600, for bringing the image of racing into disrepute and for a dishonest act in lying about why he wanted to use the swab box ahead of the running of the 2003 $750,000 Kelt Capital Stakes at Hastings.

In 2005 he was disqualified for six months for creating a false document and supplying false information about his horse Realign's eligibility to race in blinkers.

- Waikato Times

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Midget is correct. Leave the personalities out and look at the science. The limit of cobalt in the horses is set at 200 ok? It doesn't matter how it got there, if it's over, then it should be disqualified if it placed. That takes care of the owners who would know nothing about drugs or chemical etc in horses. Then there's the penalty for the Trainer - whatever that may be. All done. If a horse is over a prescribed limit then it's over - period. What I cannot understand is why the Derby placed horse in question has not been disqualified. If it was over the permitted 200 level in a post race swab (which it was)  then it should be disqualified. The powers that be have done racing no service IMO. If they had acted promptly and disq the horse then you would not have all this carrying about "favouritism" and protected species. The RIU or whoever is responsible has not done O'Sullivan and Scott any favours here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think everyone agrees much more information needed here. Some on here wanted the masses (in often unpleasant ways) to wait  for proof before condemning.   Even  they can't help but be amazed that the excuse has been made and accepted. What started out with many people defending the "Great Family" has resulted in them becoming very quiet once they were asked to believe this poor excuse. It  makes those defending them look like they were fooled too. I would have been happy to accept their defence had it been believable but is there anyone now willing to say "Oh yes thats how it happened poor things" I doubt it. Be interesting to see how this affects the stables. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From Stuff yesterday  
 

Questions and answers relating to cobalt and the charges 
 

What is cobalt? 
An essential trace element that occurs naturally in horses, dogs and other mammals.


Why is it a prohibited substance in racing? 
Cobalt administered in amounts much greater than required for normal living affects the blood system by stimulating the production of red blood cells (erythropoiesis), similar to the way EPO does.

 
Why is there a threshold for cobalt? 
Because it is naturally occurring in horses, so a level has been set above what could be considered to be a range for a normal population. The threshold of 200 micrograms per litre of urine has been set for horse racing in Australasia. This was based on a study of 2000 samples carried out by the Chemistry Centre, an internationally accredited racing laboratory in Perth, Western Australia.

How much drug testing is carried out in NZ racing? 
Each racing season more12,000 drug tests are carried out.

 
Why has the O'Sullivan/Scott investigation taken eight months? 
Cobalt is a newly identified performance-enhancing drug and studies on how it can be applied to breach the threshold have been limited. Significant time has been spent investigating this area and carrying out trials. Trials have to be ethically approved, and the results analysed and peer reviewed. 
 
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 of 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 animal's system through negligence, contamination or some other means.

 
What are the potential penalties?
Up to five year's suspension or disqualification and up to $25,000 fine.
 

 - Stuff

 

Hope everyone is treated the same and the testing system foolproof nationwide and totally transparent.

Can understand the stress involved being charged ,and if innocent , That is proven to be the case, in all defences.

31 minutes ago, Trump said:

Midget is correct. Leave the personalities out and look at the science. The limit of cobalt in the horses is set at 200 ok? It doesn't matter how it got there, if it's over, then it should be disqualified if it placed. That takes care of the owners who would know nothing about drugs or chemical etc in horses. Then there's the penalty for the Trainer - whatever that may be. All done. If a horse is over a prescribed limit then it's over - period. What I cannot understand is why the Derby placed horse in question has not been disqualified. If it was over the permitted 200 level in a post race swab (which it was)  then it should be disqualified. The powers that be have done racing no service IMO. If they had acted promptly and disq the horse then you would not have all this carrying about "favouritism" and protected species. The RIU or whoever is responsible has not done O'Sullivan and Scott any favours here. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, gubellini said:

Interesting to hear Andrew Scott on Trackside Radio this morning touting yearlings for syndication. It is patently obvious that at the conclusion of this sorry saga it will be business as usual at Wexford.

its  there lively  hoods  ,  why wouldn't it be  business  as   usual  all his  clients  lve  both  him  and  scotty ,   and will continue  too  it  be a  relief  that its all out on the open how   its  come about  obviously by   a mistake  either by  a  employee or them 

 

it  wouldn't been   easy  times  for  both trainers  family's and there staff,   with all the questions   and   the idiots wanting   blood,   some  you really need   to  take  a  hard look at  yourself, 

and   can  you,  tell your  trainers if you have horses in work  who you are,    so they can tell , what they think you , 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, mr_gee said:

its  there lively  hoods  ,  why wouldn't it be  business  as   usual  all his  clients  lve  both  him  and  scotty ,   and will continue  too  it  be a  relief  that its all out on the open how   its  come about  obviously by   a mistake  either by  a  employee or them 

 

it  wouldn't been   easy  times  for  both trainers  family's and there staff,   with all the questions   and   the idiots wanting   blood,   some  you really need   to  take  a  hard look at  yourself, 

and   can  you,  tell your  trainers if you have horses in work  who you are,    so they can tell , what they think you , 

i aggree  with midget    few  you are  frigging  nuts 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to the science, which as yet is MIA. Midget, are normal Cobalt supplementation levels for cattle higher than for horses?

You have said here yourself that oral administration, even on race day is unlikely to exceed the threshold let alone 3x the threshold and we know that urine levels peak and drop quickly however administered. The story seems incredible to me. Hopefully, once the charges have been heard, the RIU will release the full detail of Grierson's study which made the water trough explanation plausible to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, mr_gee said:

its  there lively  hoods  ,  why wouldn't it be  business  as   usual  all his  clients  lve  both  him  and  scotty ,   and will continue  too  it  be a  relief  that its all out on the open how   its  come about  obviously by   a mistake  either by  a  employee or them 

 

 

It's also the livelihood of those that are competing against them, what about the connections of the beaten horses and rhe livelihoods of those impacted by this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Trump said:

Two questions. (1) Who owns the cows ?  (2) Has Andrew Scott been disqualified in the past for any similar offences?

I reiterate this is a learning curve for us all Leggy.

Prior to this my understanding was that oral administration or ingestion could not exceed the threshold, however, as I've stated, the gypsy from Southland proved, under veterinary supervision, that feeding an additive containing excess cobalt could, and did on consecutive days, provide blood cobalt levels well in excess of the 200 level.

No one is disputing the gypsies science or testing protocols.

You now must assume the accepted science was incorrect and it follows that if a feed additive could cause exceed the threshold then a water additive could too.

Note Leggy, this has been peer reviewed by the scientist considered to be the expert in the field, and you can bet your last dollar that Wexford will call that exact same scientist as an expert witness and he'll dismantle the prosecutions case.

The RIU have done the right thing here, they've tested the respondent's explanation thoroughly, and laid charges accordingly, and they'll get a result because they've followed best practice principles.

Had they rushed into it ( as the screaming masses have demanded ) and laid the "administering" charge the Wexford twins would be likely to have engaged the same expert witnesses and walked Scott free ( pun intended ).

Leggy the story might be incredible, but it's also plausible if you extend the gypsy argument.

Sometimes life throws up incredible but plausible scenarios, for example consider this headline, Elton John and his husband had a baby boy, incredible, hell yeah, impossible, well yes if you're thinking of conventional techniques, plausible, in retrospect yes it is because it happened.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mr-gee thanks for your comments. I have been racing horses for over 40 years. Back in the 80's I got sick of taking horses to the races and having to compete against horses so full of anabolic steroids that they had muscles on their eyebrows. Now it is Cobalt. All I want is the five horses I have shares in to be able to Race on an even playing field. Is that too much to ask for?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Huey said:

Don't agree , they have had nearly a years worth of favours.

 

1 minute ago, Huey said:

It's also the livelihood of those that are competing against them, what about the connections of the beaten horses and rhe livelihoods of those impacted by this?

Huey i agree with you if they are guilty...BUT if they were genuinely ignorant of cobalt levels ...I,ll cut them slack ...obviously don,t know Scott

personally but his CV don,t read well.

RIU should up their game...maybe a shot of Cobalt may speed up the process.

 

Why has the O'Sullivan/Scott investigation taken eight months? 
Cobalt is a newly identified performance-enhancing drug and studies on how it can be applied to breach the threshold have been limited. Significant time has been spent investigating this area and carrying out trials. Trials have to be ethically approved, and the results analysed and peer reviewed. 
 
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 of 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 animal's system through negligence, contamination or some other means.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah midgie, the convulsion of science could be used to confuse the matter, but Cobalt is not new and this leave it to the experts is just more flotsam.

I know the racing community is rather small and no one likes to cause a fuss, but drugs and enhancements are used way too much and all most punters want is a level playing field.

I like Lance and have found him to be a straight up guy, but this tosh is just unacceptable in the real world and they and others should stand up and be counted. Far to often its who you know and not what, in this business and no wonder most of the public avoids anything to do with the game. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, gubellini said:
29 minutes ago, gubellini said:

mr-gee thanks for your comments. I have been racing horses for over 40 years. Back in the 80's I got sick of taking horses to the races and having to compete against horses so full of anabolic steroids that they had muscles on their eyebrows. Now it is Cobalt. All I want is the five horses I have shares in to be able to Race on an even playing field. Is that too much to ask for?!

mr-gee thanks for your comments. I have been racing horses for over 40 years. Back in the 80's I got sick of taking horses to the races and having to compete against horses so full of anabolic steroids that they had muscles on their eyebrows. Now it is Cobalt. All I want is the five horses I have shares in to be able to Race on an even playing field. Is that too much to ask for?!

 

27 minutes ago, gubellini said:

mr-gee thanks for your comments. I have been racing horses for over 40 years. Back in the 80's I got sick of taking horses to the races and having to compete against horses so full of anabolic steroids that they had muscles on their eyebrows. Now it is Cobalt. All I want is the five horses I have shares in to be able to Race on an even playing field. Is that too much to ask for?!

so   your  horses all drug free?   i doubt  very much

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You talk rubbish Yorkie.

Cobalt has been used safely for years as a foam stabilizer in beer, and it's only dangerous in excess.

It is toxic as a heavy metal salt, but harmless as a water soluble vitamin.

As a sporting PED it surfaced about five years ago but has long since been usurped by Xenon, in fact the only reason it's even surfaced again is because it's popular, and that's because it's cheap.

Horses have been having it injected ( VB12 as a multi vitamin injection ) regularly for as long as I've been in the game, forty plus years, but no one ever tested for it because no one knew how it worked, or that it even worked, until the Eastern Europeans started using it at the Winter Olympics.

It DOES NOT work like EPO, it actually stabilizes a peptide known as HIF that acts on the kidneys in a sequence that eventually produces EPO as a byproduct.

It's an essential trace element, and vitamin, just as Selenium and Vit E is.

Get your head sorted out and take the time to study the science, just as the experts have done, because it's frustrating having to read the absolute rubbish that's being written here, and on the other site, when it's based on disinformation, stupidity, jealousy, and/or ignorance.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mr-gee I think you are being a bit cynical.One of the horses I have a share in won at Matamata a fortnight ago. I don't know whether it was swabbed or not. If it did and returns a positive I will make a donation to the charity of your choice. My trainer is Graham Richardson. What is your connection to Wexford Stables?

Share this post


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