Yankiwi

GRNZ Board Member To Face Charges

148 posts in this topic

Well this should be the beginning of putting an end to recent rumours.

 

9th March 2016


Media Statement on judicial proceedings against Greyhound Racing Board Member


Greyhound Racing Board chair Craig Rendle said in a written statement today:


“The Board of New Zealand Greyhound Racing has been made aware of an allegation of misconduct against a Board member.


“The Board takes all allegations of misconduct extremely seriously and is unequivocal about upholding the integrity of our industry at all levels. However, it would be wrong to comment on the particulars of any case before all the judicial processes are complete.


“The affected member has stood down from the Board in the interim pending the outcome of the proceedings.


“In the meantime, the Greyhound Racing Board will continue to make sure all industry participants – including owners, trainers, promoters, supporters and spectators – have the utmost confidence in the way we operate and continue to benefit from it as a sport.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, we have two names (Gonasyn & Fertagyl) of permanently banned drugs, the question has to be asked, how many "B" samples are still kicking around from the last year or so's big races? Maybe it's time to have another look at those samples.

It's also well documented that Nathan wasn't the only trainer of dogs, during the same time period, owned either completely or partially David Scott. Those would be the "B" sample I'd be looking at first if I were calling the shots at the RIU lab.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No winners here but Davetboys lawyer needs a good kick in the goolies. What sort of a defence against a guilty charge is it to try and besmirch the name of the innocent messenger. I am surprised whoever was chairing the meeting allowed it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Furthermore....hey Davey if you were actually "trying to help out a battling trainer" why didnt you perhaps suggest to him that he could keep the stakes money for a month or so and not pay you out your half? Oh yea I know why cause you were not trying to help a battling trainer at all, you were trying to line your own pocket, your also a farken liar as well as a cheat. Im totally agrieved as to why the "plastic police" (RIU) didnt hand this charge over to the NZ Police to investigate and charge accordingly, this is a classic case of fraud and corruption which is known as white collar crime of which most crooks would do this guys industry ban in jailtime.....know ya limits RIU and step aside when your out of your depth in future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, maybe the Association could ring the main media outlets tomorrow and suggest another contacts details for comment on these matters.....asking aaron cross to comment is absolutely no different to them doing a story on anti whaling then crossing over to the Japanese government for their opinion!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's nothing stopping a criminal charge from being filed in the crowns justice system for the charge the RIU decided to drop.

It'd only take a phone call from Nathan to the police.

To me that's the most serious breach of any rule/law unveiled in the investigation.

If a settlement was offered in lieu of a criminal court trial proceeding, it surely would help out a battling trainer much more than a drug assisted win on any track.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So a greyhound board member suggests they use a substance that hes aware is not being tested for by the riu.       Call me cynical, but come on,this is what vets do every day.                                          The riu make a big deal of how closely they work with the veterinary association. In other words, keep them informed when testing for the latest performance enhancer will start,thus avoiding unwantedpublicity, such as in this case.  That's the real world.           Only when the RIU introduce retrospective testing on "every" sample held in storage for any trainer found with a positive,will this change.  And we all know that's the last thing the RIU would want to do.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now