Kavanagh & O'Brien cleared of cobalt charges

[CT"s 310]

17 minutes ago, Leggy said:

Even if it is a "fact" that he was told that (and I suspect it is hearsay, not fact), it is wrong. There are no known performance enhancing levels of cobalt in horses.

The science of performance ehancing substances is an evolving one for both equine and human. Just ask Lance Armstrong or Maria Sharapova.

In my opinion if I pay a trainer to train my horse and the horse is detected to have illegal levels of cobalt in it's system, then this is the responsibility of the trainer. I don't pay a vet to train my horse. I pay a trainer who organises a vet and is responsible for every aspect associated with getting the horse onto the racetrack or am I missing something here?

Short stuff (a qualified vet who could directly be affected by this ruling in future) and his clueless lap dog Newmarket beg to differ but only when it suits their particular cause. 

They are clearly in the minority though and rightly so. 

[slam dunk 1,317]

36 minutes ago, Leggy said:

That comment is even dumber than some of your others on this thread.

That the horses were administered cobalt salts is not in question. Brennan has already gone down for that.

Of the 3 alternate charges laid against the trainers, two, AR178 and AR175(h)(ii), require a tested sample to have a prohibited substance present. It is not a technicality if the samples were not tested by accredited labs and there is consequently no admissible evidence of the positive. As someone pointed out on the other channel, that's like holding a murder trial where there is no evidence that anyone is dead.

The third alternative charge, AR175(h)(i), is administration, and the evidence is clear that the trainers had no knowledge that the horses were administered cobalt salts.

You make out you have read the decision. I suggest you try again from the start.

Before making assumptions Leggy bear in mind I did quite a bit of practical study into vitamins as far back as 1966 then mid seventies when I was an owner trainer.

Back then there was a lot of hush hush rumours and conflicting information floating around. So I know a lot more than I'willing to say here. OK I'm not a vet and back then cobalt in B12 I don't think was well understood. Certainly it wasn't an issue. To fix poor blood readings I don't remember B12 being prescribed rather B1 or a complex.  One thing I do remember is the dramatic improvement if form. I'll say this. If you look at results at various carnivals where there is a quick back and a major turnaround in form I'm 95% certain vitamin injections have had something to do with it. 

There is no point arguing over AR178 or whatever. The simple fact is its 100% accepted cobalt was administered. People can make their own conclusions who knew what, who forgot and who didn't want to know.

 

[CT"s 310]

7 minutes ago, 2Admin2 said:

Why would you fly to Nanjing twice in one day?

So is Brennan a victim or a whore?

I'm currently in transit. Travelling from Southeast (around 35 degrees) to Northwest (around -5 degrees).

Brennan is a patsy, the Lee Harvey Oswald. 

I'm positive he didn't expect to end up where he has but I'm sure Cav and O'Brien will tred very carefully moving forward as the patsy if pushed further might divulge a whole lot more than these shysters will be wanting. 

[Midget 4,489]

I thought you'd want to know this Tommo.

[CT"s 310]

28 minutes ago, Midget said:

There's no point in engaging with you Tommo, you have a closed mind on the matter and your lack of understanding is such that it'd be futile trying to re-educate you.

If you really want to develop a reasonable understanding why don't you read the 4,783 previous posts on the subject then maybe we can have an intelligent conversation.....hold on.....intelligent ?

I'll make it simple for you short stuff. You should be able to handle multi choice. 

Who is ultimately responsible for what and when a horse is injected with?

a ) The trainer........ or

b ) The vet

[Midget 4,489]

23 minutes ago, CT said:

I'll make it simple for you short stuff. You should be able to handle multi choice. 

Who is ultimately responsible for what and when a horse is injected with?

a ) The trainer........ or

b ) The vet

The vet, he is the professional, he knows the withholding times, he understands compounding, he knows clearance rates and half lives, he's highly educated, he has to know, that's why you pay him so much.

What's your point anyway ?

Who's responsible when you go to the doctor and he writes a scrip ? You or the doctor ?

[gary1 361]

15 minutes ago, Midget said:

The vet, he is the professional, he knows the withholding times, he understands compounding, he knows clearance rates and half lives, he's highly educated, he has to know, that's why you pay him so much.

What's your point anyway ?

Who's responsible when you go to the doctor and he writes a scrip ? You or the doctor ?

i don,t disagree with you midge  but if the vet says the withholding period is 72 hours but by some misfortune he quoted the wrong period and it was actually 86 hours  does the trainer actually get off Scott free  because the horse still loses the race and lets say its a group race worth 300000 plus the owners would be livid and in cts case if the horse was a $ 1.60 you would possibly have to have over 500000 large ones to win that no ryhme no reason

[Fartoomuch 1,376]

22 minutes ago, Midget said:

The vet, he is the professional, he knows the withholding times, he understands compounding, he knows clearance rates and half lives, he's highly educated, he has to know, that's why you pay him so much.

What's your point anyway ?

Who's responsible when you go to the doctor and he writes a scrip ? You or the doctor ?

Why do you and others bother engaging with this fuck wit and his close relative SD. The charges were laid, due process carried out and the outcome of the case was they were not guilty of the charges laid by Bailey et al.

I am of the view that both have a case for some serious coin here. In all probability it will be a confidential settlement as is usually the case when one party has been flogged.

[Midget 4,489]

Agree, I often say I won't bother again but then the secret teacher in me says "maybe you should just try to help them understand ", but it's to no avail, you're correct, they're just fuckwits living in a delusional world, feeding off each other's stupidity, and I should ignore them, I'll try to not respond to the fuckwits, but I probably won't be able to resist..

[Leggy 4,074]

1 hour ago, slam dunk said:

Before making assumptions Leggy bear in mind I did quite a bit of practical study into vitamins as far back as 1966 then mid seventies when I was an owner trainer.

Back then there was a lot of hush hush rumours and conflicting information floating around. So I know a lot more than I'willing to say here. OK I'm not a vet and back then cobalt in B12 I don't think was well understood. Certainly it wasn't an issue. To fix poor blood readings I don't remember B12 being prescribed rather B1 or a complex.  One thing I do remember is the dramatic improvement if form. I'll say this. If you look at results at various carnivals where there is a quick back and a major turnaround in form I'm 95% certain vitamin injections have had something to do with it. 

There is no point arguing over AR178 or whatever. The simple fact is its 100% accepted cobalt was administered. People can make their own conclusions who knew what, who forgot and who didn't want to know.

 

I'm not making any assumptions, you are, and you're distorting the facts. Back in the late 60s, early seventies, in my eventing days, we had horses on B12 supplements b.i.d. for two weeks prior to and right through events. If cobalt had been illegal and they were testing for it we probably would have had a few positives. Any changes in form at the time were probably due to mitigation of deficiency. Your anecdotal evidence is no more than hear say, and that's from 50 years ago.

The point of raising AR178 is that it requires a legitimate test finding a prohibited substance. No such thing occurred here. That's not an argument, it's a fact.

You also earlier raised the $3000 cost of the vitamin complex bottles. That is another misleading distortion of facts. That was for 3 bottles each containing 20 drips. That's about 50 bucks per drip, hardly unusual for any treatment or drug these days.

True, cobalt salts were administered and people can draw their own conclusions. VCAT did based on evidence. You seem to want people to judge based on hearsay and your contortion of the facts.

You want to label people cheats for administering a non-performance enhancing naturally occurring salt (albeit not knowing it was present). Have a closer look and I think you'll find the cheats that ignored the science, relied on flawed studies, altered evidence and threw caution to the wind without regard to the law or the rules were on the other side, desperate to make a name for themselves by getting a cobalt conviction.

 

[scooby3051 10,857]

SD and Midget stop the personal stuff... BOTH of you. And SD Admin was kinder to you than i would have been anymore of the total shyte you tried to post and I will not be so kind again.Cheers.

[CT"s 310]

2 hours ago, Leggy said:

I'm not making any assumptions, you are, and you're distorting the facts. Back in the late 60s, early seventies, in my eventing days, we had horses on B12 supplements b.i.d. for two weeks prior to and right through events. If cobalt had been illegal and they were testing for it we probably would have had a few positives. Any changes in form at the time were probably due to mitigation of deficiency. Your anecdotal evidence is no more than hear say, and that's from 50 years ago.

The point of raising AR178 is that it requires a legitimate test finding a prohibited substance. No such thing occurred here. That's not an argument, it's a fact.

You also earlier raised the $3000 cost of the vitamin complex bottles. That is another misleading distortion of facts. That was for 3 bottles each containing 20 drips. That's about 50 bucks per drip, hardly unusual for any treatment or drug these days.

True, cobalt salts were administered and people can draw their own conclusions. VCAT did based on evidence. You seem to want people to judge based on hearsay and your contortion of the facts.

You want to label people cheats for administering a non-performance enhancing naturally occurring salt (albeit not knowing it was present). Have a closer look and I think you'll find the cheats that ignored the science, relied on flawed studies, altered evidence and threw caution to the wind without regard to the law or the rules were on the other side, desperate to make a name for themselves by getting a cobalt conviction.

 

VCAT wouldn't know a thing about horse racing Leggy. 

They specialise in tenancy disputes of which 99% of their cases pertain to.

How can you have a fair verdict from a government body adjudicating on a subject they know nothing about?? 

The lawyers would've been licking their lips as soon as the case was put to VCAT. 

Still plenty to come out of the wash with this one for sure. 

[CT"s 310]

3 hours ago, Midget said:

The vet, he is the professional, he knows the withholding times, he understands compounding, he knows clearance rates and half lives, he's highly educated, he has to know, that's why you pay him so much.

What's your point anyway ?

Who's responsible when you go to the doctor and he writes a scrip ? You or the doctor ?

So you're saying the buck stops with the vet then and if anything happens to the horse it's the vet's responsibility and the trainer has no liability? 

If that's the case, what's the point in paying the trainer?

Of course you'd say that short stuff. Again tailoring a response to match the corner you're in regardless of the facts. 

This is great entertainment. By the way The Elephant man was 5'2" which just happens to be your height plus or minus a couple of phone books. 

[Midget 4,489]

I'm in a corner ?? In which case we're standing in a round room you loser.....keep going, you have no facts, you have no science, you only have hunches and hearsay.....you're an uneducated nutter clutching at straws....

[CT"s 310]

1 minute ago, Midget said:

I'm in a corner ?? In which case we're standing in a round room you loser.....keep going, you have no facts, you have no science, you only have hunches and hearsay.....you're an uneducated nutter clutching at straws....

There's no science involved short stuff. 

Two trainers knowingly paid their vet to administer cobalt to their horses to make them run faster.

The horses were tested and they got caught plain and simple.

They then hired a lawyer who found an easy way to get them off and threw their vet under the bus denying all knowledge and responsibility.

No science there short stuff. You must be going blind as well 

[Leggy 4,074]

7 hours ago, CT said:

There's no science involved short stuff. 

Two trainers knowingly paid their vet to administer cobalt to their horses to make them run faster.

The horses were tested and they got caught plain and simple.

They then hired a lawyer who found an easy way to get them off and threw their vet under the bus denying all knowledge and responsibility.

No science there short stuff. You must be going blind as well 

Why don't you sit down and read the decision before you shoot off again CT. There is absolutely no evidence that Kav paid anyone anything, aside from the incredible testimony of Brennan. No bank transfers, no withdrawals, no nothing. The trainers didn't get caught doing anything wrong either. Where do you come up with so much rubbish. You should stick to what you are good at and that's stopping odds on certainties.

[gary1 361]

11 hours ago, Leggy said:

I'm not making any assumptions, you are, and you're distorting the facts. Back in the late 60s, early seventies, in my eventing days, we had horses on B12 supplements b.i.d. for two weeks prior to and right through events. If cobalt had been illegal and they were testing for it we probably would have had a few positives. Any changes in form at the time were probably due to mitigation of deficiency. Your anecdotal evidence is no more than hear say, and that's from 50 years ago.

The point of raising AR178 is that it requires a legitimate test finding a prohibited substance. No such thing occurred here. That's not an argument, it's a fact.

You also earlier raised the $3000 cost of the vitamin complex bottles. That is another misleading distortion of facts. That was for 3 bottles each containing 20 drips. That's about 50 bucks per drip, hardly unusual for any treatment or drug these days.

True, cobalt salts were administered and people can draw their own conclusions. VCAT did based on evidence. You seem to want people to judge based on hearsay and your contortion of the facts.

You want to label people cheats for administering a non-performance enhancing naturally occurring salt (albeit not knowing it was present). Have a closer look and I think you'll find the cheats that ignored the science, relied on flawed studies, altered evidence and threw caution to the wind without regard to the law or the rules were on the other side, desperate to make a name for themselves by getting a cobalt conviction.

 

leggy i see you worked it to be about $50 a drip but as stated by the nsw vet,    Racing NSW chief veterinarian, Dr Craig Suann, told the Sam Kavanagh hearing a typical bottle of injectable vitamins would normally cost $20 or less."  far call from $3000

[Leggy 4,074]

I didn't work that out gary1. It's in the evidence, and according to Sam Kavanagh about equivalent to an amino drip purchased from the farm store.

Regarding the cost of the vitamin complex, Sam Kavanagh said that the price of $1,000 for a bottle covered twenty drips meant $50 a drip. He was asked about the cost of drips and advised that he purchased some drips from the feed store rather than the vet, and the cost depended on the drip. A Darrow’s drip would cost around $15 and amino drips were over $50 per drip.

[Midget 4,489]

55 minutes ago, gary1 said:

leggy i see you worked it to be about $50 a drip but as stated by the nsw vet,    Racing NSW chief veterinarian, Dr Craig Suann, told the Sam Kavanagh hearing a typical bottle of injectable vitamins would normally cost $20 or less."  far call from $3000

Suann conveniently and mischievously used a bottle of OTC multi vitamins as his example, Brennan was using compounded prescription vitamins.......they're a gulf apart 

[CT"s 310]

6 hours ago, Leggy said:

Why don't you sit down and read the decision before you shoot off again CT. There is absolutely no evidence that Kav paid anyone anything, aside from the incredible testimony of Brennan. No bank transfers, no withdrawals, no nothing. The trainers didn't get caught doing anything wrong either. Where do you come up with so much rubbish. You should stick to what you are good at and that's stopping odds on certainties.

Really Leggy?? Are you that naive?

There was absolutely no evidence that OJ Simpson murdered Nicole Brown Simpson either. 

The glove didn't fit so there was no doubt he was innocent wasn't he??? 

Of course the trainers didn't get caught doing anything wrong. Why do think they forked out millions for their lawyers??

I honestly thought you were better than that.