Sign in to follow this  
Fartoomuch

Positives at Nelson

234 posts in this topic

54 minutes ago, eljay said:

If what you say is the absolute, then every trainer who presents a horse is guilty simply because as he does not know whether horse has ingested something, whether in the paddock or feed or whatever, so by starting a horse he is on a wing and a prayer because he could not categorically swear that the horse was clean, could he      So if nobody wants to get an unexpected knock on their door the easy way out is to not enter any horses.      Yes I know this sounds silly, but just as silly as someone who not only starts a horse they assume and believe is clean then is treated as a criminal because somehow their horse returns a positive.     That's why I say sure get the cheats by proving they are in fact cheats but don't tar the honest guys with the same brush.       

Well I don't know if everyone is guilty as there's only been his 3 and the Dunns ones that have failed tests lately , to me that's only a couple of guilty trainers ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So because their horses gave positives the trainers are automatically guilty you say.    But can they prove the trainers administered the substances?      Yes, the horses gave a positive swab but were the trainers to blame or a "mysterious" third party.      Yes they were "guilty" of breaking the law as it is written but probably a multitude of others are also guilty of presenting their horses but because their horses were never swabbed then they are classed as angels.     

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Portfolio said:

If Brosnan wanted to get a few more winners, he should just hand the reigns to someone else, no need to worry about drugs. In fact, some of his drives you might think he needs testing, not the horse.

 

Still, we know what will happen, must have been a bad batch food, ate a fence post, shared drink with a cow.

Grenado was driven by Dylan Ferguson and  and  Our Petite Lady by James Stormont  :D 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not saying they tried to cheat but facts are they presented horses to race with higher levels than allowed with banned drugs in the systems , which mean yes guilty under the rules. Your very quick to say it could be feed contamination and yes well it could be but could also be just as easy to say maybe they tried to get away with something and got caught.?  All I know is that the test have tested positive for banned substances and as a trainer its your job to make sure you line up free of them, or under the allowed limits. Anytime a horse tests positive it's bad news for our racing game so the sooner the feed contamination mix ups or failed drug cheats  are out of the game the better. Again I'm not saying they cheated but they have presented horses that's have failed to comply with the rules. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, hsvman said:

Not saying they tried to cheat but facts are they presented horses to race with higher levels than allowed with banned drugs in the systems , which mean yes guilty under the rules. Your very quick to say it could be feed contamination and yes well it could be but could also be just as easy to say maybe they tried to get away with something and got caught.?  All I know is that the test have tested positive for banned substances and as a trainer its your job to make sure you line up free of them, or under the allowed limits. Anytime a horse tests positive it's bad news for our racing game so the sooner the feed contamination mix ups or failed drug cheats  are out of the game the better. Again I'm not saying they cheated but they have presented horses that's have failed to comply with the rules. 

Yes I agree - but damned if I know how you can be sure  horses are "clean" which under present rules means if you were certain they were okay and subsequently produced a positive you would be guilty of being an idiot I suppose :D        Incidentally, are all horses engaged in the Auckland Cup under 24 hour surveillance?      

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hsvman is right but we are not scientists and we rely on vets- and if products mislabelled  we in bother-I think no one would try because u know u are going to get caught.

 

best friend is a good vet giving good advice and up with the play .  big stables are at the mercy of having staff make a mistake- however the presentation of a horse with a banned substance is the trainers responsibility- that's the rules that's it. like being accidentally offside u are still penalised.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 30/12/2017 at 8:44 PM, tim vince said:

hsvman is right but we are not scientists and we rely on vets- and if products mislabelled  we in bother-I think no one would try because u know u are going to get caught.

 

best friend is a good vet giving good advice and up with the play .  big stables are at the mercy of having staff make a mistake- however the presentation of a horse with a banned substance is the trainers responsibility- that's the rules that's it. like being accidentally offside u are still penalised.

I understand what you are saying, but it is easy to blame stablehand, many trainers have done it and got away with it.

If a doctor prescribes drugs, and a nurse gives to much, guess what, nurse is liable.

Maybe trainers need to take more care, mix their own food. 

One thing upsets me most, is those that have been charged for all sort of drug offences, dating back to the 80s.

Mostly, well known stables, bigger stables that should be able to get things right for their owners, punters and the industry.

Then a few stables that battled, then start training plenty of winners till caught.

Sorry, but I have no sympathy for those caught, if they had actually fined trainers more harshly from day one, this would not be an issue.

How can it be a penalty, when trainers can still train after positives, and then transfer horses to family of friends to train for a few months?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Portfolio said:

I understand what you are saying, but it is easy to blame stablehand, many trainers have done it and got away with it.

If a doctor prescribes drugs, and a nurse gives to much, guess what, nurse is liable.

Maybe trainers need to take more care, mix their own food. 

One thing upsets me most, is those that have been charged for all sort of drug offences, dating back to the 80s.

Mostly, well known stables, bigger stables that should be able to get things right for their owners, punters and the industry.

Then a few stables that battled, then start training plenty of winners till caught.

Sorry, but I have no sympathy for those caught, if they had actually fined trainers more harshly from day one, this would not be an issue.

How can it be a penalty, when trainers can still train after positives, and then transfer horses to family of friends to train for a few months?

And what if it a deliberate act but not by trainer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is the HRNZ caffeine level for a horse far lower than an Olympic athlete ?

The threshold is ridiculous and if it was adjusted to reflect the size of a horse versus a human then these “false positives “ would not  happen - half a cup of energy drink wouldn’t cause an above base positive .

The low threshold which  results in cases like this , and many others , is doing significant harm to the sport.

Why HRNZ is the level so low versus the human athlete? 

Share this post


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

Why is the HRNZ caffeine level for a horse far lower than an Olympic athlete ?

The threshold is ridiculous and if it was adjusted to reflect the size of a horse versus a human then these “false positives “ would not  happen - half a cup of energy drink wouldn’t cause an above base positive .

The low threshold which  results in cases like this , and many others , is doing significant harm to the sport.

Why HRNZ is the level so low versus the human athlete? 

This is a total guess and possibly a stupid one.

Is it because horses don't socially consume coffee ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Portfolio said:

I understand what you are saying, but it is easy to blame stablehand, many trainers have done it and got away with it.

If a doctor prescribes drugs, and a nurse gives to much, guess what, nurse is liable.

Maybe trainers need to take more care, mix their own food. 

One thing upsets me most, is those that have been charged for all sort of drug offences, dating back to the 80s.

Mostly, well known stables, bigger stables that should be able to get things right for their owners, punters and the industry.

Then a few stables that battled, then start training plenty of winners till caught.

Sorry, but I have no sympathy for those caught, if they had actually fined trainers more harshly from day one, this would not be an issue.

How can it be a penalty, when trainers can still train after positives, and then transfer horses to family of friends to train for a few months?

Fully agree. Usually there is a pattern of offences and suspensions relating to particular trainer. i.e. they usually get caught more than once over a period of time. Having said that the are getting smarter and able to pay for expensive vets. I know I bought a horse from a  leading  stable, just afterwords the trainer was suspended for 12 months for a high Co2 level. This wasn't his first offence, yet he still only got 12 months.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, richie said:

And what if it a deliberate act but not by trainer

So, somebody else outside the stable would give horses substances to increase performance? 

Why would anyone risk it? Surely, trying to make rivals horse slower is a better option .

Share this post


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

So, somebody else outside the stable would give horses substances to increase performance? 

Why would anyone risk it? Surely, trying to make rivals horse slower is a better option .

Who said outside stable,i just said not trainer.Maybe employee that feeling aggrieved.Maybe employee that didnt realise consequences or maybe employee who just made honest mistake

Share this post


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

Who said outside stable,i just said not trainer.Maybe employee that feeling aggrieved.Maybe employee that didnt realise consequences or maybe employee who just made honest mistake

Lots of maybes there mate. Which is my point, nobody is accountable. If tougher penalties, all of a sudden trainers would take more care in every aspect.

Maybe Lance Armstrong was innocent, maybe someone, somewhere, sometime gave him something to ride faster? 

Oh dear, while we still have people that make excuses doping will continue, that's not maybe, that's for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Each case will be investigated on the individual situation. Trainers usually do it when their horses aren't quite up to it and they get desperate.

If a trainer has been training for 20 years or so with a clean sheet, then you would be suspicious it may have been a stablehand. Mostly though the trainers that get caught become repeat offenders over the years, they tend to rely on giving their horses some additional "help".That's what I've noticed anyway.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 21 December 2017 at 5:25 PM, Kotare_Hunter said:

But the decision on whether to charge the Dunns has been delayed for two weeks after Robert Dunn requested more time for a private investigator he has enlisted to complete his own inquiries.

So it's almost been 3 weeks & still nothing... Are we surprised??

Its a concern how drawn out this investigation has been (whatever the specifics & outcome). Far from upholding the integrity of the industry, the lack of transparency and inaction has allowed the rumour mill to flourish and had the opposite effect! One can't help but wonder how this would differ if it was a small player...

Share this post


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

Its all sorted abeit 9 months down the track.

Penalties to come.

I must thoroughly commend Don and Peggy Burrows approach to their positive swab.

So Dunn concedes his guilt before JCA.hearing. All this 9 months after the positive. You must wonder now whether the JCA will give him a lesser penalty for pleading guilty even after wasting RIU resources for 9 months. Of even more interest is that its not the first time his team have had positives and what influence that will have on penalties.

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
Sign in to follow this