Chief Stipe

I see Peter Profit aka @Archie Butterfly is going for the outlandish headlines. "Levamisole isn't just a wormer son - it's speed!", he posts. What utter nonsense. So one of its metabolites is aminorex. It is produced in very small amounts and cleared very quickly. Not only that it is extremely easy to detect. I notice so far the positives notified are to Levamisole NOT aminorex!!! Is it because it wasn't tested for or not detected?

The reality is most punters wouldn't have a clue what to look for in a preliminary. I asked a friend why she liked a particular horse. "I like its colour", she said.

I doubt McGrath will apply again given the rule doesn't actually offer any scope for leniency. Poorly written rule in my opinion if its intent was to allow those charged to argue rehabilitation had occurred.

Appeal – Costs Decision dated 4 June 2024 – Nigel McGrath ID: RIB42842 Respondent(s): Racing Integrity Board Applicant: Nigel Raymond McGrath Appeal Committee Member(s): Mr M McKechnie (Chair) and Mr A Harper Persons Present: Mr P Hall KC - Counsel for Mr McGrath, Mr D Dow - Counsel for Racing Integrity Board, Mr R McKenzie - Registrar, Mr N Grimstone - Chief Investigator (RIB), Mr N McGrath, Mrs A McGrath, Mr R and Mrs G Gardner, Mr A McKerrow - Racetrack Chaplain (Salvation Army) Information Number: A11684, A11685, A11686 Decision Type: Appeal Charge: Charge 1: Attempts to administer Prohibited Substance; Charge 2: Refuses to make a statement; Charge 3: Obstructing a Racecourse Investigator Rule(s): 1004(1) - Prohibited substance, 1001(1)(i) - Other - Serious Racing Offence, 1001(1)(j) - Other - Serious Racing Offence Animal Name: STEEL THE SHOW Code: Harness Race Number: R8 Hearing Date: 17/05/2024 Hearing Location: Christchurch Outcome: Appeal Dismissed Penalty: Unlicensed Person Nigel McGrath's disqualification remains in place along with an order for payment of costs totalling $9,500 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Mr Nigel McGrath made application under Rule 1205 of the New Zealand Rules of Harness Racing for the cancellation of an order for disqualification of his Trainer’s License which was made by a Judicial Committee on the 3rd of July 2020. 1.2 By a Written Decision dated the 22nd of May 2024, the Tribunal dismissed the application by Mr McGrath. 1.3 In its Decision of the 22nd of May 2024, the Tribunal invited the parties to make submissions in relation to the issue of costs. Submissions have now been received from both Mr Hall KC, Counsel for Mr McGrath, and Mr Dow, Counsel for the Racing Integrity Board. 2. THE COSTS APPLICATION BY THE RIB 2.1 Mr Dow submits that it is the usual practice of Adjudicative Committees and Appeals Tribunals to award a proportion of the total costs incurred of around 60%. 2.2 It is said by Mr Dow, that the timing of the application is relevant in as much that it was brought at a time when Mr McGrath had served less than half of the period of disqualification and that this weakened the application. Further, it is said that the costs incurred, were substantially increased by the fact that the Applicant took issue with the length of the period of disqualification and much of the material filed for Mr McGrath addressed that issue. As to the relevance of that, the Tribunal ruled in its Decision of the 22nd of May, that it was required to accept the unchallenged Decision of the Adjudicative Committee. Mr Dow submits that the application, to quote his words effectively turned the application into a dual hearing involving both an application under Rule 1205 and an appeal against penalty. 2.3 The total costs incurred by the RIB were approximately $13,000. In addition, disbursements were incurred totalling $901.62, being accommodation on the 16th of May 2024 in Christchurch and $621.99 for flights from Auckland to Christchurch and return. 2.4 The Respondent, on the basis of a 60% calculation, seeks the sum of $8,701.62. 3. THE SUBMISSIONS FOR MR McGRATH 3.1 Mr Hall KC, in his submissions on costs, submits that the application was not without merit and that there was a persuasive foundation for the application. 3.2 Mr Hall points to L v The Integrity Unit 27 May 2020 and the second L Decision of 15 June 2021 and the modest costs award that was made on the second occasion. 3.3 Mr Hall submits that any order for costs will fall not only upon Mr McGrath, but upon his wife and family. It is said that he has already exhausted family savings in bringing the application in the first place. 3.4 Mr Hall points out that Rule 1205 does not provide that an application for cancellation must be brought after 50% of the disqualification has been served and that an application can be brought after one year of the disqualification having been served. 4. DISCUSSION 4.1 As to the merits of the application, it is unnecessary to repeat what was said in the Decision of the 22nd of May 2024, other than to note the following, which were significant considerations: a) Less than half the term of the disqualification had been served. b) Much of the hearing and the submissions for Mr McGrath challenged the length of the disqualification imposed by the Adjudicative Committee. c) The Decision of the Adjudicative Committee had not been appealed. 4.2 In addition to the costs sought by the RIB, considerable expense was incurred in assembling the Appeals Tribunal and in hiring the hearing room at the Commodore Hotel in Christchurch. The room hire was $775.66 excluding GST. 4.3 The application by Mr McGrath was dismissed. As the Decision of the 22nd of May makes clear, this was by a considerable margin. 4.4 In the ordinary course of events, costs follow the event in judicial or semi-judicial proceedings, unless there be some compelling reason otherwise. No such reason is apparent here. That said, the Tribunal is conscious of Mr McGrath’s financial circumstances and the impact of the disqualification upon his career in Harness Racing. 4.5 There are no ‘hard and fast rules’ as to what percentage of costs should be awarded. It is entirely discretionary. As Mr Dow points out in his submissions, the figure of around 60% has been adopted on a significant number of occasions. 4.6 The Tribunal considers that having regard to what has been said above and conscious of the circumstances of Mr McGrath, the following costs awards are appropriate: a) To the Compliance RIB, the sum of $5,500. b) To the RIB Adjudication, with reference to assembling the Tribunal and conducting the hearing and issuing the Written Decision – $3,500. c) The contribution towards the costs of the venue hire – $500. The figures above come to the sum of $9,500. There are orders for the payment of costs in terms of para a) b) and c) above. Decision Date: 04/06/2024 Publish Date: 05/06/2024

But the example I gave is real - one had 46 drives the other 18 this year. They both got 3 days. Some get fines some get suspensions. So the questioning the consistency of rulings is valid.

No I actually posted on the Topic before you did. The original post was by @Nowornever not @Brodie. But you seem to overlook such points when Brodie is involved.

Thanks for the sarcastic response. However if you look closely at other decisions related to the whip rule you will see inconsistency. For example a driver might have had 43 drives this season gets 3 days the same as someone who has had 18 drives. The rule is inane in my opinion.

What level of arsenic is harmful to dogs? Research shows that 20mg/kg of dry matter in pet food is not toxic. I doubt 800 nanograms per litre is anywhere near toxic. Why would anyone retrospectively test every bit of wood for arsenic and rebuild their kennels? Who could afford to? What level of arsenic is performance enhancing? I look forward to someone giving me an answer to that question. Arsenic is a heavy metal that is toxic. Long term exposure isn't in the best interests of a dog and certainly wouldn't be performance enhancing. At the end of the day it is easily detectable and only an idiot would risk deliberate administration.

Nowhere near 30.

Do you know how close 800 nanograms is to zero? 0.000000008

Weird.

😒 hmmm or herrrrr

You don't sit right fullstop. Question: are most Greyhound trainers thick if they think they can administer Arsenic and not be detected? Yeah Na. The fact is like the other two codes testing thresholds of zero return positives due to environmental contamination.

Really? You want money to pay for your research? Do you have grandchildren?

Sometimes under that sort of pressure the local teams go into head in the sand mode and don't reach out for assistance. For example if there were pump problems why didn't they call NZTR for assistance financially or logistically? That serves two purposes - one it puts notice on NZTR to do something and two it covers the locals if problems occur. I'm not suggesting they didn't do this but can understand if they didn't reach out. Te Aroha for example were offered assistance from Matamata when their track renovation had issues but I'm told they essentially said no thanks.

I'm a bit disappointed to see Timaru have these problems. Given their previous successful meetings I thought they didn't have the same issues as everyone else. Clearly there are soil compaction issues and the track moisture content got away on them because of the drought. What is the long term forecast for the Spring? If it is a traditional hot Nor-West November then they could have the same issues to keep on top of at Riccarton.

Wouldn't have made a difference as heavy dews and fogs will soften the top 20mm but irrigation is required to soften the lower layer. So there will be a slip zone just below the surface. Are water pumps in short supply?

On the basis that there has been a drought I would say the issue has been caused by a LACK of irrigation not too much. It is similar to the issue that was discussed on BOAY a while back where the Steeple course was dangerous and slippery due to the grass dying off. In what video we can see it appears there has been a lot of browning off of the grass. The drought caused the maintenance of the track to get away on them. I suspect that like a lot of tracks they don't expect to irrigate much and the cost of doing so is avoided.

Mick on Monday: Warren Kennedy laments wasted opportunity at abandoned Timaru meeting www.nzherald.co.nz A wasted opportunity annoyed superstar jockey Warren Kennedy more than wasted time after yesterday’s abandoned Timaru meeting. The premiership leader flew all the way from Auckland to Timaru but never sat on a horse as the meeting was called off after two races, with a horse slipping in the second race of the day. No horses fell and no rider nor horse was injured in the split-second incident. Kennedy missed both the races that were held because his flight was delayed by fog, so was back at the airport soon after he left it. AdvertisementAdvertise with NZME. Kennedy would have dearly loved for the meeting to go ahead as he chases the premiership, having edged back to three wins clear of defending champion Michael McNab after a double at Ruakākā on Saturday. McNab went winless at Ruakaka and wasn’t riding at Timaru yesterday, so Kennedy saw the abandoned meeting as a missed opportunity. “I was on a couple of favourites and would have loved to get a few wins to stretch the margin back out to five,” he told the Herald.
“But I can’t argue with the decision. I went out and inspected the track, and there was a very significant slip mark and smaller slips around it. “The track was actually very firm underneath, about 2cm down, but with a little rain this morning [Sunday] and the fog, the top got soft but the underneath didn’t get that moisture, so it created a slippery surface. AdvertisementAdvertise with NZME. “It was the right decision, even though it makes for a wasted day.” Kennedy said frustrating experiences like yesterday’s are all part of the year-long battle for his first premiership here and after winning two in his native South Africa. “You have ups and downs over the course of a season, but I got that double yesterday [Saturday], so that helps. “I’d love to get back up to a lead of 10 or something so I can feel more comfortable, but Nabba has shown he won’t go away, so I think we are in for a good battle.” A further unexpected curveball was thrown with regard to that battle last night when NZTR announced a new synthetic track meeting at Riccarton on Wednesday, which clashes with the Cambridge meeting on the same day. Riccarton will then race again on Thursday, and that could mean decision-making for both Kennedy and McNab, who both originally intended to ride at the Cambridge synthetic meeting on Wednesday and Riccarton on Thursday before heading to Te Rapa on Saturday. They will both still be at the Riccarton meeting on Thursday and Te Rapa on Saturday but will have to choose where they ride on Wednesday. As it stands, Kennedy leads their personal battle for the premiership 118-115. That has seen Kennedy return to favouritism with the TAB to win the title, paying $1.80 to McNab’s $1.90 as their odds continue to seesaw. Kennedy’s win on Saturday came with the impressive Love Affirmations, who relished the better ground, and Sterling Express in a R65 over 1200m. As good as Kennedy was on Saturday, the riding star of the meeting was Jasmine Fawcett, who rode a treble, including an effortless debut victory on a smart 3-year-old Dan Vegas, brother to talented Australian galloper Gringotts. AdvertisementAdvertise with NZME. Fawcett continues to be one of the big improvers in the jockey’s ranks, Saturday’s treble taking her to a personal best 60 wins for the season and with seven weeks still to go. Three of those have been in black-type races and she sits ninth on the premiership, the same spot she filled at the end of last season, but with $1,758,488 in stakes earnings, with her tally making her the third-highest female jockey in the premiership. The jockeys’ premiership continues to throw up some incredible stats, with 40 more meetings of the thoroughbred season left before the Waverley fixture on July 31 brings the season to an end. Joe Doyle looks the next jockey set to break the once-unthinkable $5 million in domestic stakes for the season mark, while Opie Bosson currently has the best strike rate of his career at this stage of the season, riding a winner every 3.86 rides, better than his 3.88 strike rate of two years ago.

Where are you getting the videos from? Source please.

@Yankiwi please teach yourself how to copy the race Youtube links rather than downloading .wmv files on your pc then uploading them on BOAY. Thanks.

Viewing the TV only tells you where the Jockeys have chosen to steer and/or where the horse ends up due to luck or lack thereof. Given very few Jockeys walk the track before racing they use the first two races to suss it out. It is also harder to detect viewing the video if the surface in places is rough or shifty. Some horses just won't go in that type of ground.

The video for race 2 is still consipicuously missing.

They an two 2 yr old trials before the meeting started. Obiviously no problem with them. https://loveracing.nz/raceinfo/53597/meeting-overview.aspx

Well you are a better judge than most Trainers or Jockeys. I make a judgement initially on the form of horses racing on the track. If there is a pattern of form reversals then that raises suspicion. I then follow up by talking to Trainers or Owners that I may meet over time. If I have an interest in a horse racing then I will always try to walk the track before racetime and/or seek opinions oncourse from those with real skin in the game. So if your inference is that I have a vendetta and have based my opinions on no information then you would be wrong.