Geez I know, contrary to your own self belief, that accurate statistical analysis is beyond you but it also seems so is literary comprehension
The cases were different but I know such nuances escape you and your agenda to slag off Greyhound racing at any opportunity.
I've consistently raised my concerns about the inconsistency of the RIB Judicial decisions both within a racing code and between codes.
I've also been consistent in my criticism of the RIB AND Code management to address the elephant in the room which is environmental contamination.
If you don't believe there is a difference between environmental contamination and deliberate administration of a prohibited substance then you are clueless about the challenges facing the racing industry. Granted there is also a difference between a licensed person themselves returning a positive and their dog returning an environmental contamination positive vs a drug free trainer's dog returning an environmental positive.
The RIB are taking the easy option by treating it as being no different. If a dog returns a positive at a level that can only be reached by deliberate administration to the dog then the penalty should be different for one that has a low level non performance enhancing positive obviously caused by environmental contamination.