Chief Stipe

But where is that stated in the Harness Rules? Either way it is an exercise in tautology because if they don't allow a licence then you are essentially disqualified. The only difference is there isn't a finite date!

@Gammalite you have obviously not been reading my posts nor up with the play in NZ. In the Thoroughbred industry you don't need to be licensed to break, educate and pre-train a horse. I assume it is the same with Harness.

If they applied the "good character" test to numerous people in the industry there wouldn't be many left. Anderson has served his penalty as given by the Court. Arguably he could argue a Human Rights case if he is continually refused a license. It isn't as if there aren't precedents within the industry.

So as posted by @Robalan there is no mandatory disqualification for a criminal conviction? He did get a 6 month disqualification when the RIU double dipped on the MDMA conviction. A case of the RIU doing a double whammy by using a broad definition of Rule 100. Essentially Anderson was convicted in Court for an offence against society and the RIU's view was we'll also ping you for the same thing as an offence against racing.

FFS Ravioli you don't have a tipping service do you? The horse wouldn't settle and fought Sam for most of the race. She let it down in the straight, it responded for a time and then when asked for more effort it had nothing left. Why flog a spent horse? How is that good for animal welfare? Especially one that seems to have control issues anyway. We'll see more of this as our field quality reduces. Trainers taking their horses to the races to educate and get them fit.

How many times did the horse jump into the water?

There were 700 polling locations in Harris County.

They aren't actually restrictions. They are tightening the rules primarily around mail-in ballots BUT to compensate are extending the time available for people to vote in person.

So? Isn't the more important question were those registered voters the actual voters who voted?

That's pretty obvious. Having spent a considerable amount of money getting charges dropped in the Courts why would you want to relitigate it all again? Especially in a Judicial system where the Judge and Jury are also the Prosecution?

So in your opinion the horse would have run 4th if "ridden out"? Does "riding out" mean using ALL your allocated whip strikes?

That was the last piece of court action. All the prior action initiated by the Police and driven by the RIB either hit a dead end or was withdrawn. Why bother? Why spend more taxpayers and industry money on appeal when if what you elude to is correct the RIB can achieve a similar outcome through their own Judicial process? It is apparent that it has been a mess from the start and now it is a face saving exercise. So presumably the RIB are relying on being Judge and Jury with a lower threshold of evidence required to rub some licensee's out. If the evidence presented in Court wasn't enough to get a conviction then it shouldn't be enough for the RIB. I'm guessing it will come down to the interpretation of who said what and what it means.

Classic losing team response - blame the Judge. So the Police and the RIB didn't think that their case was strong enough to appeal? My understanding is the Police had had enough anyway after having been prodded into it by their ex-colleagues. If what you allege is true (obviously you are close to the leaks) then why didn't the RIB (RIU) go down that path to start with?! Also is it right that the burden of proof is so much lower in the RIB process?

Well the very expensive District Court process has been dead ended. So they are going to have to save face somehow.

But you agree there was some electoral fraud. Do you agree or disagree with the changes to tighten up the voting rules in some southern states?

Agreed. The news item was never about Sir Mark Todd it was an orchestrated coordinated media campaign by the Anti-Racing Mob. They have one objective - "To stop the using of horses or any animal for entertainment purposes." That means no Racing, no Equestrian events, no Hunt events (foxes and hounds have already been banned), no Gymkhanas, no Pony Clubs.....which leads to no horses. I guess you could say the Anti-Racing mob are just Anti-Horse.

Yep that was my first thought yesterday. I went to the RIB website to read the Press Release. Guess what there isn't one! The last one was the announcement of Mike Clement as CEO. This morning I read where Clement has said that it is inevitable that Whips will be banned. Since when did the CEO of the RIB make the Racing Rules let alone publicly comment on them?

Don't you think sorting out the INCA mess and removing those who made it a mess would be a bigger priority for you Mike?

At least 31 instances of whip misuse by riders and drivers in thoroughbred and harness racing have occurred since the start of this year, according to the Racing Integrity Board website. Among them, several riders were found to have breached the whip rules on multiple occasions in the past six months. Breaches include excessive whipping, using a whip in “more than a wrist only flicking motion”, lifting the whip above shoulder height, and striking a horse in consecutive strides. Penalties include fines and suspension. The majority of the fines this year were between $100 and $400. One jockey was fined $4000 for a fourth breach in six months. Several were also suspended between two and nine days. An amateur jockey was suspended for six weeks. Phil Walter/Getty Images Former Deputy Police Commissioner Mike Clement is now the head of the Racing Integrity Board. Racing Integrity Board chief executive Mike Clement said over the past few years, NZ Thoroughbred Racing and Harness Racing NZ had made “significant steps” to control whip use and there was a “marked difference”. “They are transitioning from the habits of the past into a new paradigm in whip use. Both codes should land on a vision for whip use in the sport,” he said. “Most would agree the whip won’t be permissible at all. That’s what I would encourage. They need to make clear what their ultimate intention is so everyone can work towards that. “The days of whips are numbered.” He said there was no “one size fits all” when it came to whip infringements, but suspensions did impact the employment of a rider. “It beats any $100 fine by the length of the straight,” he said. “We’ve come a long way. We’ve got a long way to go. We are in a transition period regarding whip use, and we should push on with making the change, with many commentators say is inevitable.”

So bumping this thread helps?

Excellent.

Perhaps. I haven't seen the full video - have you? I don't know any other information or context. Do you? So I gather from your second paragraph that you would like NZTR to investigate? I wouldn't bother giving it anymore oxygen quite frankly. I'm not joining the hunt for monsters brigade nor enabling the anti-race movement.

Well I hope it isn't a case of "something was administered but we don't know what it was" response. Because that would be bollocks. If there is something and their testing fails to pick it up then that's a failure too on the RIBs part.

Why? On what grounds? That would be over reach. Do you belong to the group flog him for life?