Chief Stipe

Well you haven't seen the entire video then. The horse jumped three times and also went in the opposite direction twice. The horse is a 7 yr old eventing horse that has known issues. Todd was paid by the owner (the rider) for lessons to remedy some of the issues. In the video it is clearly evident that a large part of the problem and probably the cause of the habit developing was the rider. My interpretation was that the rider wasn't listening to Todd's instructions either. The owner posted the clipped version and distributed it quite some time after the actual event. There are a number of other horses and riders in the video.

Under siege horse trainer fighting back from the brink Kate Goodrich with Left Hand Drive. By Bruce Clark 02:29pm • 15 February 2022 1 The irony is probably not lost on race horse trainer Kate Goodrich that her last winner (that’s March 2020 at Wodonga) is called Too Hard To Handle. It’s been the only horse she has had run in the last two years; it ran last week too (finishing sixth at Ararat). Before that there was Too Dark To See, before that Turf Wars, before that Isa Realist and The Poison Tree. No, this isn’t a conspiracy theory, but as Racing Victoria strives to bring long running cobalt cases to heed, it settles in for another expensive Supreme Court stoush with the girl who won’t go away in Kate Goodrich. So Goodrich will have her day in court, well she has already had plenty of them, from failed mediations, to the Racing Appeals and Disciplinary Board Tribunal (so long ago it’s now disbanded) to the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) to the Supreme Court, to the Court of Appeal and now following a ruling last week – back to the Supreme Court for discovery, mediation with a directions hearing listed for May 27. And you can throw in trips to Victoria’s racing Independent Integrity commissioner Sal Perna (past) and Sean Carroll (present). But this is not a story about the legal positions on the young trainer who was found by an independent commission (FBIS) to have been bullied and threatened and a decision to dismiss her from training at Kilmore back in 2013 as flawed and unjustified. There have been show cause notices and refusal of nominations along that journey since. The Supreme Court is well placed to serve the justice that Goodrich desires. This is a story about the young girl who dreamt of horses and becoming a trainer and ended up on the verge of ending it all. You can call Goodrich tough, you can call her a dogged litigant. But neither fully explains Kate Goodrich. Why should you even be reading about a person in a sport that craves success and stories of the big stars, while nodding to diversity, welfare and inclusiveness. She has trained four winners in five years, only 45 in her career. She’d rather have you not reading about it either, but that she has got this far is a story in itself. Kate Goodrich in competition “All I wanted to do was be with horses, but I don’t know how many times through all this that I thought I was done,” she said. “Yes, I have had suicidal thoughts, many times that I felt I couldn’t keep going. The medication has probably kept me alive, it’s kept me putting on weight that’s one thing, but it shouldn’t be about that. “There have been days I just couldn’t get out of bed, sure there might be people who don’t like me but they don’t know me, this is all just bullshit what I have been through and no one should go through that. But then I have had messages of support from people from all over the world. “When I read things, it’s like a knife twisting in your heart, it’s just re-hurting you. Sometimes I just don’t know, I have been so f..ked, mentally f..ked, I have been so spent, you don’t know what they are capable of and the smallest things trigger thoughts and I am back to where I started, the lowest points. “Sometimes life has been too hard and it’s impossible to deal with the pain, you dread every day, no one will ever know what it’s like, you feel dead, and you wonder how you get passed that and reprogram the brain. “I don’t know if I ever will be the person I was. But riding horses again has been so good for me, I’m trying to be better and they have made me better. I know I just could never keep going without them, or having to end it for them either.” For Goodrich it is simply about accountability. Mediation came with financial offers to go away but with strings attached to shut up. This is the female version of David v Goliath. But Kate keeps on going, even with her Dennis Denuto like team (and that’s no disrespect to her brilliant lawyer Ragu Appudurai, just a scene setter for you) as she takes on an army of industry supported QC’s like Paul Holdensen, who represented the likes of Novak Djokovic recently. But more so it is about the horses she misses. The girl who as a toddler would ask her parents to pull the car over if they ever drove past a horse in a paddock. She just wanted to pat it. The girl who saved up her Christmas and birthday money to buy a pony and then needed to get mum and dad to buy a property that wasn’t the old suburban plot, but land that could keep the horses. They did. A young Kate with her pony “Red” “They weren’t horse people, my grandad was an SP bookie, he’d punt like a mad man (I thought that’s what his clients did), and he’d take me to the races, mostly jumps races, I just love them.” So there was a Welsh mountain pony – “it was as mad as a hatter” – when she was five, it was barred from riding school when he climbed a tennis court fence at school and needed to be retrained. It lived, loved, until 30. “I loved competing, I was competing from as young as I can remember, all sorts of horses, I was a pretty good rider back in my day. She was rehoming horses before rehoming was an industry focus when just 13. She learned from two-time Olympic champion Gillian Rolton and proudly has ridden Gillian’s Olympic champion Peppermint Grove, remember the horse she won gold on with a broken collarbone. But Kate goes back to her early favourites like Lwana – her first off the tracker – it was three, Goodrich was 13 and they ended up open eyed at the Hurstbridge Pony Club finding out what came next. Or the grey Cassie, who gave Goodrich a broken back, not Cassie’s fault she says, or another problem horse like Presto, who even her father, a builder by trade, would learn to ride on. Kate Goodrich in full flight on Lwana Being involved as an equestrian required a lot of money, the Goodrich family didn’t have that. But the horses led her to experience with local trainer Lee Hope before the proudest day in her life – telling her parents she was a licensed racehorse trainer. That was 2002, the first winner took some time, 2007 Strikin’ Rich at Kilmore but for Goodrich it has always been about the horses. On the track, and they are all family favourites who stay in the family, the best will be “Socksie”, Signor Socks who won eight races and over $220,000, sure, hardly an icon of the racing turf, but everything is relative. Or its older half-sister Isa Halo is a better story perhaps, and punters love these stories. It’s a Friday night at The Valley in 2008, Isa Halo is first-up. “We had no money, but she was flying, we had a $50 quaddie,” she said. Their Kilmore mate and clerk of the course Bobby Challis had Doosra Diamond in the first leg. A 3000m race, one out, fell in by an inch. Load up the second leg with seven and Anyways in a 1500m slog for Shane Nichols wins at $15, beating a $100 shot she didn’t have. Still alive! Only two in the third leg, and yes Crabs wins for Craig Williams at $4 in another tight finish. Isa Halo is $41 one out in the last, Dean Yendall up, lasts by an inch and happy days. “It paid $11862 (still remembers that) and we had it seven times for our $50 bet (that was when it was a 50 cent divvie). We got around $20,000 in cash and the rest as a cheque.” “It was scary. It wasn’t even the money, we needed it, it was that we pulled it off for $50.” Part of that $50 bank was her long-term partner, former AFL footballer Jon Hassall, a 50-game player with Collingwood and 44 with Hawthorn. “I was working as a waitress in a restaurant in Kangaroo Ground in my late 20s when I met Jon. I never wanted to get married, I never wanted to have kids, I never thought I’d be good at that, I had my horses and Jon.” And she still has her horses and Jon, and her dreams of better days ahead. And a day in court that gives her those better days.

Well that to me is a worrying sign in itself. Is it an indication of a general resignation amongst licensees that it is better to plead guilty than risk a worse penalty and costs?

I haven't extolled his virtues at any point. However I believe in giving a young person a chance after they have erred. I'm also aware of and not naive to the fact that the drugs he supplied to other licensed horsemen are abundant in our society. I'm also cognisant of the fact that the assault charge occurred after he was put under extreme pressure by the ex-cops from the RIU. That isn't an excuse for his behaviour but it does highlight one of the issues I have with the current culture within the RIB. I would as he is a class driver and potentially a very good trainer. He wasn't always on the wrong side. https://www.facebook.com/124364354264770/posts/1339548156079711/ I guess if you are consistent you won't be punting on anything Natalie Rasmussen drives either. After all she was the buyer/user of Anderson's supply. Not exactly a young person is she?

He got 3 months community detention and 12 months intensive supervision. He has completed those sentences. Why should he be punished any more? Many young people get caught up in the party drug scene and make mistakes. Indeed in other sports there has been similar cases where the offender has received less punishment. That doesn't excuse Anderson's behaviour however to continue to punish him is unjust in my opinion. How hard is it to register every owners share in a horse and count that it doesn't add up to more than 100%? Likewise with the insurance - make it a condition to register any pecuniary interest in a horse with HRNZ. That would help resolve bad debt issues as well. Simple. Should have been put in place years ago. Protects all the newbies into the industry as well.

I can still read a race Ravioli and Deploy was spent.

Well you are wrong again Galah. My criticism is that contrary to your opinion the fact is they aren't doing their job and what they are doing they aren't doing very well!! Explain to me how the Anderson case is a good example of the RIU (RIB) doing their job well? You seem to want a bob each way Galah. On the one hand you say the RIB is doing a great job yet on the other you adhere to and promote the conspiracy that PED use is rife in the industry. If the latter is the case then surely it follows that the RIB are incompetent and their testing regime is flawed!!

Then you are getting the wrong gist. I don't see where anyone has said Racing would be better off without the RIB (RIU). Where posters differ is that they disagree with you that they are doing a great job. In my opinion they aren't and could do a lot better. No one has said that the people you list are "great guys". Let's look at those four people: Alford - done for administering a prohibited substance on raceday. The RIU were tipped off and caught Alford in the act. He was seen to and admitted administering formalin by injection and an alkalising substance by gastric tubing. Fair cop. All the embellishment aside it is arguable that formalin is a PED - it does have some medicinal properties that prevent and stop EIPH (lung bleeding). Disqualified for 7 years. McGrath - again done for administering a prohibited substance on raceday. Again the RIU were tipped off and went into covert surveillance mode. The evidence was circumstantial that he used a gastric tube to administer a prohibited substance. McGrath aggravated the situation by not co-operating with the investigators. Although no tests were done or rather were able to be done the JCA concluded that he was attempting to use an alkalising substance. He got an 8 year disqualification. A fair cop. As with the Alford case it raises questions about the efficacy of the RIB swabbing regime. Anderson - he was done for supplying fellow horsemen the party drug MDMA - namely Ecstacy. A very common party drug. This was collateral damage from operation INCA i.e. wasn't the initial intent of that Police investigation nor the RIU. Anderson was discharge without conviction in Court and subsequently was done by the vague but all encompassing Harness Rule 1001. Nothing to do Harness Racing per se. Effectively the RIU/JCA (now combined into the RIB) punished him more than the Police/Court system did. Arguably the pressure put on him by the usual ex-cop RIU staff contributed to his subsequent criminal charge. In my opinion this action diminished the standing of the RIU. 6 month disqualification for the Party Drug supply conviction and hasn't to this date been licensed again. Now that is a HRNZ issue not the RIB. Kerr - done for over selling shares and insurance in a horse(s). The RIB charged him under Rule 1001 - that he committed dishonest or fraudulent acts connected with harness racing. Disqualified for life. In my opinion this is a weakness in the Harness Racing NZ systems. No excuse for Kerr to commit fraud but it isn't the first time this has happened and unless the ownership recording systems are updated it will happen again. So looking at the evidence of the RIB doing a "great job" - in all four cases they were late to the party. One case wasn't even their cop - they just handed down a harsh penalty when a higher court didn't. The last case was a criminal case yet in this instance they either didn't refer it to or wait for the higher jurisdiction - I guess they wanted to get the kill on their rap sheet!! Meanwhile social media are openly attacking leading stables for allegedly doping their horses and the RIB remains silent. Apparently the use of EPO is rife yet the RIB and their testing systems can't find anything. That's incompetence on a number of levels. What's more they haven't done anything publicly to dispel the rumours yet their new CEO has publicly stated in the media in response to the Sir Mark Todd beat up that whips should be banned from racing!!! FFS since when did the CEO of the RIB make or comment on racing rules? He is there to enforce the rules NOT create them!!! Not only enforce the rules but enforce them consistently. The RIB fails miserably in both easy tasks. Further have we seen any positive personnel changes at the RIB since it was created? We've seen the hiring of new Stipendiary Stewards who have no racing background at all and who in less than 18 months Chair or Head the race day inquiry system!!! Nor have we seen any positive action on resolving the issue of drug positives from environmental contamination nor the promised re-evaluation of medications that are good for horse welfare vs their mis-classification as PED's!!!

However I do believe Harness and Thoroughbred horse breakers, early educators and pre-trainers should be licensed. Primarily to protect owners and for horse welfare purposes. There are a lot of Trainers at Cambridge that only train horses for the last 2-4 weeks of a horse preparation before it goes to the trials or the races.

As far as I know if you insure your bloodstock there is no requirement that they are kept on licensed premises in the care of licensed people.

You don't need to be licensed to farm sheep, cattle or even breed horses. Being licensed doesn't guarantee that you are safe or even good at what you are licensed to do.

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?