Yankiwi

Could they be there to show those who might be viewing the races from outside the track property, a bit about what their near future might be looking like? Seems the JCA are finally beginning to apply their version of chains on a CD serial offender. http://www.jca.org.nz/non-race-day-hearings/non-raceday-inquiry-riu-v-j-mcinerney-written-decision-dated-14-october-2019-chair-mr-n-mccutcheon 12) Reasons for Penalty The Committee had regard for the penalty submissions of the RIU. They believed that the punters’ interests are paramount and that greyhounds should be presented to race within the weight allowance provided for under the provisions of Rule 45.11. The record shows that the current breach is the sixth offence in 12 months that has been dealt with by way of an NRI. Mr McInerney’s previous breaches demonstrate that he has the worst record in the country in so far as weight infringements are concerned. Clearly the previous penalties of $100 - $300 have not served as a deterrent and the Committee determined that a significant increase is appropriate. 13) Penalty Mr McInerney was fined $550.00.

Look what I spotted yesterday when I looked over the fence into Brodie's back section. Maybe his "restriction" is just a smoke screen to cover up his true profession. Could he be the person tasked with washing the Meth off of all the $20 notes?

GRNZ didn't get much (if anything) for their money. The sooner she's gone the better, in my opinion.

From its 26/07 race - ARCHIE JOHN HILL (2) - bumped with outside runner early stages. Turned its head outwards whilst free of interference shortly afterwards. Referred to the Veterinarian where it was reported to have a Torn tendon in its right front shoulder with a 28 day stand down imposed. Notwithstanding this the greyhound was stood down to trial to the satisfaction of Stewards on one occasion. https://www.grnz.co.nz/catch-the-action/13620/stewards-report.aspx Quite a remarkable recovery time from a "Torn Tendon, with only about 5 weeks between the "injury" & its satisfactory trial. Another Fahey farce & they're adding up at a lightspeed pace...

This image has forced me to rethink my new hobby.

No contact KC? Maybe an earthquake caused the posture of the #2 dog to looks like this after the non-contact. How come none of the other dogs front legs look like that? Zoomed in on the "non-contact"

I'm not worried whether she's been retired or not. Dogs will always be dogs but I question is when will officials become officials with integrity? I am very worried about the favouritism repeatedly (and blatantly) shown by GRNZ, the RIU & the JCA. Whiterod has moved on & now the focus almost immediately has changed to the south island. Coincidence? I think not!

Humour? I've found a new hobby.

Obviously, things are not all equal. It seems if you're a Cole or a sitting board member, the industry will bend over backwards to cater to your needs. According to the Steward, the #1 dog did not make head or muzzle contact with the #2 dog. 4) SHEZA LOOKER (J & D Fahey, race 11) charged pursuant with Rule 55.1(b) and stood down for 3 months (2nd offence) and required to complete a satisfactory trial. https://www.grnz.co.nz/catch-the-action/13716/stewards-report.aspx Watch Thursdays Stewards report for the magical serious injury to suddenly show up from the dodgy $1.20 failed red-hotter & the charges to be reversed.... Full video replay

Another excerpt from the same finding. 1.7 As events transpired Mr Freeman took Gibbonator to Christchurch to race there on 31 October 2014 but scratched the dog following a further veterinary examination in which it was found the dog was still suffering pain in its right carpus. On this occasion the vet who examined the dog issued a ten day stand-down certificate. On his return from Christchurch Mr Freeman was interviewed about the scratching of Gibbonator from the race meeting at Palmerston North on 29 October. He was cooperative during the interview and admitted he had asked Ms Clark to backdate the scratching saying he was disappointed and embarrassed by his actions which he explained as having “pushed his luck”.

That's not what the JCA said about your father Courtney. http://www.jca.org.nz/non-race-day-hearings/non-raceday-inquiry-riu-v-pb-freeman-decision-dated-8-january-2015 3.3 In assessing penalty in this case the starting point in our view is the nature of the culpability involved in the charge. Despite the submission that Mr Freeman’s actions “… could be perceived to be dishonest”, and the reservation implicit in that concession, we are quite clear that the backdating of the scratching was suggested to Ms Clark by Mr Freeman, and carried into effect by her, for a dishonest purpose. That was to preserve the opportunity for Gibbonator to run at the Christchurch meeting on 31 October 2014, an opportunity which, Mr Freeman clearly recognised was likely to be lost once the scratching was notified later than the preceding Friday. Whether Mr Freeman was motivated to act as he did because of the stakes on offer at the Christchurch meeting or not is perhaps a moot point given that Gibbonator had qualified to race in the Galaxy series in any event, as Mr Buchanan has pointed out, but the fact remains that in as much as the backdating of the scratching of Gibbonator preserved its opportunity to run in the Galaxy series it also at the same time preserved its opportunity to win the prize money on offer. We think it unlikely that Mr Freeman would have acted as he did simply to enable Gibbonator to run at the Christchurch meeting without regard to the stake money on offer.

CV? Certificate from Vet?

The same PF that more than likely committed race fixing on Monday? Fusion Cronulla...

Have the synthetic drug addicted sardines been spawning in the river again?

There's heaps of options for Taylor to sing in NZ. http://www.rodeonz.co.nz/rodeo-dates-locations

Bring the teenagers to the track to see Taylor, on a day when the track isn't going to be anywhere near capacity without her there, that would make some sense. But don't invite her there on a day where capacity is already expected without her. If invited, then the teeny boppers will be half the crowd or more, while the punters who have a wallet to take out & use will be no-where to be seen.

Taylor Swift = Country music roots. Country music = Cowboys. Cowboys horse sport of choice = Rodeo. Let Taylor go sing at some rodeo, where she would be a much better fit. It was a stupid choice to invite her to Flemington in the first place. Who would anyone in their right mind want a race course full of teeny boppers hanging out for a selfie over punters? As far as I know, Taylor Swift fans are not funding the industry.

I counted two hocks, race 6 & race 13. Obviously the Stewards knew there was a problem as they've noted this in their report. "The track was inspected throughout the meeting." https://www.grnz.co.nz/catch-the-action/13696/stewards-report.aspx Obviously the Stewards didn't have the balls to do anything the problems, other than print some words in their report. The warnings were there in the pre-race trials. "BIGTIME BLUE was found to have injured the left calf muscle during a pre race trial with a 14 day stand down imposed." Welfare is paramount, unless it's inconvenient....

Then obviously you must be some kind of Bredon Cole look-a-like. lol You'd be surprised how a gold necklace & cowboy hat can ensures favouritism.

Addington seems to be in general the only track to have syringes for taking blood swabs. You see blood tests coming from there rather regularly. Any other track & it's quite rare. 3 weeks ago... https://www.grnz.co.nz/catch-the-action/13674/stewards-report.aspx I reckon any time a dog is called for a swab & it fails to provide a sample, or there's a question as to who came into contact with the dog after a race, then the answer to those instances should be an immediate blood swab. We've all seen the "failed to void" pop up every now & then, so why does it end there? Blood and/or hair are other options! Happy owner/connections after the big race already know how to avoid the normal swab procedure by making excessive contact with there charge at the podium. It's been documented more than once.

I suggest the TAB will only give free bets to those who are ultimately going to give it back anyways. Counterproductive any other way. I put a $20 note into a pokie last weekend while waiting for my pizza order to be cooked. I got free spins a couple of times (rather lazy ones) but ended up getting to machine up to $40. I hit the collect button & 20 x $2 coins popped out. By the look on the faces of others in the room, I thought I had done something wrong! Anyways, the pizza order was paid for from winnings & I've still got a $20 note for next time I'm hungry. ?

Codeine, Meth, Synthetic Opioids - All class 1 drugs according to GRNZ rules. Want a comparison - Live baiting = Live or dead animal. Under the current model, the RIU & the JCA are nothing more than enablers to the cheats. They both severely lack integrity. [15] Greyhound Racing New Zealand has prescribed starting points for breaches of the Prohibited Substance Rule according to the category of the particular prohibited substance. In the present case, the prohibited substance, Codeine, is in Category 1 (“Substances that have the ability to negatively impact the performance of a greyhound”). The starting point for a Category 1 prohibited substance is disqualification for 10 years. The Informant did not seek a disqualification. Why not? So what? The prescribed recommended penalty has been previously set down by the GRNZ board, which funnily enough one of the respondents to the charge is a member of. [23] The Committee does not believe that the Penalty Guide starting point of 10 years disqualification is an appropriate starting point in this case. Compelling mitigating factors are the Respondents’ frank admission of the breach, their conduct during the course of the investigation, their previous excellent record and the very low degree of negligence, if any. The Informant did not challenge the integrity of the Respondents as greyhound trainers. The penalty guide makes no mention of a fine. If compelling mitigating factor were found, then a heavy reduction in the length of disqualification could have been awarded. Possibly a 80% reduction to 2 years? Why didn't the RIU challenge? The respondents produced a dog with a class 1 substance on a race day. That's exactly the same thing that happened in the Schofield case. Another RIU/JCA Farce....

Why wasn't the handler named? All three on the Schofield property were named.... "Who" not "What", as predicted...

This would prove to be a more honest statement. At the time of OPAWA HILARY’s positive swab we were aware that Codeine was a drug that could be used for altering the race performance of a greyhound. As public trainers we are now fully aware that altering the performance of a greyhound with the use of Codeine holds little penalty. A class one drug here people... https://www.grnz.co.nz/Files/Documents/Prohibited substances - starting points2.pdf