Yankiwi

No disrespect, but this appears to be a guilty until proven innocent post.

Should have added... RIU budget intact!

Harness code blowing out the Police budget.... Greyhound code blowing out the SPCA budget... All over a few $K, a rabbit & a Bichon Frieze. #confess

Didn't hear the show... I can add that it'll be very important to define "ticket" prior to putting anything into the rules. All tracks, track specific, during a trial... We've heard the loopholes before...

Since the property was deregistered & no LP's resided there, might as well use the GRNZ rule book (constitution as well) to wipe ones backside with. It's meaningless under those terms. If Denis would like to, he continue a greyhound breeding programme & sell the pups on TradeMe. He could market them to the homes that want a young greyhound that's never seen a racetrack. That could take a bit of a bite out of GAP's rehoming numbers if he sold the pups for the same price GAP charges to rehome a dog. Competition drives a market...

What I'm saying (or asking) is why has the RIU passed an investigation over to the police which includes drugs (MDMA) for those in the Harness code, yet the didn't pass over an investigation into Methamphetamine? Which drug is worse? Which drug is higher on the police's wanted list? Why the inconsistency? Drugs are against the rules of both codes. The RIU are the same police for both codes.

I find it odd that the RIU investigators don't have bigger problems to be undertaking, then trying to prosecute someone (now more than one) that are not even LP's any longer. I suppose they've given up on the dress code that was such a hot topic a couple of years ago & need something to do... I believe the RIU went way overboard when they came to the conclusion that the source of meth had to be David. What gave them the right to come to that assumption? Meth is everywhere in NZ, whether we like it or not. Remember those TV shows that proved there was a higher concentration on Meth on bank notes than the cut-off point of the contamination levels in homes? The TV reporter didn't implicate David for that! At the end of the day, Denis won a C1 sprint with a dog that had methamphetamine in it's system. How it got there is only speculation, but I find it hard to believe that anyone deliberately drugged the dog to win the $700ish purse. Denis since has basically paid the ultimate price for the crime, hasn't he? However, not settled with that result, the RIU ever since have taken every pot shot then could to continue the saga... If it was integrity the RIU was after, why didn't they hand the swab information over to the police, like they seemed to have over the last year and a half in the recent Harness saga? Why have the two saga's been treated so differently? Smoke & mirrors in the RIU's attempt to show the three codes & the NZRB that their actually doing their job. Sometimes I wish people would actually take the time to look at the big picture, which is one step further than being settled with what the powers fed them.

Yes to both. From the 8th August till the 4th of September is 28 days - The 28 days previous to the race day.....

My last shot at getting you to see the light... ….during the preceding 28 days... What was the first day PRECEDING 5th Sept? Sept 4th was the first day to precede Sept 5th, right? If you can not understand this, don't bother reading any further. The 5th didn't precede itself... The 5th does not count as a preceding day... The count back starts on Sept 4th as in the calendar I had prepared.

I know, different animals & Manukau not Rangiora..... #3 Just A Matthew - Possibly a win but much better chance than 50/50 of placing. If I were still punting, I'd throw my $10 to place on it now & save my other $40 for if/when it drifts to $2.40 or well beyond. Might even get out to $2.80 or $3.00. At $3.00 I'd be borrowing another $50 from the wife..... A bold prediction in a race where three other dogs are equal early favourites at $4.50 & this selection is currently 5th favourite.

Permission shall be granted by Stewards for a Greyhound recording a weight variance of more than one and a half (1.5) kilograms to start in a Race provided that such Greyhound has not performed in any Race during the preceding 28 days, and no fine shall be imposed. 4 Sept is the first day preceding. 3 Sept is the second day preceding. 2 Sept is the third day preceding. ….. 8 Aug is the twenty-eight day preceding. The dog raced in the 28th day preceding..... For the avoidance of doubt, the day of the dog's last start shall be counted as a day for the purposes of the 28 days. 8 Aug counts as a day... The rule doesn't say that the day of the race in question (5 Sept) counts as a day preceding itself... That'd be illogical.

I've read it many times. It clearly states that 8 August (the day of dogs last start) counts as a day & it is the 28th day prior to 5 September. The JCA has previously upheld this.

I shut down grassroots. I did so completely by my choice without any influence from anyone in so-called power.

Through channels, I have passed along this same math lesson on at least two occasions to the top dog Steward of the greyhound code. I also understand that my math lesson has been upheld when put before the JCA. I'll give another reminder, for all of those with interest in the code. My next step will be to discredit the NZRB's Glenda & John, after recent claim that the RIU works, which obviously in this case it doesn't. Class, take your seats. On 5th September a greyhound was down in weight by 2.2kg's. https://www.grnz.co.nz/catch-the-action/13213/stewards-report.aspx Judicial report: HOMEBUSH SATARA in Race 4 was down in weight by 2.2 kilograms and this was intentional. This is in breach of 45.11 of GRNZ rules. 45.11 Where the weight of a Greyhound recorded at a Meeting varies by more than one and a half (1.5) kilograms from the weight recorded in a Race in which it last performed that Greyhound shall be permitted to compete in the current Race but the Trainer of the Greyhound shall be guilty of an Offence unless permission has been granted under Rule 45.12. Now there is written in to the rules an instance where the Steward may choose to wave the charge, if the dog hadn't raced in the 28 days prior. 45.12 Where a Greyhound is presented for a Race and such Greyhound is competing for a Trainer other than the Trainer at its last start the Stewards shall waive any Penalty that would otherwise be imposed for any weight variance. Permission shall be granted by Stewards for a Greyhound recording a weight variance of more than one and a half (1.5) kilograms to start in a Race provided that such Greyhound has not performed in any Race during the preceding 28 days, and no fine shall be imposed. For the avoidance of doubt, the day of the dog's last start shall be counted as a day for the purposes of the 28 days. https://www.grnz.co.nz/greyhounds/profiles.aspx?AnimalID=30411 So, what was the date of 28 days preceding 5 September (the race day)? Here is where the challenges of math seem to become an issue, so I've skipped all the fancy number stuff & put the lesson together in pictures. So yes this dog did race in the preceding 28 days & the trainer should have been charged, yet again. Disclaimer, no dog were killed (that I'm aware of) on a ferry during the preparation of this maths lesson.

Now that were in the day & age of potential employers trawling Facebook (and the like) to vet applicants, wouldn't that make a site like BOAY (or similar) the prefect spot to get a feel for what someone might be really about, underneath the eyeshadow or when a pretty smile isn't being seen on their face? Have people let settle, some of the underlying factors, that might have had a factor in the departure of Liz Whelan?

Don't rule Yankiwi out! Never been in the cart before but I did once give a horse a good scratch on its neck.

Maybe he can or maybe he "carnt" give any proof. Fear Trail's for everyone I say!

On what basis do you claim that there is not enough evidence in the Cole case to charge anyone?

Fair comment. However, the RIU investigated and laid charges against a casual employee (volunteer) in the recent animal welfare case who wasn't an LP.

Why didn't the RIU investigate this? They were the ones to pass it on to the police. The RIU are the ones tasked with doing the policing of the three codes. If the RIU can't investigate race fixing, drugs & live baiting in the greyhound code, what do they do to justify their existence? Checking the colour of saddle cloths, counting whip strikes & checking the colour of handlers socks? Really? At the end of the day, people (trainers/jockeys/drivers/LP's/so on) are going to do what they do. That in itself should be a minor problem. The major problem is the enforcement of the rules has been all but non-existent for far to long & that's what will take the industries down. What has happened, happened. What wasn't done/ignored about what did happen is the major problem. Axe the RIU ASAP. That's the place to start ANY reform to save the three industries.

If you look at the big picture, things might come in to a better focus. Less than a week later than the report was released, first a finding turns up on the JCA website about a greyhound trainers guilt to animal welfare charges. Then today police raids of harness stables. Are these two fact the reason the report only focused on the gallop code? With time, the harness code may be able to overcome this, but by the time it does will there be any tracks to race on? Can a greyhound be taught to herd a standardbred? I hope so, because it might be the only way forward for the two of them.

Skip the questioning Brodie... Just pee in the little wee cup.

If the Racing Inadequacy Unit were doing their job properly, the police wouldn't need to be involved. Hopefully there are detectives at the RIU headquarters!

I didn't say a word. GRNZ did.

https://www.grnz.co.nz/News.aspx?NewsID=2897 Contenders for Nomination based awards are: Love Our Dogs Angela Washington Ashley Bradshaw Fatima Avdic Georgie Milne John McInerney Karen Walsh