the galah

Your getting a bit tiresome. I couldn't care less if you know my real identity,but clearly you don't. Keep guessing. I'll tell you when your right.Right area ,wrong details. When do you think you will wake up and realise that defending the actions of someone who seeks to gain an advantage over others by operating outside the rules,is a reflection on you. Perhaps if Mcgrath had people around him who said do everything by the book then he would not be where he is today.I'm tired of listening to apologists for actions of people who seek to gain an illegal advantage.Yours is "its o.k. for us to do it,but not anyone else". I'm consistent,your not in my opinion. Is this really about Mcgrath,or is he just the unfortunate person who is dealing with all the crap thats goes with being caught? He was found guilty to attempting. Its not alleged. He said it was to be air support to be drenched in the horses mouth,the jca said they found that was most likely a lie,but couldn't completely rule out his explanation it was to be air support. They didn't believe Burrows when he said his initial statement was inaccurate because he was effected by cannabis and alcohol.Read the jca report if you still think it was alleged.

Cole now seems to be supplying big numbers to the Waikato meetings.You would have thought that the locals would be getting preference. Still thats me done for betting on the waikato dogs. I may not be a big better,but looking at your pools you can't afford to lose punters like myself.Hell when i put my bets on ive noticed i can often half a dividend if your betting with the tote with 3 minutes to go anyway.. I hope he doesn't come to auckland,but hopefully punters show some principals if he does.

No i would not have complained had Mckendry let the horse go and been swamped late in the piece.That is what i have been saying he should have done. As i have referred to earlier,that is exactly the way he has been driven previously. No one complained then.The horse came out and won its next start.To say punters would be screaming that would have been a shit drive, is a bit of an insult to the intelligence of the normal punter,just as the stipes report for. that race is. I agree that letting it go may encourage it to pull in future races,although in my opinion with the benefit of hindsight connections just had the horse too fresh in his first run for a while.I also think strangling a horse to the point where it is choking down would be more detrimental and more likely to run the risk of injury.Even the best get it wrong occasionally,but Mckendry may still think he did the right thing. Still thats what we do on these forums,discuss opinions about all things racing.

I agree,it must have put enormous pressure on a lot of individuals,mentally and financially. I agree those levels of pressure in some instances are out of proportion. But thats life. It isn't always fair. Not a good answer,but a reality one. Besides it wasn't pressure that led to Mcgrath pre race drenching. Thats his fault. On the contrary,you would think someone in that position would have a better handle on the need to be more cautious.Just stay within the rules.

Hard not to have conflicted thoughts about this case. On one hand the RIU have shown they are capable of enforcing the rules. That is there job. In past years it appeared the RIU's modus operandi was simply to pay lip service to those calling for action against those who were breaking the rules,and to those calling for a level playing field. Well this case,along with other recent RIU action,should reassure everyone that the RIU takes the job of maintaining integrity seriously. So well done to them. On the other hand you have Mr Mcgrath, who clearly is a very likeable,hard working and talented horse trainer. Meet him outside harness racing and you would respect his character. But clearly when it comes to the methods he uses to get the optimum performance from his horses,he has shown that he has operated outside the rules which are in place to maintain integrity. The penalty he has been given seems harsh,but personally i think deciding what the appropriate penalty was would have been a very difficult decision. Mcgrath will get a lot of sympathy from many,partly because some could see themselves in the same predicament if the spotlight was shone on them to the level it was on Mcgrath. I predicted not long after the INCA cases first came to light that many of the most vocal who turned the whole integrity thing into a them and us battle,making everything about personalities,would ultimately play a part in the downfall of some of those they supported. I think Mcgrath,unfortunately for him,is an example of that.

I appreciate what you say,just don't agree that anyone was at risk. Horses choke down because they are restrained so hard they can't get enough air. I can understand ones that may be locked up,but have never been able to understand why any driver would restrain a horse in the open to such a degree as to make it choke and fall. It has happened many times,you always see it coming and if they are in the open then thats not the horses fault,its man/woman made. You are probably right,possibly the way they geared him up contributed to him hit the footrests. You are looking at it from a horsemans point if view,fair enough,but you don't take into account that this was a race with betting on. This isn't the first time Copy That has done this.Look at its 5th race day start. No safety issues that day because it was driven differently. No one was expecting Mckendry to knock the horse around when it got tired. As i've said this horse is a repeat offender. Why was their no stipes action? Are they not concerned about safety??? Thats the point i was making when i described the stipes report as a joke. They apparently accepted what mckendry said about the horse racing in an unsafe mannner,yet they did absolutely nothing.

If hitting the footrests is a reason for pulling a horse up,then why dose no one else do it? It seems to be the go to excuse by drivers who have been questioned as to there aggressive drives. None of them have pulled a horse up and it is used as an excuse for letting them run? They keep trying.As you say,we will agree to disagree.

I've always believed the harder you hang on to a horse that is pulling,the more likely you are to hit the footrests if its already dong so. In a situation where a horse is pulling hard,isn't the gear most likely to move forward bringing the cart closer to the horse. Thats the way i believe it works. I know thats how it worked with an extremely big horse i used to have that used to do it all the time because they did'nt make carts ,hopples and other gear big enough for him. I know a horse hitting the footrests will panic a bit and get keen,but Mckendry was in the clear outside the leader so in my opinion simply chose to look after the horse because he didn't want the horse having a hard run first up. If it was a trial then fair enough,but this was a race where punters had there money on. Aren't they entitled to a run for there money?Personally i think it a poor look.

The stipes report says this horse appeared to choke down because driver,m mckendry, restrained it hard and it began to hit the footrests,which made it pull more.. Now if a horse is pulling hard and hitting the footrests because of that,why would you restrain it more if that is making the matter worse?.That explanation seems a total contradiction. Also why would you hang onto a horse if you think it is beginning to choke down? To me that stipes report is a bit of a joke. Either they should have stood the horse down for terrible manners,or they should have opened an inquiry into why a driver can pull a hot favorite out of a race because he doesn't want to give it a hard run,because it had pulled too hard fresh up. Since they didn't,will we see others pull their horses up halfway through a race because it suits the connections. In my opinion this would only happen in the north island,as the stipes up there really don't care what the punters think or see. And no,i didn't back copy that.

Your right there happy,wide out in the last 100m would be a very lumpy drive,but few would get that wide.. Rest of the track very wide. Thats true as well,but part of the reason for that is the grandstand is so poorly positioned and the horses don't even come into the birdcage pre race I'm sure if a pre christmas grass track meeting was held at timaru with the same promoting geraldine got,they would get a big crowd.People like to be close to the action which is why grass tracks are more appealing to the public than tacks inside tracks.

To me i think its always made the most sense for geraldine to race at timaru on the grass there. Its just i don't think those that run the timaru track would want a grass harness meeting,as they don't even let the harness go in the birdcage pre race there.Timaru people make up the bulk of the geraldine crowd in november.Thats my opinion

I should have said actual changes,not proposed,as we now know for sure. Personally i think they needed to retain harness racing in the regions. As to which courses,for example keeping Timaru ahead of geraldine and waimate makes perfect sense to me given timaru was to remain open for the gallops,whereas geraldine and waimate were twice and once a year clubs with no local gallops.And of course the populations of the cities should be a factor in my opinion,for example dunedin.

So HRNZ wanted Timaru and forbury gone and did not support them getting any dates. Interesting that Hrnz had chosen Oamaru ahead of Timaru and Forbury. One press release says timaru has 4 dates and the other says 3? Don't know why. Timaru does still have the gallops,so makes sense to see them get some harness dates. I think the proposed changes are for the best,so good to see the changes.

I think all races clubs programme must get approval from HRNZ. It is good to see clubs thinking outside the square.Who knows,programming races from areas where there is no local racing may become more popular in the future so as to encourage continued participation.

I believe happy would be referring to hrnz giving approval for the programming of such an event.

Personally this is the type of field i prefer to spend more on and do. Punters are about backing a winner,doesn't matter whether it is the nz cup or the above race.The above field has plenty of disclosed form to base a decision on. Give me one of these races any day over say that 2yo trot last week at addington where only 2 trotted,or that 4 horse high class race at auckland last week,or one of those 7 horse sires stakes races dominated by the all stars that you see so often. Who bets on those type of races?

It does seem strange that gallops keep racing at gore and timaru,yet the harness code at this stage has stopped racing there. By harness removing racing it surely must undermine the ability of those galloping clubs to be able to maintain their facilities at the current level. Someone was telling me today that Forbury was likely to take legal action around retaining harness racing. Don't know how true that is but can hrnz afford to be fighting legal battles on several fronts?Harness clubs fighting HRNZ through the courts must weaken both sides financially.

Just finished watching the replays of invercargill from saturday just gone, and it looked to me that the starter has upped his game and all the mobiles starts were good, with the mobile being driven at the ideal speed, which resulted in only 1 breaker pre start all day,which was in the mobile non win trot. Good to see no one being disadvantaged in the score up. Hope they can keep it up.

Oh dear,my tips for race 12 never looked likely. I actually had backed 9 of the previous 11 winners including one at $15 by backing a couple each race,,but i jinxed it by tipping them. Having said that my bets at addington not very good and kept me on the losing side. I think i may be better to stick to Korean baseball after all.

not as yet,but if it was north korean baseball i would be backing whoever Kim jong un has his money on.

Only on the waikato and auckland ones. Once you get to know them they are quite consistent. I think the key is to back the one you like to win,but take a couple of savers to win,as the first 50m can be alter your chances if your 1st selection gets a bump. Profits may not be as big ,but if you lose they are not much either. For example today in race 12 i would put say $10 to win on 2&6 and $5 to win on 3. One of them should win and should get a profit that way.

I was supposed to put this on the greyhound chat part. Still, anyone who may be thinking about using the greyhound website should know it is the norm to have injured dogs left in the fields. There even has been dogs on the ballots missing starts sometimes because dogs stood down with injuries 4 days earlier are not scratched until the day. The lights are on,but no one is home.

Here we go again. About 1 hr 45m from the start of the first race and the official nz greyhound website still has dogs in the fields that were injured and scratched 4 days ago. In fact it appears all ballots are running today as well. This website truly is very amateurish.The only reason i refer to this very poorly maintained website is because the TAB websites "a" and 'o' look the same and i often end up miss spelling the names. They talk about wanting punters,but really the official greyhound website just makes punters waste their time .They often don't even have video replays of a days racing if you've missed a race until a couple of days later.

Just heard the trackside presenter say domestic action takes precedence as she crosses over to invercargill with 59 seconds to go. Commentator gets to mention 1 horse before they go up to the mobile.

Back to normal poor coverage again with the 2 minute lead in to the invercargill race 6. The aussie jumps race obviously takes precedence.