Jacob

I think its more so, most have simply given in and either left the industry here or gave up trying to have their voices heard.

clearly showing your ignorance here Chief. Muscle injuries tend to come from shifty surfaces or surfaces where dogs go deep into the track. Auckland has always had an issue with muscle injuries because of both of the above for example.

Interesting when the only other person they ever tried charging in our case was me and this was nearly 4 months after the DQ was in affect already. The RIU/RIB really do struggle with any type of consistency in these rulings

I wouldn't know the reason for this case, but gracillis injuries tend to occur when a dog shifts ground or overstretches. Tracks where dogs go deep into the running surface, or the track has a shifty surface at the top tend to be the main cause. I know the first case has been a problem at Auckland multiple times over the years.

Only took them a decade to try and solve Auckland and Wanganui's injury problem's. Whether Auckland's actually any safer would be a question only the trainers could answer as the stipe reports more often than not wont contain injuries picked up after a meeting in the coming days.

Hate to see a dog hurt itself but that was karma. Sad to see

Felt like race fixing but i guess you cant really blame him if that's how the rules are written. More the fault of whoever drafted the rules up and hes just taking advantage of poorly written rules

What a joke. I see Cole withdrew 3 dogs to get Federal Morgan into the final. How is something like this allowed?

Seems to be a real lack of dogs in this years event. Any reason?

Turnwald wasnt the person who traveled the dogs.

https://i.stuff.co.nz/sport/racing/125132920/mpi-launches-investigations-into-drugging-of-horses-and-greyhound

The problem with greyhound racing compared to the other two codes is you are guilty regardless of the level in the dog. This is my understanding from our own case a few years ago. Science doesnt matter because whether or not you, a staff member or someone in public is responsible for the positive, the onus is on the trainer. What I am surprised about is the new standard the stewards spouted about setting in the case i was involved in were thrown out of the window for this one. This is very dissapointing to say the least. As a side note, all staff and handlers of the dog shoukd have been requested aswell. Not just one member. There is no consistency at all on these investigations and fines

So where were the standards they were supposedly adopting? Why was no one was asked to be drug tested?

I am not going to applaud a kennel that rehomes one or two dogs out of 700. You go through the gap list and every one of there dogs on there was ussually sold prior If you want to stick up for this practice go ahead but I will not. Its inhumane.