curious

Still doing a bloody good job too from what I saw, especially when he gets the field 2 minutes pre-race and still has all the unfamiliar colours and names nailed! A few here could take notice.

Spurious question? I don't think motor sport has any animal welfare public perception issues.

Lol. Hope they weren't my colours! I have enough trouble keeping track of them. To be fair though I've seen lesser crowds on premier days at Ellerslie and that's with a $10 gate charge which is more than most race meetings command these days. Tucker looks better too. vlc-record-2024-12-20-05h16m19s-Rural New Zealand - S02 E02_2024 12 20_05 07 10_1_245.mp4-.mp4

No, but I might have a couple of rides lined up. Should win the first (without a whip!)

Still am and still trying to make it a better sport for both horses and human participants.

Yes. I agree but after 150 years, I doubt it's under any great threat.

A Finder survey of 1,008 respondents revealed 1 in 3 Australians (33%) – equivalent to almost 7 million people – have gambled on sporting events. The research found 1 in 7 (15%) gamble on sporting events at least once a week, 7% place a bet monthly, and 12% do so once in a while. Finder analysis reveals the average Aussie gambler spends a staggering $15,269 a year on sports betting – equating to almost $98 billion annually. Of those who gamble, 61% have put money on the Melbourne Cup – with the average punter predicted to fork out $85 on the race that stops the nation. If 33% of the population gamble on sporting events and 61% of those bet on the Melbourne Cup, that's 20% of the population by my calculations but feel free to keep making up figures to support your radical opinion.

Where on earth did you get that figure from?

Anyone hear what the jockeys thought of it?

Haha. Sharrock should probably have read the legislative net bill before he summarised it as he did.

I didn't say that no-one supported whip use or racing that includes whip use, but by way of perspective and reality 97,000 is about 0.4% of the population of Australia. What do the other 99.6% think. If you want to use biased data to support your fallacious argument, then good luck to you. I'll stick with mine.

https://www.facebook.com/reel/568323512653211

From their facebook page on Monday.

Nope. More subjective observation. Pretty sure the ones I had to step over trying to get to the rail to watch a race didn't see many races though. I doubt they would have been in a fit state to fill out a formal survey.

Because I love horses and the people involved with them, and want to not only do the best for them but what I can to preserve the game that both the horses and the humans involved also love. Ignoring human and animal welfare issues and the public acceptance of those will mean it won't survive here in the longer term. Did you listen to the interview with Mr Engelbrecht-Bresges the other day? He and those in other jurisdictions get it. NZ authorities don't yet, and by the time they do it may be too late.

A lot of them probably didn't watch a race or have a bet either. They were there for an event, not the horse racing.

McGreevy, P. D., Griffiths, M. D., Ascione, F. R., & Wilson, B. (2018). Flogging tired horses: Who wants whipping and who would walk away if whipping horses were withheld?. PloS one, 13(2), e0192843.

An earlier study in Australia found similar results. Of the 1,533 respondents from across the country, only 25% (113 women and 271 men) supported the whipping of racehorses.

Many of those aren't interested anyway. And did you miss this bit? 74% say it has, or will, impact their engagement with the sport. That's about the same level of public perception that got greyhounds shut down.

They also say they don't think there is a problem with the public perception. I wonder if they've bothered to do any surveys. Wouldn't that be a reasonable task for the new welfare department? This is from the latest British (BHA) one: The latest polling report shows: 39% of adults state that concerns about horse welfare discourage them from engaging with racing. The biggest welfare concerns are (in order of impact) deaths and injuries, perception of cruelty/use of the whip, and what happens to horses when they finish racing. of these: 74% say it has, or will, impact their engagement with the sport. 42% say they have either stopped engaging with racing or will stop in the future. This is not just a barrier to our future audiences, but our existing one as well. When asked what would improve their opinion, the public response cited limiting use of the whip (35%) and ensuring strong penalties are in place (35%) as the top two requirements. The most negative perceptions of the whip come from younger audiences, particularly those aged 18-34.

Do you mean with hands returned to reins between strikes?

As I've said, it should be hands on reins between strikes. Not only stop the cheating but also significantly improve the public perception.

I don't think there's any issues with NZTR. That is a good relationship as far as I know. They certainly give them plenty of trial dates. Also, I think they can apply for a one day licence which they originally said would probably be available once everything was up to snuff. But, they probably make more money today than they would from an industry day.

https://www.miragenews.com/austrac-takes-ladbrokes-and-neds-operator-entain-1379104/#google_vignette AUSTRAC Takes Ladbrokes And Neds' Operator - Entain Today, AUSTRAC commenced civil penalty proceedings in the Federal Court against Entain Group Pty Ltd (Entain), which operates online betting sites including Ladbrokes, Neds and other online betting brands. The proceedings allege serious and systemic non-compliance with Australia's anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing (AML/CTF) laws. AUSTRAC CEO Brendan Thomas said the agency considers there were systemic failures in Entain's approach to its AML/CTF obligations. "AUSTRAC's proceedings allege that Entain did not develop and maintain a compliant anti-money laundering program and failed to identify and assess the risks it faced. We are alleging this left the company at serious risk of criminal exploitation. "Money laundering is often a symptom of serious criminal activity, including fraud, scams and corruption, all of which have equally serious effects on our communities," he said. AUSTRAC's allegations include that: Entain's board and senior management did not have appropriate oversight of its AML/CTF program, which limited its ability to identify the ML/TF risks it faced and its vulnerability to criminal exploitation. Entain operated a 24/7 business through its website and app, which created risks that persons unknown to Entain could access and use Entain's betting platform including through third party providers. Third parties, including businesses and individuals, accepted cash and other deposits on behalf of Entain to be credited into betting accounts in ways that could obscure the proceeds of crime. Cash is less transparent than other forms of money and is at higher risk of being the proceeds of crime. Entain did not have appropriate controls to confirm the identity of customers making these deposits and the source of this money. Entain did not conduct appropriate checks on 17 higher risk customers, including examples where Entain did not appropriately deal with the risk that its online betting sites were being exploited by criminals to spend the proceeds of serious crime. This includes allegations that Entain deliberately obscured the identity of some high risk customers, on its own systems, through the use of pseudonyms to "protect their privacy". "This is the first time AUSTRAC has brought civil penalty proceedings against businesses operating in the online betting sector, and the Australian arm of Entain is part of one of the world's largest sports betting and gaming groups," Mr Thomas said. "The online betting sector, and all other businesses regulated by AUSTRAC, must take their AML/CTF obligations seriously. This includes ensuring they have appropriate procedures to know who their customer is, even when they rely on third parties to process transactions." The action taken today is part of AUSTRAC's ongoing work focussed on gambling businesses in Australia to fight money laundering opportunities in the gambling industry. Following the Federal Court ordering Crown pay $450million in penalties over 2 years in 2023, this year AUSTRAC has seen the Federal Court order SkyCity to pay $63M penalty for breaches to the AML/CTF Act, accept an enforceable undertaking from Sportsbet, continue the Federal Court case against Star and we are continuing our regulatory focus on a number of other gambling entities across Australia. Additionally, the launch of the money laundering National Risk Assessment this year highlighted the highly exposed nature and vulnerability to money laundering online betting agencies face. This valuable resource has been developed support business better understand and develop appropriate measures to mitigate their risks.