Reefton

Dunno about listed status for the Reefton Cup The Reefton President is listed with the RIB - black effing listed!

Its an interesting one really Our cancellation would probably have put us out of business but for NZTR's recognition that there was no track issue and subsequent full payment of our meeting fees. Frustrating thing about that of course is that clearly NZTR knows, the likes of Michael Pitman David Walsh Jim Walker Mouse McCann and Max Skelton know but the RIB, clearly knowing not one thing about racing, continue to insist they were right. There is none so blind as he who will not see. It isn't like Clement in his days with the NZ police force where they could pick the evidence to suit their argument or they could withhold evidence that might be useful to the defence. The facts of this case are there as plain as day to everyone and yet this guy continues to blindly argue that Oatham is right and we are wrong while the Minister washes his hands of the matter. I don't think even Monty Python would come up with a sketch as silly as that We generally manage a profit simply because of volunteer work, a desirable time of year to race. the novelty of being a one day Club and the only Thoroughbred race meeting in the province (and the Northern South Island for that matter). And we keep our raceday process as simple as possible - contract out the bars and the catering and keep our staffing to the minimum. Oh and the generous sponsorship/donations of our many long term race name supporters. But as I constantly say - the thing we will go broke on is enthusiasm not financially(unless Oatham strikes again!). And that, after many months smashing my head against a brick wall, is where I now find myself. No more enthusiasm, no more motivation and a rapidly waning interest(might have watched on e race a week this winter unless I am in the local on Friday night and then I won't bet unless someone wants to take easybets or something in a group). Its a great game this full of great people and great characters but gee it is being ridden into the ground and that's pretty bloody depressing

Worrying about the cost has never been a concern of the TAB Mike(or any of the hierarchy in this game) Don't know how many times I have told them when programming the Coast January meetings that it is logical to have us(Reefton) first since they will have all the machines etc there from the trotting meeting the week before. But no they have one of the other ones first so that they have to cart the gear away from Reefton then cart it back The industry pays the bills so nobody worries about the cost savings to be achieved with a tiny bit of thought Similar with the starting gates - Try to impress upon these dates chappies that there is a saving if Reefton is either first or last(the gates are stored at Reefton). But no they love to jam us in the middle so we have to truck them to Grey then back to us then down to Kumara then back home again. Nobody gives a stuff about logic and cost saving(admittedly they have ordered it properly in the 2023/24 season) Just like the way they are happy to have commentators flitting here there and everywhere when it suits them

John Oatham needs to act? Be careful what you wish for

As I said in the Reefton 5 January post the Minister has come back again when I had another whinge and said (essentially) 'no sorry I cannot help on this as I have no authority over the RIB. All I can do is appoint members to the Board and they have to do the investigating if warranted' And since like every other publicly funded organisation the staff at the RIB will be on this 'governance and management distinction' bandwagon the reality is that this Mike Clements has total control over that side of NZ racing. So given his blatant disregard of the rules of racing and his clear lack of knowledge of the way racing works are we not in a perilous situation here? We bagged Purcell, Saundry and Sharrock but at least they all had some background in racing and clearly an interest in the game. This guy not only has no background he also has no regard for the rules, the reality or the stakeholders. He also has a Chair of his Board with(to my knowledge) no history whatsoever in the racing game. No wonder the game is f#*ked

Well it was sort of skiffy rain early then a bit of drizzle 45 minutes before. Certainly not steady rain(well not what we call steady rain - more a drizzle). Even then when Oatham marched out with a probe thing to check the track one of my life members wanted to go out and stick it somewhere unnatural. But the track was set up to handle the moisture because it had been heavily watered. There was nothing bloody wrong with the track. Moseley said so twice including three times in succession after he won the first(to Davidson to Walsh and to me) By the time it was abandoned the sun was coming out and it was stinking hot again. Reefton can get frigging hot in the summer(And bloody cold in winter)

Yes there would have been. There were probably 30 horses staying on the course(including all of Pitty's and John Blackadders) so bound to have been. As I said we had put tonnes of water on because we had had 6 days of 30plus degree temperatures and we knew the forecast was for rain on the day. We had the irrigation going within half an hour of the end of the trots and it didn't stop for four days.

The arrogance of thinking that you are the be all and end all in NZ Racing and simply can do whatsoever you wish without consequence Sort of like deciding that you are going to abandon a raceday then once a race is run declare, with no evidence whatsoever, that the track is unsafe.

He replied all right but just in a resigned fashion - essentially 'well the offer(of a meeting) is there and it is your call whether you take advantage of it' What would be the point of a meeting if this guy will not face the truth. It is pretty obvious he himself knows this was a debacle but he is obliged to back up his man. By admitting a mistake he is basically saying Oatham is a prick and made a mess of this thing. Hardly a way to heighten staff morale? Clement does appear to be the meat in the sandwich here(though given his salary that goes with the job) but at the end of the day he has a trail of debacles that the RIB have been at the heart of and he should be taking steps to stop this sort of thing happening. Look at the Riccarton thing - how many horses 'blundered' at the start on the first two days????? Yet not a mention of an inspection of the start points or any oversight of the track preparation prior to the Saturday? And on one of NZ racing's biggest days of the year? It defies belief Maybe it is a lack of specialist knowledge of racing issues that is Clement's problem but if you are in the job you have a responsibility to get yourself up to speed. AND he needs to remember that so often their actions are recorded on TV and monitored by people who really do know the industry. It isn't like his copper days when most of the work goes on behind the scenes - fart at the wrong time in the RIB job and everyone knows about it!

That is when I bollocked him about essentially wasting my time. ie what is the point of a meeting if you will not accept that your organisation is in the wrong this is the email 'Hi Mike I find it highly extraordinary and unsatisfactory that you, as someone who clearly has a bias in all this and who has been the subject of a serious complaint about their clear (and undeniable) breach of the rules of racing, continues to deal with it. Given your Chairperson is a KC I would have thought she would have an appreciation of the concept of independence. Clearly this Brian Dickie has been badly misinformed by parties with a vested interest in protecting their own butts and that will be exposed in my forthcoming letter. Common sense would dictate that anyone doing a review of what went on seeks outside evidence to assess the accuracy of the information they have received and the appropriateness of the actions taken by those under examination. I am not surprised no name was affixed to the review - I would highly embarrassed to produce that effort myself. You are making an utter fool of yourself and your organisation by continuing this charade in trying to protect Oatham. You fail to appreciate that there were several highly qualified former riders(Walsh, Skelton, McCann, Walker and others) and highly successful Trainers(Pitman, Rae, Parsons) on course that day and yet not one of them was consulted by this Dickie person? This is not like a Police investigation where the events need to be examined for evidence - half the South Island racing fraternity and several North Island as well - were in attendance and they know what they saw. By continuing to deny the facts and indeed at times manufacturing evidence - 'other horses slipped' and 'Moseley did not breach the careless riding rules' for instance - not to mention this claim that Moseley did not tell Mark Davidson that track was Ok immediately after the race - you are seriously bringing your organisation into disrepute. This evidence is there for all to see in the race video and the stewards report of the day. It is irrefutable and of course I was personally in attendance when the desperate and unsuccessful search was going on for this slip mark. At the time I had no idea of the fact that there was a breach of riding standards that had taken place and hence my comments to Oatham on return to the birdcage still not knowing the truth. One might also enquire why Club representatives and the likes of Michael Pitman and, particularly, David Walsh were not advised of and invited to the track inspection - I had to invite myself when I saw them heading down the straight. Jeff McLaughlin our CEO is a former Stipe himself with vastly more experience of West Coast Racing and tracks than has John Oatham - why was he not advised? I am happy to make all of this public if the RIB does not want to face up to its shortcomings in this unfortunate affair(and that covers all three days of that West Coast Circuit I might add) but will probably elect, at this stage, to approach the Ombudsman given the disinclination of the RIB to engage on this. Not that the Club or I have particularly much faith in the Office of the Ombudsman on this - in this day and age the RIB will, I know, squeal 'Health and Safety' and the conclusion will be a forgone one(despite there being no evidence whatsoever of Health and Safety issues). I am aware of NZTR's concerns at the RIB behaviour on the day as well and of course they paid us our full race day payments despite threats to Clubs producing substandard racing surfaces in the month's prior. The facts are these: 1) Oatham tried to stop each of the three West Coast meetings in that five day period. 2) Moseley clearly breached the rules of racing with aggressive tactics between the 400 and 250m marks of that race one at our meeting and this breach went unmentioned let alone punished. 3) Moseley clearly indicated his approval of the track to Stipendiary Steward Mark Davidson, jockey mentor David Walsh and myself immediately after weighing in from race one on January 5th. If you wish to dispute that lets have Mark Davidson put his hand on the Bible and deny it(because I am happy to do the same to confirm it). 4) No slip or skid mark was able to be found on the bend into the straight that day because none existed. I am happy to summon multiple witnesses to attest to that. 5) There is no video evidence to substantiate the 'other horses slipping' claim from the RIB letter of 11 January and indeed no mention of more than one horse slipping nor of the particular horse(Madison Rose) slipping more than once. In dispute is that the riders were 'consulted' on the abandonment. One senior rider told me directly and another implied they were simply told that the meeting was abandoned. Comment has also been made about the number of times riders were called to the Judicial room prior to the start of racing in what would appear a clear attempt to intimidate particularly younger riders about the state of the track. Just because there is a shower of rain does not automatically make a track slippery and our track people were VERY careful to prepare that track to take the forecast rain. I see little point in you coming to the West Coast to meet me given your reluctance to accept the irrefutable facts of the day. Apart from anything else you would need to set aside a full day to do so given the distance involved and the potential road conditions on mountain passes at this time of year. if however you do wish to come over I suggest that a meeting with all the West Coast clubs is in order so that Oatham's behaviour over that five day period can be discussed. I also believe that, as a minimum, David Walsh and Michael Pitman be invited to attend via zoom along of course with our CEO. The alternative is that you 'swallow a dead rat' and officially recognise what everyone else knows and extend a public apology to the Club and stakeholders for the unfortunate events of the day and promise to take steps to ensure that this sort of RIB instigated debacle does not happen again. It does you and your organisation no credit to continue to defend the indefensible and you might wish to contemplate the saying 'When you are in a hole stop digging'. It may be unpalatable but there is no shame in admitting a mistake. I look forward to your advice regards Brian Molloy President RJC'

Oh sorry no there was no letter wot the review - just an email saying here is the review I then sent two further letters to her just asking (1) who did the review, which(if any, outside parties were consulted and what the terms of reference were and (2) what the review cost(they declined to answer the second response is pretty irrelevant but the first is as follows(it was actually an email not a letter) Good morning Brian The Chair of the RIB Board has referred this request dated 2 July 2023 to me for a response which follows. Abandonment of Reefton race meeting While the RIB is not subject to the Official Information Act 1982 as suggested in your letter, below are the answers to the questions you raise, namely: The author of the external review is barrister Brian Dickey. No one outside of the RIB was approached for comment as it was a review focused on the manner in which the Steward’s applied the rules, policy and protocols of NZTR. Noting that this matter has been proceeding for some time and in the interests of looking towards the future, I would like to suggest we meet to have a discussion, with whomever else you consider it appropriate to meet with. I will be in Canterbury for an unrelated purpose on Friday the 21st of July and I could travel earlier with a view to driving to Greymouth to meet with you on Thursday the 20th if you consider this a worthwhile option. Regards Mike Mike Clement Chief Executive Racing Integrity Board m: +64 21 846 569 e: mike.clement@rib.org.nz

Mind you she might be in the click with Dickey as well. When you read that thing a couple of weeks back about Justice Bill Wilson and the carry on over his association with that Allan Galbraith(it involved Rich Hill Stud) it is pretty clear they all inhabit the same cesspool these KC's and barristers(even judges). She is currently prosecuting that White Island case for Worksafe so works as a prosecutor for the Crown as well.

Shit no All letters come from Clement. She just hands anything on to him even when it stated clearly that he had committed a serious breach of the rules of racing(with obvious and irrefutable proof). I am not quite sure what her idea of independence is but it seems you could accuse him of being an axe murderer and she would pass it to him to handle.

Nobody was even told it was going on. It was only chance I was out and about and noticed them walking down the track. Jumped the fence and ran after them. Jeff McLaughlin didn't know nor anyone else. Presumably not David Wash either. Plenty of trainers looked at it afterwards and of course anyone with the slightest experience of racing could see the real reason for the horse losing its footing The guy had a fixation with closing all three Coast meetings down. I think he was lucky someone at Kumara didn't hang one on him he annoyed them so much the day before. Mind you one of my Life Members wanted to flatten him too. Abused the shit out of him but by then it was too late. He saw his chance at Reefton and seized it

The topic of photographic evidence did come up on the day. Not sure who from but given the NZTR decrees from the months immediately before(a la Awapuni and Riccarton) it was mentioned as being of importance to get and provide photo's of track issues. I will guarantee you had they found anything the camera would have been out quick smart. I was shell shocked with what was going on and not quick enough off the mark that day(probably any other day for that matter) AND as I said Chapman Fenwick Oatham and Garry Foskett had all inspected that track in the month or so before. Other than Garry(who was there to help put the new rail, up) I wasn't there but he was glowing in his praise for its presentation and none of the others complained.

Hmmmmmmmm.......... So one of NZ's ex top cops calls in one of NZ's ex top prosecutors to do a 'review' of the conduct of his new employing organisation I wonder if they regularly worked together in their former roles?? I wonder if they enjoy friendly relations?? Hmmmmmm.......

They could not produce hard evidence if they wanted to as none existed. Re David Walsh I am not sure he was invited in when they spoke to the riders either before or after the first race. Given his vast knowledge you might have expected him to be invited out for the track inspection??? After all he has not hesitated in the past to be critical of or course(he was not this time I might add)

Hell Curious thanks for your diligence! My problem is I have a business to run and racing doesn't put food on the table or pay my mortgage(not that there is to much of a mortgage anymore). I tend to brush over things and not pick up the minor technicalities. That review of course is long and tedious and I need to concentrate properly but time is the issue. As it goes on and on they wear me down since of course my enthusiasm level for the industry is lower and lower by the day. Can I be bothered going through it paragraph by paragraph and refuting it bit by bit? Good question

Put it this way - I do not believe either of them would tell lies - why, in this case, would they? Therefore I would imagine that neither of them was consulted in this 'review' and that accordingly whatever went on between them is not on the record.

Well he repeated the same thing over and over first to Mark Davidson then to David Walsh then to me. I had already asked him after he and David Walsh walked the track before the races and he said no problem the either. To be fair I think Terry Moseley is a good bloke(not that i know him well) so am not looking to drag him into controversy. Same with Mark Davidson - in my limited dealings always found him to be a decent friendly guy. But the suggestion that what was said between them was not actually said is outrageous. As I stated MIss Hannan was quite desperate to find some evidence of a slip. Whether it was her?

no idea. Didn't see that suggestion or claim

Shifting the post was as much to do with my old mate Judy Lawson being fined for easing up prior to the post than the Gold Dust thing. It was slightly around the corner and Jude stopped riding and got run down for third. It wasn't satisfactory and had to change but didn't cost much. We can't complain about that. There was also a lot of white paint applied to the outside fence after Gold Dust leapt over it and got halfway to Christchurch up the Lewis Pass road.

Yes I've been worn down Shad but they have not heard the last of me and this incident yet I intend to review the 'review' and Messrs Oatham, Dickey and Clement might not necessarily enjoy the read. Funny thing is when you correct them on something they never respond. For instance they never elaborated on me querying the 'multiple slips' and 'inconsistent surface' claims they made. Curious pointed out that Clement has been careful not to say that horse slipped - if it did not slip then what justification have they for saying the track was dangerous? Since that 'review' I have had an email crack(its coming) at Clement and in particular regarding this Dickey bloke denying Moseley told Mark Davidson, David Walsh and I one after another after race 1 that that track was as good as gold. I invited him(Clement), since Mr Dickey says that did not happen, to have Mark Davidson put his hand on the Bible and declare that it did not happen(because I will put my hand on the Bible readily and say it did and I also have a witness who heard it as well). Needless to say Clement did not take up the invitation.

I might add when I asked how much this 'review' cost they refused to divulge

Next chapter This is a 'review' of the RIB actions that day. I received it in response to the previous letter to the Chair and Minister. Astonishingly the Chair had passed it to one of the people(Clement) who had been complained about to deal with. Sort of like the Cops asking the offender to conduct the investigation. Since it was unclear who completed this 'review' I asked and was told a Brian Dickey(or Dickie) a barrister. Notably he did not put his name to it and to my knowledge he did not consult one outside party(not bloody one!). One suspects he talked to Oatham and Clement and dutifully reported what they had to say. I take particular exception to the 'intemperate accusations' statement late in the 'review'. I deal in facts not unsubstantiated observations or claims. Makes me laugh to hear the RIB have acted in a 'professional' manner. They made up facts to justify their position for God's sake. Is that professionalism? Final - Summary of the review of abandonment at Reefton 5 January 2023.pdf