Freda

Iffraaj priced below O.P and S.F.....doesn't make sense at all.

Now THAT I will agree with....

just to throw my very small hat in the ring - and do a ThOmmo, tell everybody later - I backed Authentic Paddy for a place. Thought he was good value and so he was.

Actually, Pitty, it isn't all about you. Do you agree with the above points? ...and if so, what - apart from waiting for the M report to be implemented - do you think we should aim to achieve? ...because I heard a whisper that the funding from NZ First has been put on the backburner, not sure the time frame or the reason...but if that is the case, your pet wish [ all weather track here ] may not be the given you think it is. If the oil is right, and the funding is delayed for a significant time, we will then be getting towards an election and Winston's mandate for change will be looking a bit shaky.....and this means that, as an industry, we need to DO something other than wring our hands. If Saundry, Jackson. Hughes and Allen keep on keeping on, we're right up the creek.

It's all very well for you to wave a red flag...but bear in mind that there has to be a POINT to a strike. A specific rule or law that needs to be highlighted and challenged. In Queensland, stakeholders rallied together and presented a united front about the state government's application of their funding - POC tax I think it was. One issue that was been highlighted, reversed and extra money applied to ease their situation. There are SO MANY issues here, that striking [ IMO ] would just be a waste of time. The Fair Tax protests were well done and about a particular issue, and, with the help of a sympathetic Minister, sorted. But we promptly wasted the fruits of that gain to be back in the same position. What do we strike about? Funding is directly the function of the NZRB...so which - of the many - of their operations do we strike about? Get rid of them all, you may say. But that requires legislation and a complete re-hash of their function. Isn't that where we are now? ....and nothing has happened - yet -despite all the rhetoric from the same Minister.... and still the CEO tours around spinning the same B/S that we are supposed to swallow. NZTR - where to start ? date structure, handicapping, programming, 'tiered' racing/high top end stakes, track maintenance, integrity, apprentice training, horse welfare, allocation of turnover money on a club-by-club basis, lack of incentives, everywhere..the costs at office level, registrations/ownership changes, owners' privileges [ lack of ]......which bit would you like us to strike about again? And....just consider the position of a strong-minded trainer or trainers who decide to boycott a trials or racemeeting or in some other way disturb the heirarchy to make a point....round the corner will be a non-involved trainer who will leap upon the annoyed owners who have missed a race or races and there goes a client.

You are absolutely bang on.

Agree...but nothing I can do. And before you call me as gutless as those I criticise for doing nothing, remember that my place depends upon the goodwill of those I wish could be replaced....I am not ready to be unemployed just yet.

Nope, no one will make an effort or stick together, that is why we are [ collectively ] in the strife we are in, self -interested, narrow-focused individuals who won't stand up for anything. Starting the trials early seems to be the solution, the fact that those with the bigger teams will struggle to get them all worked is, of course, irrelevant.

If fescue/browntop with a bit of nui added was still extant, maybe there would be some cushion in the turf...there isn't any now with the high-tech stuff in use, and the ground has to be watered to give some ease.

Superior it sure is - but, again, I don't think DAILY hammering is in the ideal operation category.

I stand to be corrected.....but I can't see the hoi polloi being allowed to charge all over a strathayr track.

So the ' road show' will go ahead on trials day. Silly me, why would trainers have been considered anyway, getting ideas above their station now, they are. I was about to head out to leg my jockey up today to be intercepted by Timmy who was trying to explain that there were other people than just trainers who had to be considered. Of course these important people had schedules that had to be adhered to. What was I thinking? Fancy the idea of getting as many trainers together to have a discussion..we and our owners are going to be directly affected....but hey, no worries.

I don't think Strathayr is considered a 'training' track. One concern I have - subjective of course - is that if an allweather is installed, the likelihood is that an excellent plough training track, as well as some if not all of the grass gallops may also go west. If the new track surface is ok, well and good, I guess. But if they don't get it right - and how could anyone have confidence that they will - there go some of the best training facilities . With difficulty supplying adequate water to inside grass gallops, training would be difficult to say the least in Canterbury's summer months.

There has been a hard pan underneath from the time of its reconstruction, 1998. Instead of getting excited about an allweather here, money would be better spent re-doing the existing course proper - strathayr would be lovely - IMO of course.

Just wait till we get the all weather....?

Ask someone who knows.....?

Yeah, yeah....but it seems illogical in the extreme to organise experts from Australia to talk to no one.

The inside portion has been shaved - I think to get rid of the poa. But good point nevertheless.

To add a comment - from left field - I just opened an email indicating a 'synthetic track roadshow' presentation from representatives of NZTR, all welcome to discuss the installation of same at Riccarton. This is to be held on Dec 12th , Wednesday next....only problem is that there are trials on that day. Who is the bright spark who decided the day...and why is it that NO ONE from either organisation - which run the blasted things - had any idea that there were trials?

There has recently been an email inviting 'stakeholders' to yet another meet-and-greet with J.A. What is the effing point?

There have been plenty of comments already about the facilities at Cup meeting, but yes, your dissatisfaction is just more of the same reaction. Those in the corporate boxes, or with access to the Committee room, no doubt found things very nice..but unless you purchased a ticket and sported a wristband, no entry to the members' area. I was told the members area was an exercise in not getting squashed or having a drink spilt over you, I can't comment, didn't go near the place. Out the back with the horses, home when they were done, suited me. Probably fair enough, what do members get as a point of difference anyway? bugger all, I am hearing from former members who are disenchanted with the privileges they have paid for...and as for the poor old public? the young ones looking for the party, were no doubt quite happy, but many others were not. The earthquake damage to the old stand is nobody's fault, but the lack of disclosure to those who had pre-purchased tickets was not good enough IMO, and it seems little effort was made to adequately cater for genuine racefollowers who wanted a bet, and to sit and actually watch a race.

Yes, quite. Re. the infrastructure part, I realise that hinges upon funds generated from the theft of assets....but the allweather tracks were supposed to have been funded through the RDF..in part anyway...beats me how Riccarton in a major city qualifies for that, but....

wrt allweather tracks - you are so right, whatever is afoot, whether something or nothing, we should be keep informed. So far we have been told NOTHING from either NZTR or any potentially involved clubs.

Successful?

Yes, exactly. I have learned plenty from the comments on the situation too. Now it is all done and dusted, I can perhaps share some thoughts? Clearly the decision was made on the basis of a breach of contract....where the second instalment was due on a certain date, and then not honoured. Hard to rule against that fact alone. I could have been sucked in too, by the former trainers affirmation that the leg in question had been checked and all was well. He lied. The vendor maintained he didn't know the horse he bred and reared was a windsucker. Really? He also claimed the mare's leg had been scanned.....he told porkies too. Believe no one. Both vendor and former trainer have gone down considerably in my estimation...well, one has, the other didn't have far to fall.