Why do they need to be given all this free money to bet with? Going to be interesting to see if OTG js continued in the New Year? Hardly encouraging harness racing when they mostly offload on these Same Race Multis on the Greyhounds, which are going to be terminated from NZ in July! Thursday nights now has emphasis on the Dish Lickers which is unfortunate I wouldve thought, as it takes very little skill to be wagering on them!    

Good question. Here’s a breakdown of what Peter V'Landys’s legal action against The Thoroughbred Report (TTR) is — and why it matters. I’ll also touch on how this ties into his history of legal actions for context. ✅ What is The Thoroughbred Report The Thoroughbred Report (TTR) is an independent racing-industry publication covering news, governance and issues in the thoroughbred racing world — including investigations into governance, welfare, and oversight of racing authorities. ttrausnz.com.au+1 On 2 December 2025, TTR published a statement saying that it — and two other “independent racing publications” — had recently received correspondence from V’Landys and/or legal counsel for Racing NSW in response to TTR’s reporting on governance issues. ttrausnz.com.au The statement characterized the correspondence as a “legal threat.” ttrausnz.com.au ⚠️ What V’Landys’ action (or threat) against TTR is about According to TTR’s public statement, the legal correspondence was triggered by its reporting “on governance matters within the New South Wales thoroughbred racing industry.” ttrausnz.com.au In other words: V’Landys (or Racing NSW’s legal counsel) appears to be challenging or threatening to challenge TTR because of critical or investigative reporting into the way the industry — under V’Landys’ leadership — is governed. The precise issues under scrutiny aren’t detailed in the TTR statement. But given the history of controversy linked to V’Landys, it likely relates to governance, transparency, or welfare in the industry. TTR says it views the threat as “legal intimidation,” arguing that independent journalism is essential for oversight and accountability, especially when powerful regulatory bodies are involved. ttrausnz.com.au 🕰️ How this fits into V’Landys’ past legal cases This isn’t the first time V’Landys has used legal action (or threatened to) in response to media scrutiny: In 2019, an investigative program by ABC titled The Final Race revealed serious alleged animal-welfare abuses and slaughter of former racehorses — sometimes sold to knackeries/abattoirs. ABC+2thoroughbreddailynews.com+2 V’Landys sued ABC (and the journalist behind the piece) for defamation, arguing the broadcast wrongly implied he was responsible or complicit in systemic cruelty. ABC+2Coleman Greig Lawyers+2 In 2021, the court dismissed his defamation claim. The judge ruled that although the report was damaging to his reputation, it did not meet the legal threshold for defamation — specifically, the court found the broadcast didn’t prove he “knew” about the cruelty or knowingly permitted it. The Guardian+2racing.com+2 The dismissal and appeal failure reaffirmed that journalists can — under law — draw attention to systemic problems even when senior figures are implicated. Wikipedia+1 So the new action/threat against TTR seems to follow a similar pattern: powerful industry authority reacting defensively to critical reporting under threat of legal escalation. 🧭 Why this matters for racing, journalism, and governance Media freedom and scrutiny: TTR argues that this kind of “legal threat” undermines independent journalism — essential for holding powerful regulators to account. ttrausnz.com.au Transparency in the racing industry: If journalists fear legal retaliation, it could discourage reporting on real issues (governance failures, welfare problems, mismanagement), which harms industry accountability. Precedent and public trust: Given the past controversies around horse welfare and regulation under V’Landys’ leadership, how this plays out could influence public confidence in how racing is governed. Regulatory culture: A pattern of legal challenges to scrutiny (rather than engagement or reform) may raise concerns about how open the industry is to external oversight.

to be honest! I'm struggling to get my head around this???

Self interest and parochialism is across the whole industry not just in the administration of it

I disagree too. The allocation of bulk funding to clubs has been entirely their responsibility.