Jump to content
NOTICE TO BOAY'ers: Major Update Complete without any downtime ×
Bit Of A Yarn

Recommended Posts

Posted
On 6/17/2025 at 1:33 PM, the galah said:

Its interesting how ,when mcgrath was given 8 years disqualification,the adjudicators listed 3 aggravating factorrs relating to the case.The second of which was, he was disqualified for 18 months for2 positives in 2004-5(blue magic).Then they said they factored in a small uplift in the penalty,due to the 2 2004 beaches.

that all seemed reasonable. 

But what about the opposite happening with the cran dalgety case heard a couple of weeks ago.

the adjudicator in the dalgety case said this

"the only personal aggravating factor is mr dalgety's previous breaches of the prohibited substance rules.The previous breaches are historical in that they are over a decade ago,and littlem weight is afforded to them in that context. There is NO uplift to the starting point.

so,anyone who can read those 2 decisions.

Clearly the adjudicators did a complete 180 fro dalgety,i guess because hesviewed as more of a protected species than mcgrath.

how else can anyone intepret what the adjudicators said.

And whats the meaning of the word decade. I had always understood a decade to be 10 years.

obviously the dalgety adjudicator,mr  g hall, must think its something else as he said,in one part of his decision, dalgety had 5 positives in 2017,then in another part of their decision,nothing in the last decade.

Dalgety incidentally said his stable reps gave the horse nothing and that i had to have been someone alse who attended the nelson trots.

anyway,it seems double standards still apply when people are dealt with.

just look at mcgrath and dalgety.

mcgrath had 2 positives 15 years prior considered tio be an aggravating factor at sentencing and treated as such.

dalgety has had  7(3 different occasions) over the same 15 year time frame,and they qwere not considered an aggravating factors and were not taken into account.

isn't it obvious why that was. Dalgety was not someone they want to catch,but mcgrath always was.

No horse were swabbed  tho in latest  case the problem  may been  fifties cuffs 

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
46 minutes ago, paleface adios said:

No horse were swabbed  tho in latest  case the problem  may been  fifties cuffs 

when mcgrath was disqualified for 8 years,one of the 3 charges mcgrath had was attempting to administer a prohibited substance.

The adjudicators decisions in both the mcgrath and dalgety cases, specifically addressed the issue of previous breaches of the rules as relates to prohibited substances and the impact they should or shouldn't have on the penalties handed down..

The mcgrath decision specifically said he got a small uplift in penalty because of the 2004 prohibited substance charges and the 2020 improper driving charge.

The dalgety decision said ,becuase dalgety had no breaches in the last decade he got no such uplift.

there was a clear difference in how the two people where treated by the different adjudicators. I would suggest the decision by the mcgrath adjudicators was a better decision than the adjudicator in the dalgety case,

As pointed out,the adjudicatopr in the dalgety case said dalgety had no breaches of the rules in the last decade,which clearly was not true.

the dalgety adjudicator seemed to reject the rib submission that the 2017 positives were relevant.Why?

Would the adjudicator in the dalgety case have done the same if it had been mcgrath whom he had before him..

after all,the whole point of penalties being handed down is the consistency in the application of the rules/penalties.

you see,as we all know,when you have someone who gets penalised for something and then they look at the next guy who does the same thing and gets more lenient treatment,you foster a mistrust and resentment towards authorities by the person whos been treated more harshly.Sometimes you hear people say,suchand such has a chip on their shoulders or whatever,well the people that say that should also acknowledge,well theres a good reason for that.

Edited by the galah
  • Like 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...