JJ Flash Posted November 18, 2019 Share Posted November 18, 2019 (edited) I'm picking this will be a pleasing result for many but the proof will be the initial test case which RIU will bring and JCA adjudicate on. As per normal the legal beagles and vets will be the winners IMHO. I remain neutral as to its effectiveness or use as some sort of performance enhancer but im sure others will have plenty to say about it and hold stronger views on both sides of the arguement. Manipulation of Blood and Blood Components 1004K(1)A person shall not directly or indirectly:(a)withdraw blood from any horse for the purpose of manipulating the blood; or(b)administer to, reinfuse or reintroduce into a horse any homologous, allogenic(heterologous), or autologous blood,blood products, or blood cells of anyorigin. (2)Sub-rule (1) is not contravened when the act is undertaken by a veterinarian:(a)for life-saving purposes;(b)for veterinary regenerative therapies for the treatment ofmusculoskeletal injury or disease; or(c)for veterinary treatment of respiratory bleeding by nebulizer or similar device. (3)If sub-rule (1) is contravened, in addition to the person who breaches the rule, both the trainer and person in charge of the horse commits a breach of the rules. (4)A breach of sub-rules (1) and (3) are declared to be a serious racing offence. (5)Where sub-rule (1) is contravened or a permitted act is undertaken by a veterinarian under sub-rule (2) the horse is:(a)ineligible to be entered or start in a race for a period of eight clear days fromthe date of the act or such longer period as a Judicial Committee may decide;and(b)must be disqualified from any race in which it started during theeight-day period or longer period referred to in paragraph (a). (6)Rule 1005E shall apply with any necessary modification to any disqualification under sub-rule (5)(b). Greg Edited November 18, 2019 by JJ Flash Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangatira Posted November 18, 2019 Share Posted November 18, 2019 will the gloomy scotsman have an extra dram or two when he sees this ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rusty Posted November 18, 2019 Share Posted November 18, 2019 Be pretty hard to get sufficient evidence on this charge wouldn't it? Especially with in house vets. No pun intended. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hunterthepunter Posted November 18, 2019 Share Posted November 18, 2019 3 hours ago, Rangatira said: will the gloomy scotsman have an extra dram or two when he sees this ? who???????? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flagship uberalles Posted November 18, 2019 Share Posted November 18, 2019 Looks like JJ fartoomuch will have to change his halfwit bum chums Nappy ...god forbid we get level playing field for all the honest trainers out there! good onya stables yawn is about right 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the galah Posted November 18, 2019 Share Posted November 18, 2019 3 hours ago, Rusty said: Be pretty hard to get sufficient evidence on this charge wouldn't it? Especially with in house vets. No pun intended. The intention of the rule is the right one in my opinion but as you infer how will it be applied. There also seems to also be an assumption that vets all act within the rules and what they sign off on can be trusted. You only have to look at the scratching penalty system which i believe illustrates how vets constantly issue vets certificates at the request of trainers which in my opinion would contain questionable information. So while I think the new rule is well intentioned I believe those who specialize in using such techniques will easily find ways around its enforcement. 4 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJ Flash Posted November 18, 2019 Author Share Posted November 18, 2019 10 hours ago, the galah said: The intention of the rule is the right one in my opinion but as you infer how will it be applied. There also seems to also be an assumption that vets all act within the rules and what they sign off on can be trusted. You only have to look at the scratching penalty system which i believe illustrates how vets constantly issue vets certificates at the request of trainers which in my opinion would contain questionable information. So while I think the new rule is well intentioned I believe those who specialize in using such techniques will easily find ways around its enforcement. All valid points TG and as with most rules,laws and regs , introducing them is one thing ,policing properly another. I was told a number of trainers outside of AS are using this type of treatment now. As to its effectiveness only time will tell i suppose. Greg 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangatira Posted November 18, 2019 Share Posted November 18, 2019 12 hours ago, hunterthepunter said: who???????? our domestic man of mystery wayne mckenzie 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brodie Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 8 hours ago, Rangatira said: our domestic man of mystery wayne mckenzie .? You what? ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangatira Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 25 minutes ago, Brodie said: .? You what? ? the old triple question mark 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hunterthepunter Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 13 hours ago, Rangatira said: our domestic man of mystery wayne mckenzie shore your not talking about the river road guy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangatira Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 9 hours ago, hunterthepunter said: shore your not talking about the river road guy i am not sure who it is but the bush telegraph all claim its the same person but i think he denied it was him 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hunterthepunter Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 3 hours ago, Rangatira said: i am not sure who it is but the bush telegraph all claim its the same person but i think he denied it was him do you think so Karl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangatira Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 1 hour ago, hunterthepunter said: do you think so Karl initially i was indecisive re the info but now i am not quite sure Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.