First the Dogs and now our Gallopers are on Methamphetamine!

[nomates]

1 minute ago, Thomass said:

Maybe if Big Red stops spitting the dummy and shows up at awards ceremonies, which he's BANNED, he'll be able to chew the fat with the BIG cheeses and tell some home truths...

....until then...in one talanga and out taother...

Had good friggin reason to ban going , a complete rort . But if you hadn't been on the Gold Coast on hols you would have seen him say he would break the ban if his apprentice Hazel won the apprentices premiership and go . 

[Thomass]

1 minute ago, nomates said:

Had good friggin reason to ban going , a complete rort . But if you hadn't been on the Gold Coast on hols you would have seen him say he would break the ban if his apprentice Hazel won the apprentices premiership and go . 

Wayyyy in the past...under Simple Simon's tenure...

Why punish the Industry that supplies you with a living?

Dummy spitting is Dummy Myers raisin de tear...

..and he should be banned from the Industry...and/or receive constant fines...

...just like the NRL does for not fronting...

Its called PROFESSIONAL SPORTING CONDUCT

[Chief Stipe]

3 minutes ago, Thomass said:

Wayyyy in the past...under Simple Simon's tenure...

Why punish the Industry that supplies you with a living?

Dummy spitting is Dummy Myers raisin de tear...

..and he should be banned from the Industry...and/or receive constant fines...

...just like the NRL does for not fronting...

Its called PROFESSIONAL SPORTING CONDUCT

Why do you keep banging on about it?  

[nomates]

38 minutes ago, Thomass said:

Wayyyy in the past...under Simple Simon's tenure...

Why punish the Industry that supplies you with a living?

Dummy spitting is Dummy Myers raisin de tear...

..and he should be banned from the Industry...and/or receive constant fines...

...just like the NRL does for not fronting...

Its called PROFESSIONAL SPORTING CONDUCT

No one HAS to go to the awards , Myers i agree with .

[Huey]

7 hours ago, Chief Stipe said:

How is it a "different scenario entirely"?  In my opinion on the face of it the Sharrock case definitely involved a class A drug that conceivably is performance enhancing.  

The irony is the RIU established early that the morphine positive was environmental contamination most likely through feed.

What is clear in the Sharrock case is that there is no possibility of an environmental feed source of methamphetamine I.e. P or its metabolites do not occur naturally in horse feed.

You refer to the New Plymouth case which was never resolved.  What actions did the RIU, Racing Clubs and NZTR take post New Plymouth to prevent possible environmental contamination or deliberate  nefarious administration by errant persons?

At a time when the industry has a really good "vibe" about it , well its just the "vibe" thats all.

[Newmarket]

Mmmmm, and they both won🤔

[Chief Stipe]

48 minutes ago, Newmarket said:

Mmmmm, and they both won🤔

Your point?

[LongOwner]

On 19/05/2021 at 8:43 PM, the galah said:

 Your always on about someone snitching and just post stuff to divert attention. I've no comment to make about the sharrock case,he seems to talk like an innocent man,but your focus on the press again is just ridiculous.

BBC's deceit over Diana interview worsened my parents' relationship - William  
 

Todays news is proof - never trust a journalist 

[Freda]

I think it is high time that the whole regime directing the drug testing system, and also other rules/directives that are either misplaced, not well understood, or are relics from a former time. is overhauled and brought into the 21st century.

Along with Pitty's topic ' How do we fix NZ racing ', this [ IMO ] is one that deserves discussion on its own merits.

The recent cases involving the dog Zipping Sarah, Sharrock's positives [  Big Red might be many things, but a drug cheat I would say not ], the P positives from Taranaki a couple of years ago, the morphine case - even the cobalt in the cattle trough b/s, which left a nasty taste behind.  There is no doubt that Frank Stammers or Tracey Hickey wouldn't get away with that crap as a defence, so that in itself throws the cat among the pigeons wrt the integrity processes....and the lack of security and hygiene in public facilities is a real concern.

Kenny Rae had to wear the P positive for old Absolut Excelencia, even though he was nowhere around, the carers of the horse and their associates were all tested negative, and anecdotally, none were users anyway.  Those in the district that may have been, weren't tested as far as I am aware, but as methamphetamine leaves the system fairly quickly, pretty hard to be definitive there.

The security where Kenny's horse was kept was and still is non-existent, anyone can walk in from the street, and does.  Only recently, a couple with a pram and a dog were wandering through the complex, wanting to 'have a ride on a horse'. Luckily a trainer was in the general area and shoo-ed them away.

Those areas responsible for public stabling should be accountable as much as the trainers.    The possibility of transmission of disease is also viewed with complacency.  The ability to adequately isolate horses in  these places is simply not good enough.

There needs to be [ IMO ]  threshold levels introduced, whereby contamination can be considered as opposed to deliberate administration.   

[Gospel of Judas]

On 21/05/2021 at 8:02 PM, LongOwner said:

BBC's deceit over Diana interview worsened my parents' relationship - William  
 

Todays news is proof - never trust a journalist 

Yes in his, mums and dad case they use them and they use you. But never can be certain you be next.

[jess]

No-one's putting their hand up to administering P/meth to their animals. So there is a lot of talk about how a horse can "inadvertently" return a positive to meth - mostly supposition/speculation.  Like whether it can be picked up (absorbed through the skin, feet or by inhalation) in a box where a meth-user has pee'd in the corner - or from casual contact with an owner who's used P?   We really don't know for sure.  And in the ensuing investigation - how much do negative tests on the people associated to the horse mean?  If these are urine tests undertaken some time later - possibly not much, as P is so rapidly metabolized/excreted).   And we might never know about these various theories producing positive swabs in horses - I mean imagine designing a trial to test these (& other) theories - good luck getting that past an ethics committee! 

It’s all got me wondering though.  If there was an individual who was a meth addict & who worked with horses in several capacities (short of race-day riding) – would this be a concern?  Would it be any more of a concern if that person frequented a racing complex?  Would (– or should!) this situation attract attention/action from the authorities?  Not sure how many of you can think of someone you know, in your areas, who could fit this description – or partly fit the description.  But if you can – how come it’s allowed to continue?    

Besides those pesky positive race-day swabs – competent & focused investigations could yield benefits and enable risks to be mitigated.  What comes to mind is enhancing safety & integrity - & reducing exposure of young industry participants to drugs.  Who knows – it could also bring change & support to the hypothetical individual/s to get themselves clean & sorted?  God knows there are enough people hell-bent on shooting our industry down - why would we hand them the gun & the bullets? – because that’s what we seem to be doing currently. 

 No use being those 3 monkeys with their hands over their ears, eyes & mouth - that won't make it go away.  IMO there needs to be a more serious commitment to cleaning up our act.  Detecting & dealing with drug users in the industry will bring short term bad press – but allowing it to continue could wreak long term havoc – to horse, human and the viability of racing. So what will we choose?

J. 

[Chief Stipe]

34 minutes ago, jess said:

No-one's putting their hand up to administering P/meth to their animals. So there is a lot of talk about how a horse can "inadvertently" return a positive to meth - mostly supposition/speculation.  Like whether it can be picked up (absorbed through the skin, feet or by inhalation) in a box where a meth-user has pee'd in the corner - or from casual contact with an owner who's used P?   We really don't know for sure.  And in the ensuing investigation - how much do negative tests on the people associated to the horse mean?  If these are urine tests undertaken some time later - possibly not much, as P is so rapidly metabolized/excreted).   And we might never know about these various theories producing positive swabs in horses - I mean imagine designing a trial to test these (& other) theories - good luck getting that past an ethics committee! 

It’s all got me wondering though.  If there was an individual who was a meth addict & who worked with horses in several capacities (short of race-day riding) – would this be a concern?  Would it be any more of a concern if that person frequented a racing complex?  Would (– or should!) this situation attract attention/action from the authorities?  Not sure how many of you can think of someone you know, in your areas, who could fit this description – or partly fit the description.  But if you can – how come it’s allowed to continue?    

Besides those pesky positive race-day swabs – competent & focused investigations could yield benefits and enable risks to be mitigated.  What comes to mind is enhancing safety & integrity - & reducing exposure of young industry participants to drugs.  Who knows – it could also bring change & support to the hypothetical individual/s to get themselves clean & sorted?  God knows there are enough people hell-bent on shooting our industry down - why would we hand them the gun & the bullets? – because that’s what we seem to be doing currently. 

 No use being those 3 monkeys with their hands over their ears, eyes & mouth - that won't make it go away.  IMO there needs to be a more serious commitment to cleaning up our act.  Detecting & dealing with drug users in the industry will bring short term bad press – but allowing it to continue could wreak long term havoc – to horse, human and the viability of racing. So what will we choose?

J. 

A lot of these questions would be answered or given some perspective if the RIU released the level of methamphetamine that was detected.

For example the level of morphine in the recent Te Akau case was believed to be minuscule and nowhere enough to be even therapeutic.

Allegedly the RIU Manager was tasked with addressing this problem of environmental contamination a very long time ago.  Needless to say it appears nothing was done.

[Gammalite]

22 hours ago, jess said:

If there was an individual who was a meth addict & who worked with horses in several capacities (short of race-day riding) – would this be a concern?  Would it be any more of a concern if that person frequented a racing complex?  Would (– or should!) this situation attract attention/action from the authorities?  Not sure how many of you can think of someone you know, in your areas, who could fit this description – or partly fit the description.  But if you can – how come it’s allowed to continue?  

Am sure where there are large numbers of stable staff you are going to have a LOT of different addicts of one kind or another.

Chris Waller with his hundreds of horses in Sydney had a positive Meth in 2016 so copped a large 30k fine and the horse DQ. Then after testing 67 staff (imagine a percentage would refuse testing too), 6 were found to be positive for one thing or another. Even this year in February Qld Chris Waller stable staff were 'forced to retire' (another word for sacked) after a party got out of control after a feature race win. People are always taking stuff , alcohol ,etc so random tests will catch people out. (just like on the roads) How often can we go for these random tests? and what is the punishment?  

NSW chief steward says they do about 600 tests per year on average,  on licensed persons including trainers , track-work riders and stable staff for about 20 **positive results. (**seems a lot of positives from not many tests to me, for an industry employing thousands) not sure on what penalty is dished out. Is a BIG worry if cross contamination to horses, is occuring though. 

Edited May 25, 2021 by Gammalite
add word

[Horace]

22 hours ago, Chief Stipe said:

A lot of these questions would be answered or given some perspective if the RIU released the level of methamphetamine that was detected.

For example the level of morphine in the recent Te Akau case was believed to be minuscule and nowhere enough to be even therapeutic.

Allegedly the RIU Manager was tasked with addressing this problem of environmental contamination a very long time ago.  Needless to say it appears nothing was done.

Chief I find your view on illegal substances quite disturbing. So you seem to think a little bit of a 'harmful substance' in animals is acceptable? Do you then think that jockeys, drivers, league players etc should be extended the same leniency if tested ' positive' to meth/cocaine/cannabis/morphine/alcohol etc...? 

Yep, humans have a choice about what they ingest..however methamphetamine is a chemical that does not occur naturally, so a ' minor' positive is still a postive. Love to hear your rationale.

[Horace]

38 minutes ago, Horace said:

Chief I find your view on illegal substances quite disturbing. So you seem to think a little bit of a 'harmful substance' in animals is acceptable? Do you then think that jockeys, drivers, league players etc should be extended the same leniency if tested ' positive' to meth/cocaine/cannabis/morphine/alcohol etc...? 

Yep, humans have a choice about what they ingest..however methamphetamine is a chemical that does not occur naturally, so a ' minor' positive is still a postive. Love to hear your rationale.

Some of these drugs already have a built in ' allowance' i.e. alcohol, cannabis, however I'm hoping you dont think meth. should be allowed in small bits?

[Thomass]

14 hours ago, Gammalite said:

Am sure where there are large numbers of stable staff you are going to have a LOT of different addicts of one kind or another.

Chris Waller with his hundreds of horses in Sydney had a positive Meth in 2016 so copped a large 30k fine and the horse DQ. Then after testing 67 staff (imagine a percentage would refuse testing too), 6 were found to be positive for one thing or another. Even this year in February Qld Chris Waller stable staff were 'forced to retire' (another word for sacked) after a party got out of control after a feature race win. People are always taking stuff , alcohol ,etc so random tests will catch people out. (just like on the roads) How often can we go for these random tests? and what is the punishment?  

NSW chief steward says they do about 600 tests per year on average,  on licensed persons including trainers , track-work riders and stable staff for about 20 **positive results. (**seems a lot of positives from not many tests to me, for an industry employing thousands) not sure on what penalty is dished out. Is a BIG worry if cross contamination to horses, is occuring though. 

Well Gammy that Sunshine State one was a Kiwi wasn't he?

Thats the problem with our 'random' testing....add VERY INFREQUENT 

When they 'randomed' the Ruakaka scene a couple of years ago...it was the FIRST time they'd EVER been there...caught 4 out

Our Drug 'testing' is appalling...

The only way to clean up NZ's rampant drug acceptance in society...and the Racing Industry in particular...

...is HAIR FOLLICLE testing...shows a 3 month time line and grabs the Meth heads 

BTW Big Red Sharrock will be in his wee brothers ear about this...

Bruce Sharrock is on the NZTR Board...and Red will be hounding the hell out of him until a far better protocol is in place

FFS the INTEGRITY of NZ Thoroughbred racing is on the line here

And INTEGRITY is everything

 

 

[Chief Stipe]

2 hours ago, Thomass said:

...is HAIR FOLLICLE testing...shows a 3 month time line and grabs the Meth heads 

That will result in false positives and injustice.  Just as horses can return a positive from environmental contamination so can humans.  The key question is there are thresholds in workplace testing why does Racing have a zero threshold?

A case in point being the non-negatives for the two Jockey's in Southland which are now determined to be false positives.

[Chief Stipe]

2 hours ago, Thomass said:

BTW Big Red Sharrock will be in his wee brothers ear about this...

Bruce Sharrock is on the NZTR Board...and Red will be hounding the hell out of him until a far better protocol is in place

FFS the INTEGRITY of NZ Thoroughbred racing is on the line here

And INTEGRITY is everything

 

Great to see your attitude has changed somewhat for the better.  You seem to have a more balanced view than when Te Akau returned the morphine positive.

[Huey]

1 minute ago, Chief Stipe said:

Great to see your attitude has changed somewhat for the better.  You seem to have a more balanced view than when Te Akau returned the morphine positive.

he shouldn't, amazing how the TA positive was swept under the carpet, this one has been really thrown about ... can't work out why though.

[Chief Stipe]

1 minute ago, Huey said:

he shouldn't, amazing how the TA positive was swept under the carpet, this one has been really thrown about ... can't work out why though.

We've discussed that before.  Aside from the fact that it is only your perception, when in reality the communication from the RIU has been the same as has the media coverage, the difference is Big Red came out swinging.  It also didn't help that it came straight on the back of a P positive in the Greyhounds.

 

[Chief Stipe]

4 minutes ago, Huey said:

he shouldn't, amazing how the TA positive was swept under the carpet, this one has been really thrown about ... can't work out why though.

Another point - although I disagree that the TA positive was swept under the carpet as due process was followed resulting in a disqualification and a fine you could point the finger at why was the P cases at New Plymouth "swept under the carpet"?

[Huey]

58 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

Another point - although I disagree that the TA positive was swept under the carpet as due process was followed resulting in a disqualification and a fine you could point the finger at why was the P cases at New Plymouth "swept under the carpet"?

The only hint I saw regarding the TA positive (to your credit) was on here, nothing anywhere else nadda, loveracing etc all reported the Sharrock case , did I miss something outside of the NZ herald article on the TA case?

[Yankiwi]

48 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

It also didn't help that it came straight on the back of a P positive in the Greyhounds.

 

Speaking of the Greyhounds, I understand the RIU's appeal of the Turnwald penalty is to be heard today. Hopefully being unable to offer the RIU any suggestion as a possible source for Zipping Sarah to have ingested Meth will be considered to be an aggravating factor instead of a mitigating factor. Why were the previous two penalties greater because the person who was charged & their connections actually helped in the investigation? Prior to the first hearing it was stated that two of the owners or at least the owners guests at the race meeting had used Meth on the day of the race, prior to the defendant tossing in their initial defense.

Shut up & know nothing is what I'd expect to hear from the accused & their connections if foul play was possibly at hand. I expect to see a disqualification of 3 to 4 years after this appeal. 

[Huey]

59 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

Another point - although I disagree that the TA positive was swept under the carpet as due process was followed resulting in a disqualification and a fine you could point the finger at why was the P cases at New Plymouth "swept under the carpet"?

Well I'm guessing one trainer was very lucky the other two trainers were involved.

[Chief Stipe]

52 minutes ago, Huey said:

The only hint I saw regarding the TA positive (to your credit) was on here, nothing anywhere else nadda, loveracing etc all reported the Sharrock case , did I miss something outside of the NZ herald article on the TA case?

It was headlines in the media no different to Sharrock's.