Caffeine Threshold

[LongOwner]

Galloper trainer lost a $15 k stake and fined $2k as he had a piss behind his boxes. He has 3 cups of coffee a day.

RIU said no deliberate intention and trainer innocent but horse was not clear - so proving justice cannot be served due to nonsense rules - and guilty as no other ruling can be given.

Do you know in international sport - athletics / Olympics - by memory there is a 100 threshold . Not nil like RIU rules on.

This rule needs immediate amendment as it is a nonsense and the threshold should be at no lower/the same as a human running a mile who has 20% of the body mass of a horse and been sensible a higher threshold to reflect horse size .
  
Such nonsense and no commonsense  rules just makes everyone think the RIU is there to wreck the sport instead of been good for the sport to stop cheats.

 Does the RIU think having a piss after a cup of coffee cheating?

Clean up all your rules and review all thresholds so they make sense  and then maybe more sport participants will respect you - especially if you are not on personal crusades, present yourself with humility and not arrogant.

Anend nonsense rules asap .

Edited June 25, 2022 by LongOwner

[LongOwner]

The narrative within the decision is ridiculous.

After all laboratory results and evidence says the positive  is due to the trainer urinating behind his boxes and day paddock but the RIU judge and jury write a book -

They tell us it is evil and the defendant must be punished , penalty to  deter others (I assume to put them off going to the toilet) , disapproval of the offence - again going to the toilet,  putting the racing industry into disrepute - again going to the toilet is bad for the sports look etc 

So the judge and jury from one camp can only “ cut and paste” when they write a decision .

Again a way to remove their respect from industry participants.

Each case is individual so why can it not be written as such and the decision  be delivered with some individuality to the case involved. 

Can they tell us how the actions of this trainer - having 3 cups of coffee a day and pissing behind (not in boxes ) his boxes put the sport into disrepute and why is it reported as if he had a positive to steroids!

Shows the Wigg appeal may have legs as team written decisions do not represent justice so we could interpreted the racing industry justice system provides no justice.

“Penalty Submissions – Applicant
[8]  The RIB have referred to the principles on sentencing in the Appeals Tribunal decision of RIU v L which brings a disciplinary approach to the imposition of sanctions for breaches of the Rules, in particular:

(a)  Penalties are designed to punish the offender for his/her wrong doing. They are not meant to be retributive in the sense the punishment is disproportionate to the offence, but the offender must be met with punishment.
(b)  In the racing context it is extremely important that a penalty has the effect of deterring others from committing similar offences.
(c)  A penalty should also reflect the disapproval of the JCA (now the Adjudicative Committee) for the type of offending in question.

[9]  Importantly, the RIB does not consider the Respondent to be a habitual offender, nor a person of low moral character that he would bring the Thoroughbred Racing Code into disrepute should he remain in the profession.

[10]  However, breaches of the Rules should be penalised and that such penalty should reflect the industry’s “clean racing image” and to remind participants of their obligations under the Rules.” 

Edited June 25, 2022 by LongOwner

[Chief Stipe]

They never publish the levels detected and there have been promises to adjust thresholds so as to avoid low level environmental contamination.

I would guess that the levels were such that there was no way there was any performance enhancement.

[LongOwner]

2 hours ago, Chief Stipe said:

They never publish the levels detected and there have been promises to adjust thresholds so as to avoid low level environmental contamination.

I would guess that the levels were such that there was no way there was any performance enhancement.

They have been telling us they were going to do a lot of things - we had to wait for the new structure.

The new structure is inferior to the old with no communication , arrogance still very strong , no rule amendments and no seperate appeal body - one group of judge and jury.

When are they going to change caffeine threshold and review others plus report levels to provide us with transparency? 
 

Also why no action against in-house leaks to the press or middle party then press - it should of been shut down years ago but no action taken.

Clean broom needed.