Jump to content
Bit Of A Yarn

Yet another Meth


Yankiwi

Recommended Posts

Another dog has tested positive for Meth & the investigation is underway in the CD.

Registered trainer was not the person to present the dog.

Recently the precedent has been set, so surely both the handler & trainer will have to be charged.

If so, it could lead to a major change in the greyhound industry during the disqualification periods as it is investigating one of the largest overall operations.

Could lead to plummeting numbers of dog being nominated in both the north & south islands.

This could also potentially lead to having far move available kennels for rehoming dogs than there are dogs to be rehomed.

Time will tell...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Yankiwi said:

Another dog has tested positive for Meth & the investigation is underway in the CD.

Registered trainer was not the person to present the dog.

Recently the precedent has been set, so surely both the handler & trainer will have to be charged.

If so, it could lead to a major change in the greyhound industry during the disqualification periods as it is investigating one of the largest overall operations.

Could lead to plummeting numbers of dog being nominated in both the north & south islands.

This could also potentially lead to having far move available kennels for rehoming dogs than there are dogs to be rehomed.

Time will tell...

Well there you go you will get what you have been wishing for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/8/2023 at 9:26 PM, Yankiwi said:

Another dog has tested positive for Meth & the investigation is underway in the CD.

Registered trainer was not the person to present the dog.

Recently the precedent has been set, so surely both the handler & trainer will have to be charged.

If so, it could lead to a major change in the greyhound industry during the disqualification periods as it is investigating one of the largest overall operations.

Could lead to plummeting numbers of dog being nominated in both the north & south islands.

This could also potentially lead to having far move available kennels for rehoming dogs than there are dogs to be rehomed.

Time will tell...

Who’s the trainer?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Mighty5 said:

Who’s the trainer?

The only one that has racing kennel operations simultaneously on both islands.

This investigation is into the CD location, which the trainer of record is not normally (if ever) based.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/05/2023 at 6:40 PM, Chief Stipe said:

Well there you go you will get what you have been wishing for.

What have I been wishing for?

Consistency from both GRNZ & the RIB and an end to the favouritisms handed out by & corruption within them, come to my mind.

How could this have not ever even been investigated by the RIU?

SUNP0120.thumb.jpg.51fba377d1c41f34eb100e6e1fcbacb7.jpg

  • Champ Post 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, aquaman said:

Interesting. If true and found guilty then both would have to go for a minimum of 15mths, and that would be for trace readings. But then there's two reserves in the background to uptake the license. Will watch with interest.

There's already circumstantial evidence apparent that points towards what I've been informed is true.

The trainer in question has not nominated a dog to race in the CD in the month of May.

The last time there has been any racing "results" from the operation in the CD was on 28 April.

https://www.grnz.co.nz/catch-the-action/15447/result-summary.aspx

Edited by Yankiwi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Chief Stipe said:

What favouritism?  Did they serve you an injustice?

As for favouritism, it's been rife in the code for as long as I was involved or followed it.

Here's a clue to one instance. Ask Aquaman to compare the end results from his case with the very similar case of xyz to too long after his.

No injustice was served to me directly. I was smart enough to cancel my GRNZ license before I began to speak out publically about what was blatantly obvious.

Edited by Chief Stipe
Name asked to be removed by person mentioned.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/05/2023 at 9:26 PM, Yankiwi said:

Another dog has tested positive for Meth & the investigation is underway in the CD.

Registered trainer was not the person to present the dog.

Recently the precedent has been set, so surely both the handler & trainer will have to be charged.

If so, it could lead to a major change in the greyhound industry during the disqualification periods as it is investigating one of the largest overall operations.

Could lead to plummeting numbers of dog being nominated in both the north & south islands.

This could also potentially lead to having far move available kennels for rehoming dogs than there are dogs to be rehomed.

Time will tell...

Do you actually want this to happen?

As I've commented many many times before the biggest danger to racing in any code in this country is environmental contamination from prohibited drugs.

I can't speculate on this current case but if it is similar to the others then there will be no evidence that meth was deliberately administered to a dog to achieve improved performance.  No trainer in their right mind would attempt to do so.

Was the level detected high enough to be performance enhancing?  That's the question that should be addressed not the zero threshold.  

The only alternative is to have closed systems for training in all three codes.  Like Hong Kong - industry barns and training centres.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, aquaman said:

They have made this ridiculous rule with no threshold level. And todays science will pick up trace ammount. They have set the bar as far as sentencing goes and its out of wack with reality. Now they are stuck with it.

Yep.  Certain path to self destruction.  I know at least one key administrator that has been trying to get this approach reviewed.  There were promises that it would be done however things move glacially between the codes and the RIB.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Chief Stipe said:

Do you actually want this to happen?

No, I don't want this to happen. The rules need re-writing to address threshold levels.

That said, even that won't fix much unless favouritism & corruption is removed from GRNZ/RIB as well.

Remember O'Regans dead animal in the freezer case?

The reason for the visit to the property in the first case was because of a Colbalt positive swab, above the threshold, in which the B sample was later sent to Aussie for testing & that result also breached the threshold.

Why were there no charges filed?

Was it inconvenient?

Favouritism?

The rule was breached, investigated & ignored.

https://racingintegrityboard.org.nz/decisions/non-raceday-inquiry-reserved-penalty-decision-dated-23-december-2022-ronald-oregan-and-nyomi-oregan/

3. Mr O’Regan then explained that the three Investigators had visited his property in connection with a high Cobalt reading in one of his Greyhounds

So no, simply setting thresholds alone will not make the problems go away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here Chief, I'll help you a bit.

1/2 owner of "Big Time Tasty", which was the dog that returned that Cobalt positive swab, was the man on the right in the image below undergoing alleged live/dead baiting a few years prior, which was not even investigated by the RIU after the image (amongst several others) were delivered to them with an accompanying complaint.

 

SUNP0120.thumb.jpg.0e6043142193774ca6edaea98a59127a.jpg

 

Only a coincidence, right?

  • Champ Post 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Taupiri Wonder said:

Hmmmn,and what's happened to Sammy Phillips : 21/22 Trainers Strike Rate Premiership Winner!!!

All of her dogs were also sold.

Seemed very sudden. Brings in a group 1 dog from Australia than 2 months later, all dogs on his property have gone.

Edited by BitofaLegend
  • Like 1
  • Champ Post 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/15/2023 at 2:33 PM, Yankiwi said:

What have I been wishing for?

Consistency from both GRNZ & the RIB and an end to the favouritisms handed out by & corruption within them, come to my mind.

How could this have not ever even been investigated by the RIU?

SUNP0120.thumb.jpg.51fba377d1c41f34eb100e6e1fcbacb7.jpg

Yea what a disgrace 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Yankiwi said:

Here Chief, I'll help you a bit.

1/2 owner of "Big Time Tasty", which was the dog that returned that Cobalt positive swab, was the man on the right in the image below undergoing alleged live/dead baiting a few years prior, which was not even investigated by the RIU after the image (amongst several others) were delivered to them with an accompanying complaint.

 

SUNP0120.thumb.jpg.0e6043142193774ca6edaea98a59127a.jpg

 

Only a coincidence, right?

Then concentrate on the here and now.  Otherwise the Greens win.  No dog racing.  You can sit at home and pat your greyhound pets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems to me if you were going to give your dog (or horse) a performance enhancing drug, meth would not be your "go to".  It doesn't appear to be something that would improve your greyhound and make it kick over the final stages of a race.

Most positives to meth in galloping and greyhounds have been through contamination from the people employed to look after these athletes on race day.  When you look at the consequences of their actions why do we need them in the industry?  With greyhound racing "on notice" to clean up their act maybe a more permanent ban is required to show greyhound racing is serious about keeping the industry alive for those who wish to continue in it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

Then concentrate on the here and now.  Otherwise the Greens win.  No dog racing.  You can sit at home and pat your greyhound pets.

What is now?

The (lack of) Cobalt decision was only 3 months ago.

It's been going on like this for years and has not begun to show any improvement.

They say old habits are hard to break. These old habits need to be broken before the entire industry has been broken.

The powers to be carefully pick & chose who & when they're going to go after someone, yet the protected participants can get away with just about anything.

Hypothetically, let's say it was Aquaman on the right side in that photo. He would have suffered from the full force of the rule book & been the RIU's poster child for what an efficient integrity operation they were running keeping the industry free of cheats.

This latest Meth case could prove interesting. The trainer isn't really among the protected species yet trains more racing dogs than any other trainer does, by far.

  • Will they go hard? (very doubtful)
  • Will they only do what they have to do? (likely)
  • Will they find a tea bag in the kennels somewhere & find some other stupid reason to charge him while totally ignoring the Meth positive? (not likely)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That "B sample" not being tested is interesting and shows an RIB cross code inconsistency.  Surely testing of this sample would have left no doubt.  I stand to be corrected but, I think if you put your hand up to have the B sample tested you can choose which laboratory it can be tested at e.g. Hong Kong may be your choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Yankiwi said:

break. These old habits need to be broken before the entire industry has been broken.

The powers to be carefully pick & chose who & when they're going to go after someone, yet the protected participants can get away with just about anything.

Hypothetically, let's say it was Aquaman on the right side in that photo. He would have suffered from the full force of the rule book & been the RIU's poster child for what an efficient integrity operation they were running keeping the industry free of cheats.

This latest Meth case could prove interesting. The trainer isn't really among the protected species yet trains more racing dogs than any other trainer does, by far.

  • Will they go hard? (very doubtful)
  • Will they only do what they have to do? (likely)
  • Will they find a tea bag in the kennels somewhere & find some other stupid reason to charge him while totally ignoring the Meth positive? (not likely)

 

Tell us what should happen.  Afterall that's the reason you handed in your license.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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...