- This topic has 278 replies, 50 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 5 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
The British Horse Racing Authority came down on Al Zarooni like a ton of bricks.One thousand pounds each case on the horses found to be drugged.Not only that but they took away the prize money won by both horses.That will send fear through the hearts of the Arabs.But worse still they expressed doubt that it,giving the horses drugs,may not have been an accident.What a black shadow to cast over the Godolphin operation.Heads will surely fall.Probably those of the BHA members who made such a scurrilous suggestion.
Addendum: Barney Curley look out, we are coming for you also. And remember you don’t have to prove you innocence.If we suspect that you are not innocent we can and will fine you one thousand pounds for every horse we have doubts about.And also take away your prize money.Bets will be ignored since gentlemen fron the UAE racing world don’t gamble or drink.
From the BHA website (my emphasis):
After considering the evidence, including written statements from Mahmood Al Zarooni, the Panel
was unable to establish the source of the substance
, and could not therefore be satisfied that the administration of the substance was accidental.
The Panel
accepted an admission
from Mahmood Al Zarooni that he was in breach of Rule (C)53 on both occasions and imposed a fine of £1,000 for each breach.
From the BHA website: emphasis is mine
After considering the evidence, including written statements from Mahmood Al Zarooni, the Panel was unable to establish the source of the substance, and COULD NOT THEREFORE BE SATISFIED THAT THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE SUBSTANCE WAS ACCIDENTAL.
The Panel accepted an admission from Mahmood Al Zarooni that he was in breach of Rule (C)53 on both occasions and imposed a fine of £1,000 for each breach.
Guilty until proven innocent: what a change from the Magna Carter.My point, Andy, was that they accepted an admission of guilt from the trainer.
Edit: Here’s the text of the rule he admitted to breaching:
53. Positive test of sample taken at a racecourse
53.1 Paragraph 53.2 applies where, on an examination that is carried out by order of the Stewards under Part (B)1, Samples are taken from any horse which has been declared to run under Rule (F)89 or is otherwise at a racecourse.
53.2 If a Sample tests positive for any Prohibited Substance, the Authority53.2.1 will impose a financial penalty on the Trainer,
53.2.2 may withdraw or suspend the Trainer’s licence, and
53.2.3 if the substance was not recorded in the medication records required by Rule 13, may impose an additional financial penalty on the Trainer.53.3 The Authority may decide not to take Disciplinary Action against a Trainer under Paragraph 53.2 only if the Trainer satisfies the Authority that
53.3.1 the Prohibited Substance was not administered intentionally by the Trainer or by any other Person (whether or not connected with the Trainer in any way), and
53.3.2 the Trainer had taken all reasonable precautions to avoid contravening this Rule.Since a penalty was imposed then the trainer broke some law but I am not sure as to which section he violated.Did he not record the medication or did he deny all knowledge of it? To allow ones horses to race while medicated is serious,not to know about it is worse.
Since a penalty was imposed then the trainer broke some law but I am not sure as to which section he violated.Did he not record the medication or did he deny all knowledge of it? To allow ones horses to race while medicated is serious,not to know about it is worse.
Who knows? Why don’t you do a little research and find out what the trainer said about it at the time? Or you could just carry on the wild, baseless insinuation that all Godolphin horses run off their faces on drugs.
Talking about "wild baseless insinuations" leaves me cold.The BHA said that they too were in the cold.And I quote they
"COULD NOT THEREFORE BE SATISFIED THAT THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE SUBSTANCE WAS ACCIDENTAL".You expect me to know more than them? Get real.I don’t expect you to know more than the BHA, or even the average person but you seem to have lumped Saeed bin Suroor and "the Arabs" into this issue along with al Zarooni – why is that? Numerous horses for various trainers/owners have tested positive for banned substances but you pick these two out for some reason, perhaps you can explain why?
Because they overwhelm everyone else in GB with the number of horses and jockeys they have.The least they could do is run them on their merit.Do they really have do descend to this level to make ends meet? If you really want to justify drugging their horses go ahead.I for one won’t defend them.All I did was point out the observations of the BRA.But there is no need for an emotional response.Just go ahead and argue for the defense.I have had my say.
Because they overwhelm everyone else in GB with the number of horses and jockeys they have.The least they could do is run them on their merit. Do they really have do descend to this level to make ends meet?
So as well as the two positive samples, you object to the number of horses they have and Jockeys they use?! Do you have any idea what would happen if they withdrew their support for UK racing?
I am not defending these two samples because I do not know what happened – my point was that you seem to have an issue with them because of where they are from. And to state that they don’t run their horses on their merits is ridiculous.
Incidentally, Juddmonte Farms and Darley (both "Arab") are among a number of owners that have pledged not to use Lasix on their 2yo horses in America, but why let facts like that get in the way of a good rant.
Since my responce is labeled a "good rant" i will leave the field to the name callers.
Putting on my Miss Maple hat Andy, could someone possibly with a ‘grudge’ against the Godolphin outfit have contaminated the feed of these two horses. I can hardly believe Godolphin would put their horses at risk with these drugs and Lyric of Light was expected to run a good race in the Guineas and now she has been disqualified. Why was a drug test also not run on Discourse who finished plum last? She had been so welll fancied before the race.
So many questions it’s hard to know where to point the finger, but IMO Al Zarooni has been left to carry the can.Things turn out best for those who make the best of how things turn out...Andy – I think all that bit you keep highlighting is saying is that the origin (of teh substance) is unknown and therefore, logically, they cannot state if it was or was not accidental. For you to jump to the conclusion that it was deliberate (as you have inferred if not downright said out loud) is mere mischief-making.
That explanation would not be acceptable from any other trainer.For example the Aga Khan moved his horses when nobody could explain them running under the influence so to speak.The authorities probably did not anticipate such a reaction when they found his horses to be drugged.However if as the BRA said the explanation was not fool proof then heads should roll.Would a small trainer with no "back up" influence get away with that type of explanation? Surely Godolphin cannot afford such an image? Or can they? Could the richest owners in Britain not afford the security to avoid such things happening.To whom much is given from them much is expected.Caesar’s wife must be above suspicion.That is simply my opinion.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.