- This topic has 278 replies, 50 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 4 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Surely for racing to be considered truly international, there needs to be a world-wide governing body, and rules which universally apply to all countries coming under that body.
Surely for racing to be considered truly international, there needs to be a world-wide governing body, and rules which universally apply to all countries coming under that body.
I agree with that,though your powers that be allow it,maybe after the MAZ affair i would say that will change to make sure it doesn’t happen in future.
Or MAY NOT have GT,my point was your ‘Does that help explain things’ comment.To mean that was an inference as to why the Aus horses went so well over there. MAZ has admitted to and blood tests show he was guilty.Why don’t i infer Frankel was so good and dominant he must have been on something,no it was just his ability.I have no qualms with the possibility that Horses here may either be barred from racing there or have to stop using Stanozolol,that is fair enough.Though speculating on past winners is not,some may or may not have used it,who knows,but we do know there was nothing in their post race swabs.
I am
not
saying there was any Stanozolol in the "post race swabs" Jollyp. There does not need to be. Australian authorities allow Stanozolol to be used in the training of horses, as long as it is not in them at time of race. ie MAZ has been given an 8 year ban for something perfectly legal in Australia.
For you to believe Australian trainers have not used performance inhancing drugs in training – when it is perfectly legal to do so – is naive in the extreme Jollyp. Can you imagine the conversation between trainer and owner talking about an Australian race:
Owner: "Why do you think that horse is beating us?
Trainer: "Probably because it is on performance inhancing drugs".
Owner: "Isn’t that illegal"?
Trainer: "Not at all".
Owner: "So why the xxxx are we not using performance inhancing drugs"!?Aussie Jim McGrath has just been on British TV (Attheraces) admitting that the reason Australian horses look bulked up is because they’ve used steroids in training.
Value Is EverythingThe decision regarding the suspension was made by the BHA, not by the disciplinary panel.
Read more on BloodHorse.com: http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/ … z2RWmBVDHa
Interesting. Is this unprecedented? Its a bit like a government making a judgement that overrides a court of law is it not?
In the vast majority of cases wouldn’t the accused appeal the decision, insisting that the appeal committee should have been left to make the decision. Failing that you would expect it to end up in the High Court. Yet as things stand MAZ is taking it on the chin without any defence – is it a cultural thing (honour and falling on your sword) or is he following orders?
Australian angle is interesting given Paul Bittar’s nationality. He has this far refrained from commenting on the fact Australian horses can be administered the drugs that have led to MAZ’s demise. His opinion would be welcome.
As for the Aussie horses at Royal Ascot it does make you wonder, and was Black Caviar’s comparatively lacklustre run at Ascot to do with the quaratine here meaning she couldn’t be administered steroids thus limiting her powers. One also recalls the reluctance on the part of her connectins to take Frankel on in the UK whilst they would have been happy to meet him down under – another indication they needed the drugs for her to perform to the level Australians had grown accustomed to? Peter Moody’s dismissal of Gppdwood as a "ploughed field" did seem rather odd at the time.
A word at this juncture for Sir Henry Cecil – he comes out of all of this with his held very high. Firstly in the way he wouldn’t back down to Maktoum bullying and secondly how he stood hos ground in only wanting to take Black Caviar on his terms.
Also it seems a little unfair that whilst the use of raceday drugs in the US racing has been cited as a reason for their stallions becoming unattractive in the world market, the Australian industry has been hailed as a success story. But surely using anabolic steroids is as damaging to the breed in the long run as bute and lasix? You are covering up the physical shortcomings of certain animals in order to enhance their stud value.
It seems more than a coincidence that the rise in the Australian breeding industry concurred with the increasing condemnation of the US industry, more often than not by leading Australian industry figures.
Australian angle is interesting given Paul Bittar’s nationality. He has this far refrained from commenting on the fact Australian horses can be administered the drugs that have led to MAZ’s demise. His opinion would be welcome.
Has Bittar not commented Ivanjica (at least indirectly)? Last two paragraphs of his statement reads:
“Finally, this case has served to highlight something that we were already aware of, in that there are inconsistencies across international racing jurisdictions regarding what substances are permitted to be used in training. While around the world, horseracing bodies quite rightly adopt a zero tolerance policy to the presence of anabolic steroids when carrying out post-race testing, the approach is not so consistent for horses in training.
“In an age of increasing international travel and competition we will put the subject on the agenda for discussion with our international colleagues.”
Value Is EverythingRe Henry Cecil, how can you be completely certain that any trainer is clean? Obviously i’m not trying to single anyone out, but the problem is you can’t assume, as when drugs enter the arena, everyone comes under suspicion.
Certainly you could make the argument that Al Zarooni’s punishment was quite harsh, when you consider the light slap on the wrist that a certain upper-class trainer over jumps got.
THe full BHA press conference with Godolphin racing manager Simon Crisford, BHA chief executive Paul Bittar, Jamie Stier, director of raceday operations and regulation and Adam Bickell, head of licensing and compliance.
A bit hard to hear some of the questions but quite interesting.
I find it fascinating that so many on this site want to argue about another country and their rules rather than the issue at hand."but mammy the boy next door also did what I did"."Well joey let his mother take care of him"
I had suggested earlier that So You Think might have been beaten by Rewilding because that horse might have ben drugged.I pointed that he broke down in his next race.That is the problem with steroids.
The discovery of the steroids has also been condemned by a leading equine welfare organisation. Roly Owers, chief executive of World Horse Welfare, said: ‘These drugs are banned from racing for good reason, one of which is protecting horse welfare. Horses can become quite aggressive but, most significantly, horses are bulked up to a weight their body is potentially not able to cope with.
‘These drugs have no place in racing or any horse sport.’Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/racing … z2Ra1Kl2sd
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on FacebookWas that the reason Rewilding broke down? Will we ever know?
Where does that leave those who were beaten by drugged horses?So many questions so few answers.Andy,
Why people want to talk about other countries is because racing is international these days, and big money is at stake. Prize money and stallion fees are big on the international stage. Having different rules in different countries means that Horse X from Country Y may have been trained on drugs in accordance with local rules, then travels to Country Z for a million dollar prize and enhancements to stallion fees, if winning against a bunch of horses trained in Country Z that doesn’t allow drugs at all. Some anabolic steroids clear a horse’s system in just a few days.
So You Think spent his early life and his first two racing years in a jurisdiction where the use of anabolic steroids is accepted as long as there is no trace left on race days. Rewilding spent his early life and his first two racing years in a jurisdiction where the use of anabolic steroids is banned while the horse is in training, and then he spent six months and had one race in Meydan, where the rules are the same as in Australia. Did either horse’s body weight change unusally when it moved to its new surroundings? It is pure guesswork whether either of them was given anabolic steroids.
Do you know if more horses break their legs in countries where anabolic steroid use is allowed, or in countries where it is not allowed? Or even if broken legs occur more frequently in countries with a drier climate (leading to more firm going) than in a wetter climate (softer going)? Do you know if Godolphin horses have suffered more broken legs than other owners’ horses in proportion to the number of horses they race? Trying to establish a theory covering the whole world of horse racing from the one single event of Rewilding beating So You Think is impossible.
You asked: “Where does that leave those who were beaten by drugged horses?” Which horses are they? Nobody knows. The UK tests every race winner and various other horses in each race, and some horses at their stable in random visits. Other jurisdictions only test on race days. How is anybody to know whether they have been beaten by a horse that has had drugs in the past, but the drugs are out of their system on race day?
11 Mahmood Al Zarooni trained horses have been suspended from racing following detection of banned steroids in samples. The horses include 1,000 Guineas hope Certify. Godolphin have commented on their website stating Sheikh Mohammed is ‘absolutely appalled.’
"Absolutely appalled" – at being caught
wonder how bent racing is in that wonderfully portrayed dictatorship run country where everything is owned by such few people.Do traces of steroids turn up a year later or six months later?
We know two classics won by this yard when not fancied by anyone especially beating a horse such as Camelot.Now that we know what we know I will let everyone draw their own conclusions.I suggest so as not to contaminate the breed that both classic winners from this yard be disqualified and be banned from racing and breeding.A small price to pay!Coolmore will become the shrine for thoroughbreds around the world.The American horses with a few exceptions are more and more lacking the stamina to compete around the world.[The American trainers know they can use steroids when racing in Dubai.]Other countries will ultimately follow the Irish breeding and have nothing to do with steroids.Would you send your mare to a Godolphin steroid stallion right now knowing what we know? I don’t think so.
I think it unfair for people to pick on Australia. Steroid use in training is allowed in other countries. Should we not allow Animal Kingdom to race here because it is allowed in the US ? Should we not allow horses that have been trained in Dubai to race here ?
Or MAY NOT have GT,my point was your ‘Does that help explain things’ comment.To mean that was an inference as to why the Aus horses went so well over there. MAZ has admitted to and blood tests show he was guilty.Why don’t i infer Frankel was so good and dominant he must have been on something,no it was just his ability.I have no qualms with the possibility that Horses here may either be barred from racing there or have to stop using Stanozolol,that is fair enough.Though speculating on past winners is not,some may or may not have used it,who knows,but we do know there was nothing in their post race swabs.
I am
not
saying there was any Stanozolol in the "post race swabs" Jollyp. There does not need to be. Australian authorities allow Stanozolol to be used in the training of horses, as long as it is not in them at time of race. ie MAZ has been given an 8 year ban for something perfectly legal in Australia.
For you to believe Australian trainers have not used performance inhancing drugs in training – when it is perfectly legal to do so – is naive in the extreme Jollyp. Can you imagine the conversation between trainer and owner talking about an Australian race:
Owner: "Why do you think that horse is beating us?
Trainer: "Probably because it is on performance inhancing drugs".
Owner: "Isn’t that illegal"?
Trainer: "Not at all".
Owner: "So why the xxxx are we not using performance inhancing drugs"!?Aussie Jim McGrath has just been on British TV (Attheraces) admitting that the reason Australian horses look bulked up is because they’ve used steroids in training.
Don’t put words in my mouth! Jim Mcgrath wouldn’t have a clue he is a race caller over there.I never said some horses here dont use it,so DO NOT PUT WORDS IN MY MOUTH!!!My point is people like you get on the bandwaggon and all of a sudden everything is on steroids!What helps them look so bulked up? Not working them into the grounnd to run over 14f first up! Not one of your trainers could have won with Makybe Diva over 7f first up.We call it having them ‘big and fresh’ not flat and dour.Horses such an Miss Andretti was a small mare no growth steroids there,Choisir was a bull,so he didn’t need it.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.