- This topic has 128 replies, 33 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 1 month ago by
.
- Posts
- Total Posts 17716
There are two separate issues here, the preparation of the horse for the race which is clearly down to Henderson and team, and the perceived lack of information being given.
I have sympathy with Henderson on the second count as he is merely acting as a puppet for JP McManus. I am not sure why the BHA are seemingly being used as the messengers – they don’t own the horse.
Stilvi
, I’m glad to read you talking about
"perceived lack of information"
here, as that’s precisely what it is – a
perception
not based on the complex
facts
.
JP McManus and his agent were presumably party to the judgement of all interested groups to wait until Sunday before issuing a definite decision on the horse’s participation in tomorrow’s race. Are you suggesting that the horse’s owner somehow gained from the timing of the announcement, and that he was able to dictate terms to BHA?
That, with all respect, is a conspiracy theory to further muddy the waters. What’s your evidence for suggesting it? Or is it just another
perception
?
Pinza. to give you an honest answer , I have nothing against the trainer whatsoever and have no comment to make about him whatsoever
Although its fair to say their is a possibility that people will view him differently after this saga has ended , but enough of that
My point is about the cover up and the BHA ‘s participation in this sorry tale , that’s what is really hard to swallow IMO
How can you have confidence in the rabble at all after this ??
cheers
Ricky
My banker for the meeting, I am devastated, had it in every ante post bet. Fortunately Stan James have made him NR, but still, my opinion is he would have won and won well. Absolutely amateurish from the Henderson stable. Unbelievable. And the borderline cover up and background goings on is even more unbelievable, given the drive for transparency with the BHA.
Surely the question is why? Why go to the BHA at all? If the time element was a question could the vet who treated the horse not just declare the horse was sill sick and had not recovered from the medication? Is it because Henderon knows that he cheated in the past and was caught out this time when another horse tested positive? Is it because nobody believes him anymore after what happened when he was found out the previous time? The trouble is many people wonder about the word of this man.They wonder what the hell is going on in this yard?If he had come out the first time and said he was the one responsible for the Queens horse and take his punishment he would not be in this mess.
Indeed when Paul O posts defending his mate Silvoir . . . .
Really Ricky?
I have clearly missed that one, would you care to elucidate, I really am most intrigued.
It seems that the most likely explanation is that Binocular was injected in a joint which has caused the drug to take longer to leave his system.
It still raises the question of why he was injected in a joint when it is reasonably common knowledge that this affects the withdrawal time. Maybe revenge for James Main by one of his veterinary colleagues? Who knows but it would make a good Dick Francis storyline.
Nice to see you posting again Paul
Ricky
Thanks, but will be avoiding "opinion" or controversy on the Forum though, just not worth the hassle, so will be even more boring than I was before.
Had to smile at your "defending" Silvoir comment though . . . with some of the grief and earache I have given him recently he probably would not consider me a "defender".
Thanks, but will be avoiding "opinion" or controversy on the Forum …
….yeah, right.
Nice to see you on TRF again, Beast. Have been keeping up with your blog. Always an interesting read.
Anyone know if Binocular was actually fit to race? Or was it only the med test problem that kept him from running. Haven’t heard any news on the current physical well-being of the horse since the story broke.
Cheers Paul , it was a bit of a harsh comment I will admit , like Cav I keep up with your blog as well
Next time you see Silvoir , please give him some extra grief from me , as this saga is a mess
Ricky
Next time you see Silvoir , please give him some extra grief from me , as this saga is a mess
Ricky
It does make racing look bad, not helped by there currently being nothing in the rules to force disclosure, so no rules actually broken in this incident . . . . does not make it right though.
I have suggested to Silvoir that the BHA should look at introducing formal "disclosure" protocols.
Pinza,
In view of your argument that this is all a manufactured fuss whipped up by ‘jackals’, could you please provide a list of the names of the other trainers that have had two positive post race tests for prohibited substances within the space of two years.
Only I seem to have forgotten who they are ……
AP
Well JHJ is currently charged with three counts of administering anabolic steroids to 3 horses between July 2008 and Oct 2009. Although I don’t hear many people complaining about his case being delayed.
I don’t know how I feel about this, because I do like NH, but it does trouble me. I can understand why he may have opted not to say anything after last year – it sounds like it wasn’t a problem that interrupted the horse’s prep in any way. He’s not the only trainer to sit on things – as someone who backed Denman for the Gold Cup after the Hennessey, I’d have like to have known THEN that the horse was having a wind op as it would have influenced my decision.
When all the logical explanations prove absurd then the absurd explanation becomes the logical one.He found out he would be found out.That simple.
- Total Posts 23
When all the logical explanations prove absurd then the absurd explanation becomes the logical one.He found out he would be found out.That simple.
your explanation seems to make the most sense Andy …I had heard that Binocular was on fire and raring to go and AP was clearly shocked by his withdrawal. Why have an elective test? was it to see if the coast was clear? just an observation but makes one wonder if the same thing may have happened last year.
I’ve just read Henderson’s column in last Saturday’s RP.
He mentions 18 horses for Cheltenham. He doesn’t mention Binocular.I didn’t read the column on Saturday & if I had, I probably wouldn’t have noticed the elephant in the room!
I guess the RP is put to bed sometime Friday night & copy has to be filed sometime early the same day. Just a guess though.
- Total Posts 17716
The whole tone of that article linked above is amatuerish and misleading. Entirely unprofessional effort.
CAV – Let’s turn this around. Do you have any evidence whatsoever that Binocular was otherwise unsound to race this week? You certainly seem to have leaned towards suggesting that was the case in a number of posts. I may have misread things. Are you simply trying to confirm/deny your self perceived suspicions?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.