Henderson banned for 3 months

[Tuffers]

There’s a huge gap between rumour, innuendo, individual perceptions and FACT.

I agree. What some of us are exercised about is the FACT that the RVCS enquiry having heard evidence from James Main and Nicky Henderson’s assistants (all unavailable at the BHA enquiry) they found as a finding of FACT that:

the use of the term “pre-race check” on Moonlit Path’s clinical records, and indeed, on the invoice… was, in effect, a protocol developed over several years between the practice and Mr Henderson to conceal the administration of tranexamic acid by injection to a horse on a race day….It is sure that the underlying purpose shared by both Mr Main and Mr Henderson was to conceal a breach of Instruction C9 when the BHA inspected the yard’s records.

It is wholly reasonable to enquire further into whether a protocol developed over several years to conceal a breach of the rules of racing was also used to conceal other breaches.

[Anonymous]

Agreed. The wording of that statement is inflammatory. It directs us all to a possible can of worms that could be opened at almost any yard. Trainers and vets are often walking the tighrope. The published finding is the view of the sitting panel. Such judgements have been questioned often in the past and will be again.

It is wholly reasonable to enquire further into whether a protocol developed over several years to conceal a breach of the rules of racing was also used to conceal other breaches

Yes it would. IF. If the rules of racing allow for such an enquiry. Wouldn’t the panel need to approach the matter with a view to a specific incidental breach of the rules though?

In an ideal world all licensed racehorse vets would need to account for every single drop of medication they administer. We’re a long, long way off that.

[Nor1]

Chiswickian

One minute you are saying

Anyone who doesn’t think someone of long standing good repute is entitled to be treated differently does not accept or understand the concept of goodwill. Nicky Henderson didn’t just stroll into the title of "well connected" ….. he earned it over many years.

then you suggest

In an ideal world all licensed racehorse vets would need to account for every single drop of medication they administer. We’re a long, long way off that.

Who do you think is in charge? Who employs and pays the vet? Who dictates what goes on within the racing yard? Unless I’m mistaken, it is the trainer, not the vet.
Yes

In an ideal world all licensed racehorse vets would need to account for every single drop of medication they administer.

but if the trainer says no to proper medication records, and can find another vet to comply, what then?
The RVCS have stopped the vet from working. I think it’s a pity they did not deal with the trainer in a similar manner, regardless of his longstanding good repute. Anyway, who says that is a FACT. Maybe it is just a perception.

[Anonymous]

Anyone passing the David Flood case off as comparative to the circumstances and situation involving Nicky Henderson is only trying to muddy the waters further. The two cases involve entirely different substances and entirely different individuals, before the tribunal in entirely differing circumstances. None of it has anything to do with "class" either.

Thank you

Chiswickian

for saving me the trouble of responding to

apracing

‘s comparison of chalk against cheese – you state the case perfectly.

Anyone who doesn’t think someone of long standing good repute is entitled to be treated differently does not accept or understand the concept of goodwill. Nicky Henderson didn’t just stroll into the title of "well connected" ….. he earned it over many years.

Quite: that is, not because he was born into a well-heeled family and went to public school, but because he’s done a heck of a lot to promote racing in a positive light over two decades and more.

Any criminal is likely to have their sentence reduced for "previous good conduct", and that – in a very proactive sense – is one reason why Henderson’s ban was at the short end of the spectrum for this particular offence.

None of these

facts

will stop the drum-bangers continuing to shout for his head. Anyone would think we were on a wagon in the middle of the French Revolution, with them there aristo-tumbrils still rollin’ along!

[seabird]

Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite! (don’t know how to do the accents)

Vive La Revultion!!!!!

Colin

[andyod]

Lets face it, it is not going to change.So we might as well face it and move on.

[shabby]

Quite: that is, not because he was born into a well-heeled family and went to public school, but because he’s done a heck of a lot to promote racing in a positive light over two decades and more.

Any criminal is likely to have their sentence reduced for "previous good conduct", and that – in a very proactive sense – is one reason why Henderson’s ban was at the short end of the spectrum for this particular offence.

Pinza,
Surely the point of the RCVS findings (which should be further investigated not accepted as fact) is that if their opinions were correct Mr Henderson would not have enjoyed ‘long standing good repute’ and there would have been no positive light over two decades.

[andyod]

I refer to the Sporting Life article today which says that Lynch was refused his license because and I quote
"The committee rejected his application as they felt he was not a suitable, or "fit and proper", person.
Their concerns arose from the breaches of the rules of racing he committed in 2004, his failure to be candid at a previous licensing hearing in December, and his failure to admit his misconduct until June 2009.
The BHA also had doubts about the way Lynch, 32, was seeking a British licence in order to enable him to ride in the USA where his brother, Cathal, is a trainer in Pennsylvania."
Echoes of the Henderson enquiry fiasco in paragraph two!
Seems like for much the same offences except he was not a humble jockey N.Henderson got three months.Of course being the Queens trainer he naturally would be a fit and proper person (shades of My Fair Lady)and his character beyond reproach.
How dare anyone suggest otherwise!
I trust such diligence will be adhered to in the case of
Howard Johnson.

[andyod]

I apologise for adding this to the Henderson thread. I meant it to be a new one but screwed up. Sorry and sympathy to Fergal who loses his livelyhood and for being unsuitable to
return to the arens where he made his living in the company of the more suitable.

[Author]

Posts