- This topic has 290 replies, 76 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 2 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I’m looking forward to the steroid excuses. Mr Johnson should be banned for the maximum possible time for those offences, let alone the fact it appears he’s solely responsible for the death of Striking Article as the trainer of the horse.
The steroid issue possibly has bigger implications for Horse Racing – and the past achievements of that stables horses.
the fact it appears he’s solely responsible for the death of Striking Article as the trainer of the horse
How on earth do you jump to that conclusion Jose? There’s nothing to suggest your ‘fact’ is any such thing other than you putting two and two together and making five.
I found it interesting that there was a post-mortem. Is that standard practise and who would order/authorise it? Is it routine, was it instructed by a vet, the owner, the trainer or the BHA?
Very interesting case and it’ll be fascinating to see how it pans out.
the fact it appears he’s solely responsible for the death of Striking Article as the trainer of the horse
How on earth do you jump to that conclusion Jose? There’s nothing to suggest your ‘fact’ is any such thing other than you putting two and two together and making five.
The horse was given a ‘banned’ treatment when in the care of, yes, Howard Johnson. After that it shouldn’t have been racing. I consider the trainer responsible and accountable for every horse in their care. If I’m making five, then I’m making five.
At the very least, there’s no doubt this fatality should not have happened on a British racecourse.
the fact it appears he’s solely responsible for the death of Striking Article as the trainer of the horse
How on earth do you jump to that conclusion Jose? There’s nothing to suggest your ‘fact’ is any such thing other than you putting two and two together and making five.
I found it interesting that there was a post-mortem. Is that standard practise and who would order/authorise it? Is it routine, was it instructed by a vet, the owner, the trainer or the BHA?
Very interesting case and it’ll be fascinating to see how it pans out.
I thought there was always a post-mortem because it helps research into how injuries occur? Although I heard that ages ago so may no longer be true.
My assumption, based on that, was that the fatal injury had been to the same leg as the surgery, and was found as part of a routine investigation. It doesn’t create a very nice image and I expect it will be a very emotive topic.
I found it interesting that there was a post-mortem. Is that standard practise and who would order/authorise it? Is it routine, was it instructed by a vet, the owner, the trainer or the BHA?
Or, the insurers?
The insurers do require a post-mortem.
I doubt much has changed since I worked in that industry and, at the time, Mr Johnson was high on the insurance blacklist owing to alleged misdemeanours.If, and I stress if, he is found guilty then I hope they throw the book at him.
In my view, the neurectomy issue is an animal welfare issue, and it is simply unacceptable to run the unfortunate animal in that condition.
This type of thing brings the game into disgrace and (for once) I heartily applaud the BHA.Can anyone explain why it’s taken so long to get to this point.
It’s nearly a year since Striking Article died and the steroid offences are even older.
I found it interesting that there was a post-mortem. Is that standard practise and who would order/authorise it? Is it routine, was it instructed by a vet, the owner, the trainer or the BHA?
Or, the insurers?
From the Guardian online report (one Greg Wood) : "There are clear indications that the investigation into Striking Article’s neurectomy was the result of intelligence received, since it would be most unusual to perform a post-mortem on a horse that had been put down after such a minor race."
Curiouser, and curiouser!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/racing … ds-newsxml
This article is just as interesting.
The "I didn’t know argument" is no get out clause any-more – it’s your job to know as a licensed trainer.
The excuses regarding the steroid situation are already flowing. No surprise really…..
- Total Posts 17716
A jockey/trainer got done for 3 years a while back (not trying), that offence is no where near as bad as this list, lets see how having the name Howard Johnson effects the outcome.
Musselburgh on duty vets from the Bush will take the damaged limb from horses dead from fatal injuries on the track for research. I dunno how often they do it, but it does occur. I guess that’s possibly what happened there…….
- Total Posts 17716
I always try and look at these things from the trainers point of view and if I think they genuinely made a mistake or did something in the horses interest I’ll support them all day long.
I can find absolutely no reason why they shouldn’t throw the book at this man.
However I would like to know who performed the surgery. If it was the local gypsy witchdoctor who has no knowledge of racing then perhaps he didn’t know. If it was experienced veterinary surgeons used to performing this operation on racehorses I would bet my bottom dollar he knew.
As far as steriods go I’m unclear why they were administered but they are performance enhancing, no ifs or buts about that.
The jury is still out but a ban looks inevitable.
I wonder if he realised there was no way out and that’s why he told Denis O’Regan his contract wouldn’t be renewed. A feather in his cap if he did but there’s still no excuses that justify waht has taken place.
On the same theme, Fist, I go racing fairly regularly in the north, and it’s been some time (6 months?) since I have seen Howard, or indeed Graham Wylie, present. I dont think either were at Cheltenham’s last meeting, although they had 2 runners.
John Hogg and Howard’s brother-in-law Ray have been saddling runners for the stable in the north.It doesn’t bode well for the stable.
Denerving used to be relatively common in horses who suffered from navicular disease (erosion of the navicular bone ).With greater understanding and changes in treatment, it was realised the problem was not necessarily the bone giving pain but the deep flexor tendon within the foot. As a support mechanism for the entire lower leg, the dangers of making that permanently numb became very apparent.
If the horse can’t feel the pain of the tendon tearing, then the tendon will snap, and with no stay apparatus for the lower limb left, the bones will break.
To run horses in that scenario is immoral beyond belief. Not only will he likely kill the horse, as happened in this instance, he is putting the jockeys at even greater risk than they normally experience.Steroids are used in horses to build muscle, it’s a fairly common practice pre sales, or if weak horses are on some time off. It’s far less heinous a crime than the running of a denerved horse.
He should be banned for life. And no horses should be allowed to run from his yard until all vet records are checked.
http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/sport/ … s/?ref=rss
Wondered about the title. Born in Crook.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.