March 12, 2007 at 22:16 #1094
On March 2nd Greg Wood of the Guardian published a piece on a closed- to- the- press meeting of the NTF addressed by Paul Scotney which included this quote:
""Paul Scotney, the Horseracing Regulatory Authority’s director of security, has told a closed meeting of the National Trainers’ Federation that a "very small number" of its members "are believed to be using performance-enhancing drugs which are unlikely to show up in our post-race testing"."
This is a very serious matter and well done to Mr Wood for doing his job as a journalist. But, as far as I can remember, this priceless piece of info. never appeared in the RP.
Question is, why?
Is it that the RP rely so much on revenue from bookmaker advertising that the official editorial policy is not to publish anything that might put readers off losing money to their paymasters? Or is it that most of the RP hacks are actually as useless as their writings suggest and wouldn’t know how to get a story, let alone understand it’s implications for racing?
Harsh judgement on the RP, or not?
richardMarch 12, 2007 at 22:19 #45180cormack15Keymaster
- Total Posts 8783
I suspect it’s a can of worms they are all reluctant to open. Well done Greg Wood, at or near the top of his profession.
On the drugs issue – I wonder WHO?March 12, 2007 at 22:26 #45181barry dennisMember
- Total Posts 398
if all else fails, blame bookmakers, how ridiculous
(Edited by barry dennis at 11:36 pm on Mar. 12, 2007)March 12, 2007 at 22:38 #45183HFoxMember
- Total Posts 2
Sure their are book makers involved, and jockeys, and owners, and punters, and members of the jokey club (sorry old gag i know….one too many c’s in the jockey club) but the reason why is the system not any interest body.
It goes on….people are allowed to get away with it…
Example…..a friend claimed a horse and it took two years to get the horse straight again…..not because it was injured but the feckin think went into withdrawal! The vet confirmed what it was on before it was claimed but of course would not put anything into writing…..
…..another comment from a trainer…..I have to use xxxxxx because everyone else is and its the only way I can win.
Until they treat horses as they treat atheletes -<br>re-introduce random stable checks (funny how that disappeared so quickly)<br>do random blood tests of horses ‘at rest'<br>ensure they know where all horses are kept in or out of training if a registered thoroughbred<br>and punish the vets involved
nothing will happen.March 12, 2007 at 22:46 #45185
Read the post again Barry, it was the RP’s competence that was being questioned. But , if the cap fits…..
Interesting info HFox and interesting that the HRA have just introduced random pre-race drugs testing, as they did at Warwick recently.
richardMarch 12, 2007 at 22:49 #45186barry dennisMember
- Total Posts 398
read it, rp afraid of upsetting bookmakers because of revenue, still ridiculousMarch 12, 2007 at 22:52 #45187HFoxMember
- Total Posts 2
Missed that….been working too hard since xmas and hardly seen the RP….hence coming in here to justify to myself giving Mr Dennis my money over the next few days…..March 12, 2007 at 23:08 #45189
Barry, you are kidding, any publication that relies on a big chunk of it’s revenue from a limited set of advertisers is going to look after those advertisers editorially. It would only take Willbrokes to withdraw their advertising for a month or so and the RP would be in a real dither, particularly as MGN have put the paper up for sale. What effect do you think that would have on potential purchasers, if a major evenue source was witholding support?
If you don’t know, then think about it.
richardMarch 13, 2007 at 00:04 #45191GlennParticipant
- Total Posts 1981
I’d have thought Willbrokes would support the publication of anything that wheens punters off real racing.
As for milkshakes: the prima facie evidence of certain trainers using them, or similar agents, is so obvious. How many times do we see certain trainers’ runners run through the pain barrier? No coincidence that said trainers’ horses put in the most volatile performances, put in significantly better performances on stiff tracks/longer trips and often improve markedly when entering their care.March 13, 2007 at 00:39 #45193ZorroMember
- Total Posts 472
um. I wrote about 5000 words on this subject about 18 months ago. I think it went in the Post.March 13, 2007 at 08:14 #45197ZorroMember
- Total Posts 472
Five articles on drugs in summer 2005. Not sure of the dates. They might be in the Post cuttings library, but if you can access anything there you’re better with a computer than I am. Sorry not to be more help. Maybe someone keeps old papers.<br>March 13, 2007 at 09:06 #45198Lincoln DuncanMember
- Total Posts 157
Richard, did you once try for a job at the RP, but fail to get it?March 13, 2007 at 09:21 #45200Nor1Member
- Total Posts 384
Drug abuse on horses could be reduced.
Stable staff know who do it but they want to keep their jobs (perhaps not at that stable) so they say nowt.
It’s a pity, with mobile phones able to record evidence, a few do not have the courage and support to spill the beans but would they be protected if they did?<br>I’m not sure they think they would.
The penalties are also derisory. Trainers make excuses and are not really held responsible unless it can be proved they were in attendance when the drug/s were administered. Ridiculous, as the horses are in their care and under their instructions.The rules need to change.March 13, 2007 at 09:45 #45202Maxilon 5Member
- Total Posts 2432
Richard, did you once try for a job at the RP, but fail to get it?
Ooooh, pithy. Very pithy.March 13, 2007 at 12:12 #45204
No Lincoln Duncan I have never applied for a job at the RP, nor MGN.
The point surely is that an address by the head of the HRA in a closed session of the NTF has to be big news. Something was going to be said of great importance – and indeed it was. That the HRA knows that some trainers are milkshaking horses is as big a story as the recent jockey goings on.
Yet the RP’s newshounds ignored the story. A story, the equivalent of which in any other sporting publication would have been the front page lead.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.