We are in danger of losing one of our greatest horse trainers, Peter Moody, because he can’t defend himself against a public perception of dishonesty created by ongoing inquiries, stewards, and uncertainty.
Most racing trade people will be surprised that a race-day swelling poultice has brought about the latest misdemeanor.
Let my case be clear. My support for the Racing Integrity investigators is unwavering. They are a force for good. I have no problems with individuals that are paid to spy on licensed individuals.
I do have a problem with entrapment, like any right minded person.
The Racing Integrity investigators have been right on nearly all occasions, at least technically.
Peter Moody feels he is being targeted by the Racing Integrity investigators. It is implied that they may be trying to build circumstantial evidence to support the stewards case of a single cobalt finding for one runner from the 1200+ starters the stable has sent to the races since cobalt became an issue.
Recently, Sydney trainer Kevin Moses was recently suspended for twelve months for a horse returning a positive swab.
I’m not going to defend Moody’s cobalt accusation, just point out the fact that since the single ‘positive’, other trainers have had multiple positive returns.
Strong support for Moody came from Chris Waller during his successful post-race interview after the last at Canterbury on the same afternoon.
Waller found himself in a similar situation to Moody a season or so ago.
A Waller winner returned a positive swab. The stable was at a loss as to how it happened. Thankfully for the Waller stable, they had 24 hour video surveillance that saved his/their bacon. It clearly showed an employee accidentally entering the doped horse’s stable and administering a treatment meant for the horse next door. A mistake that cost Waller $30,000 fine but not a suspension.
Unfortunately, when you get really good at the racing game jealously reigns supreme.
My methodology for assessing trainers worldwide is good. Both Moody and Waller have continually returned the same competence rating for many years and already this season are hitting their expected mark.
These two trainers are not cheats. Nor are Hawkes, Waterhouse, Snowden, O’Shea, Hayes, Pride, Van Dyke, Freedman etc or the young turk Maher. They a just high-class professionals.
There have been a few that don’t pass my muster and others that seem to be perennial offenders but still hold their license after serving suspension after suspension but don’t cop the same integrity slur of our top stables.
Will Aidan O’Brien and other European trainers take fright at this latest nonsense?
Will they read about the forced scratching of Moody’s horse because a raceday swelling poltice and change their minds about visiting for the spring?
Racing Integrity investigators and stewards have pushed our industry onto shifting ground.
What needs to happen?
Following are some starting points for discussion.
– Licensing vets is a must.
– After considerable consultation with the industry, license racehorse treatments and supplements and put them on a website;
Currently they have a list of banned substances that probably only a chemist could understand. This move may even provide another stream of revenue for Racing Australia.
Trainers need to able to treat there horses on race-day for minor aliments. What needs to be decided is what is performance enhancing treatments or where it can be described as a ‘masker’ of prohibitive substances.
– Racing Australia to create database that is available 24/7 allowing both trainers and treating vets to independently log all horse treatments.
They already have all this setup at RISA including Trainers, horses, stable returns, trade log-ins and more.
Technology is so advanced these days that an SMS message (encrypted) could log details or request a stewards clearance almost as it happens.
– If a trainer reports a stable intrusion, he is not penalised for his honesty.
Many stables in the old days had various techniques to identify if a stable had an unauthorised entry. For example, the old technique of placing a bent piece of straw in the crack between the frame and door-edge, usually above the hinge of the stable door. If the door was opened the straw would fall into the bedding. Simple but effective.
The irony of knowing this was if you reported this to the stewards you ran the risk of suspension for lack of security.
– Very cheap video surveillance equipment and external internet video logging is now available. Even the ability to log-in to the feed ‘live’ from a mobile phone is very simple now.
Many smaller operations would love to install the equipment but are afraid of the technology. Maybe Racing Australia could become come to there aid in practical ways.
– Race-day blood testing is excellent but a little more needs to be done.
Assertive action needs to be taken now before out industry and sport is again mired in innuendo. We know how well some segments of the media don’t let the facts get in the way of a good story when it comes to horse-racing.
kv joef
Roar Guru
Great news from the RAD board concerning the Matt Lawrie 'ice' case. Conviction recorded but no penalty with ' no culpability on behalf of the trainer.'. Thought as much. as i mentioned above the need for wide-spread use of modern technology to secure stables is a necessity with the various jurisdictions providing cost-effective methods. Yes there is a lot being done but as the summary of the waller case typifies, a little bit more means the diff between doubt and no doubt. the tech needed is dead-cheap but i'm sure if tenders were called it would get silly. Who knows ... maybe the Racing Integrity departments might put on their own security consultants to visit stables and advise. For instance, on my properties if a fly-farts, it is recorded at two centres both with night/light vision, many cameras at various angles plus other stuff and all this overkill for less than $1500.
Nathan Absalom
Roar Guru
It does depend a little on the details of how vets are licensed and what conditions are attached too them, but I would strongly argue that the welfare of the animal should be available as a defence for breaking the rules of racing. Racing authorities wouldn't want to strike off a vet only for them to be exonerated by a body of their peers anyway, except for exceptional circumstances. We have had some trouble with the new cobalt thresholds for greyhounds, which are lower than that of horses. It turns out some of the wheat-free kibble have cobalt, along with some of the dog biscuits. Indeed, manufacturers are recalling some batches of vitamins, in this environment an elevated cobalt level clearly means something quite different to a positive for EPO or cocaine. Hopefully I'll be able to convince some people to have their stories of when they've been charged with breaking the rules of racing to come forward, it's a better way to understand the issues than using hypotheticals.
kv joef
Roar Guru
excellent comment Nathan and i hope not. most performance enhancers either come initially from chemists and/or/thru vets. By all means bring the profession to the table when making the conditions for licensing. the trouble is that a vet can argue to their body of non-involved peers that the 'medication' was do do with the welfare of the horse or that the trainer misused the 'medication' ... sorry 'vitamins'. nearly every individual involved in the industry has to be licensed and so are bound to the 'rules'. we are entering a period of possible dankiness where (technically) stuff isn't illegal (yet) but illegal intent is evident if anyone treating a racing animal has to report independently to a third person it cuts down the chance of misunderstanding or collusion.
Nathan Absalom
Roar Guru
I don't think that licensing vets is necessary or desirable, although I completely agree with the licensing of approved products. Vets are a profession and should be answerable to their professional bodies, licensing vets will eventually create the same problem as you're describing, that the voices of the profession will be ignored when the circumstances are all too hard for racing authorities. Let's ask the question in another way, who should be writing the rules on what treatments should be permitted on raceday, racing authorities, owners and trainers, or equine vets?
kv joef
Roar Guru
Sometimes you just bury your head in your heads ... I, like most, like Waller. He is pretty much straight-up. his horses run to form. and he is getting most things right. To come out so strongly and show the emotion he did would have earned him many plaudits from his peers because i'm sure he was speaking for many of them. for the record, i've never met or had anything to do professionally or socially with Waller or Moody. i have never had a prob backing their horses or with their race results.
kv joef
Roar Guru
Agree Razzar, your sentiments are similar to Bondy and i agree. The deeper question is ... what the rules should be? the racing public need to be educated about stable doings and then when there is an inquiry not automatically jump to the conclusion that something wicked had come their way. this is the reasoning behind my request not only to hurry-up and license vets, license approved products for use in all occasions.
kv joef
Roar Guru
Little mixed, thx Scuba should have went back and checked stewards findings on Waller's Junoob case ... here it is ... http://www.racingnsw.com.au/default.aspx?s=article-display&id=16899 It's not v.long and well worth a read for the interested.
Razzar
Guest
The race day treatment rules have been toughend since Melbourne cup day 2113, when two cup runners were allowed to race, after detection of race day treatments. Recently a Victorian border trainer had her horse scratched because of a race day treatment. So the stewards can't just have rules for some, and not for others.
Scuba
Guest
"Thankfully for the Waller stable, they had 24 hour video surveillance that saved his/their bacon. It clearly showed an employee accidentally entering the doped horse’s stable and administering a treatment meant for the horse next door." I think you'll find none of that is true - Waller's foreman threw herself under the bus in the Junoob case and one of his submissions on penalty was that he had extended his cctv coverage since the incident.
kv joef
Roar Guru
Agree Bondy bigtime! Allowing that Moody had one pos in 1200+ starters giving 42% placings of which 39% converted to winners ... and one pos in all that time, with all those blood samples available. Remember they retested Black Caviar and his other group performers and got zero. call me an old racing cynic but Mr Moody seems to have been stung by someone. Whether it was a vet saying try this or some low-life trying to make the import a good-thing against his stablemate? I wouldn't be surprised if Moody had an idea but he can't say what he thinks as he will be suspended anyway. Whatever happened that once ... didn't happen again. Moody isn't an idiot and only an idiot risks a million-dollar p.a. operation. if you think Moody's starters/win-place ratio is high, that is the reason i mentioned all those other stables because they are in the same ball-park and i could have easily doubled/trebled the number of 'winning' stables. The racing game seems to be running into the same probs that the footy codes had with ASADA only recently. many of the corrections suggested above are already in-place. Medication has to be recorded in a stable 'day-book' etc but the authorities are still playing cops and robbers instead of working with trainers and coming to a plan that works for the industry. Chris Waller said as much. In days gone by when Mammoth-Juice was around, some horses were inclined to return ratings that staggered belief. PMoody's horses don't surprise with a 'where did that horse find an extra leg' performance nor do the other top stables.
no one in particular
Roar Guru
Moody gets caught again, has a whinge. he knows he rules
Jason Cornell
Expert
The trainers Association has been incredibly silent today. Imagine an AFL coach having an outburst like that and no response from AFL Coaches rep. The problem is - Moody resigned from Vic Trainers Assiciation He a a member of NSW TA - but they broke away from the Australian Trainers Association in 2008. The Australian Trainers Association recently demoted its long serving CEO - whom was widely ridiculed for basically no cation - with a guy from outside the industry with no Racing experience. Also they said they recruited him, but nobody has seen a job ad and they could not afford a proper recruitment agency. So it was the ATA responsibility to speak up with Racing Australia's proposed rule changes. Do you think they did?
Bondy
Guest
I think punters just want integrity across the board and not targeting high profiles with in the industry or punishing Neville nobody's ...