Peter Moody will not return to training after ban

So you're basing your opinion on a harness steward (with questionable motives/ethics exposed in the NSW cases) and a vet (granted a head vet with equine experience but NOT an expert in PK/PD or even epidemiology therefore I'll equipped to conduct and interpret any results from the 'research'). Those stats are non peer reviewed and acknowledged even by Prof Hibbert as a poor sample size.. couple that with RVs administration expert (Payne)acknowledging bioaccumulation and what proof do you have?? The house of cards is going to fall down its a matter of time.. What now with the ibuprofen positives? Racing has prosecuted lots of trainers and now are saying it can store in the body and release under certain conditions- and those trainers are not charged? What about those before them, already fined and branded cheats?? Inconsistency is the key along with incompetence from the moment the idea was sparked to introduce a threshold..

The Wan study commissioned by the HKJC recommended an out of competition testing threshold of 2,000 (yes thousand), due to the large amount of cobalt (in the form of B12) in bona fide feeds and supplements. Unfortunately the authorities rushed a threshold in without adequate industry consultation and have a testing procedure that is completely unable to differentiate between good cobalt (B12) and bad cobalt (CoCl2). The entire thing has been a debacle from the authorities and is now just starting to unravel, at immense cost to the industry. VCAT is going to be quite a show. And no, NOIP, connections of other horses weren't cheated out of anything. As far as we know, the stuff doesn't even work.

The man who picked and chooses races ensuring caviar was never defeated. Gets found out and quits - good bye

Agree with your evaluation Nathan. There is another case to begin shortly where the circumstances also raise my curiosity and primary doubt about intent-guilt. During the cobalt trials, i think maybe 3 other cobalt cases were discovered (in the bush). Two were of small trainers but the other surprisingly, very experienced trainer-team, the O'Sullivans from Stawell. my first premise is why would a v. experienced operator of many decades use cobalt in the middle of one of the most high-profile dope cases in racing's history? The racing game hasn't many rocket scientists but that implied action would be one of the most profoundly stupid things a person/s could do unless they thought they were protected or didn't do it. i have my own opinion on what might have happened but i'll wait for the evidence and watch the case with interest.

I'd probably add to that though the concentration does matter. One of the striking thing about the other cases that included truckloads of evidence was the concentration of cobalt was in the thousands. That's not surprising btw, the concentration of drug will be measured on a log scale and it's not a particularly potent drug. I may flesh this out in an article later, but the premise of making an arbitrary number and saying this side of it you're a saint, the other side you're a devil was never in the best interests of racing. Smaller penalties for lower concentrations would have given stables the opportunity to properly comply and understand the risks they were taking with medications, but this way just gave the impression the only way you could be over the threshold is to cheat and personally I'm unconvinced by that.

to continue my comment below ... was just emailed Bartley's latest attempt (Age - 21/3/16 - http://www.smh.com.au/sport/horseracing/peter-moody-penalty-baffles-many--in-and-out-of-racing-20160321-gnn4dh.html) ... Something that doesn't sit with me is Bartley's slur the Bowman RAD board ... Bartley wrote, 'How could two tribunals (ie Lewis/Bowman) - comprising eminent lawyers and both chaired by a judge - reach two decisions on cobalt that could not be further apart.' Here is an answer Mr. Bartley --- EVIDENCE ... legally binding evidence. Cobalt was never the issue, it was how it got there. Bartley failed to mention in previous cobalt cases in NSW /VIC, there was truckloads of the evidence, binding and circumstantial continuity eg who supplied it, who delivered it, who accepted it, who administered it and the rest. But after 18 months of Moody's investigation, there was nothing that would stand up in an actual common law court. Bartley failed to mention that Kevin Moses, in NSW, was originally given a $20,000 fine + good behaviour bond, in lieu of a suspension, for a similar offence but on appeal he was given a 12-month disqualification. BTW, read how Bartley reported the Stanley theft. This may give an independent reader an idea of his balanced opinions ... (http://www.smh.com.au/sport/horseracing/stanley-gets-ninemonth-ban-over-racehorse-sale-20160321-gnno6f.html) . I wonder how Bartley would react if someone tried to rip him for $70,000 ... for me, it probably wouldn't be the money but the absolute betrail of trust. journalism is generally viewed as a v.low profession. i wonder how that perception came about? Probably a few smearing the many. interesting to note that Bartley was told, a few months ago, his official racing press-credentials were being revoked because of his jaundiced reporting towards the industry. He saved by his cohorts. Bartley spends a lot of time writing negatively about Moody ... to an outsider, it appears similar to a vendetta. Has it an origin? Wonder what it is? Might be the same source that supplied Walkley winning journalist, Kate McClymont, with her bizarre 'facts' allegedly indicating Messara as motivated by self-interest concerning the QEII a couple of weeks ago? ... Suppose McClymont and Bartley are justified by the journalistic maxim of ... 'don't left facts get in the way of a garbage story'.

Stanley attempted to steal $90,000 from his clients (supporters?). if it happened on 'civi-street' he'd looking at time. The finding against Moody was negligence. the correct finding. the stewards quite rightly tried to prove otherwise and fell short. i personally was not surpised at the result as last September i raised some curiosities about the case that didn't sit right ... http://www.theroar.com.au/2015/09/17/moody-is-right-time-for-a-rules-revamp/ ... you held a similar viewpoint in response to my article before the hearing. You sound like a 'hang-in judg'e to me NOip. Do you think a fellow trainer with the unquestioned integrity of Mick Price would come to his defence if there was a doubt of his innocence against the intent charge. Such an action would put himself in the spotlight. i grew up in the trade during the 'dark ages', so there isn't much i haven't 'heard' about. For me, Moody's case falls in the 'dumb-ass' basket and always did. Understand what a disqualification means to someone in the trade - it is a label of implied criminality that never goes away.

Wouldn't be surprised in future, Moody teams up with another trainer. It seems a very natural progression, with 7 day racing and costs being shared make training far more attractive. Very hard to get racing out of ones blood.

Stanley stole bread roll, Moody grand theft auto The standard cobalt reading in horses is 50 µg/L. RV, and every other state, introduced a threshold of 200. Sanders and Wainscott suggested a threshold of 100. If 50 µg/L is recognised as being the upper limit, the odds of a legitiment read of 100 µg/L is 1 in 115,000. So the current threshold is double the suggested amount, and 4x the natural occurance, a very, very generous difference. Lidari's reading was 380. The chances of this reading being natural is one in several million, and readings this high in tests have not been the result of contaminated feed, but direct administration of products like Hemop, VAM or hemo-15 Moody blatantly cheated, and ripped off prizemoney from the beaten owners and put the horses life at risk. Stanley's offense pales in comparison

I've been listening to these Pat Bartley arguments for the past 18 months - which in a nutshell is 'well how did he get there? ... he has to be guilty" ... really? Maybe NOIP, you equate the stealing of a bread roll to grand-theft auto which is my way of saying comparing dissimilar cases to one another is silly.

Dodgy sale of a horse - little known trainer gets 9 MONTH DISQUALIFICATION Tests positive to Cobalt - most well nown trainer in state gets 6 MONTH SUSPENSION Yep, victorian race officials are officially a joke

Pretty sad for the game to lose such an elite trainer. His consistent winning ways with horses from day one was quickly noted. Like many elite trainers, they lead the pack in many things. Not only could he find a horse but could find previously unnoted jockeys too, regardless of gender. he was still doing it to the last making sure Daniel Stackhouse got a start as a senior. Remember when Chad Schofield split from Lindsay Park, Moody was the first to get him going as an independent. His professional efforts with Black Caviar are well documented but he realised v.quickly the horse would become a part of Australian folklore allowing her every step to be documented and for everybody to enjoy her journey. That alone refocused the public again on racing as the greatness of Makybe Diva began to fade. I've often heard that training a racehorse is easy. I think not. On a personal level, i hope he does a Lee Freedman and bails for a few years, freshens up, builds a team from the outside. Lee seems to be enjoying himself now. He gives an indication he may become a racing manager ... can you imagine being a trainer for Pete Moody ... you would need to be v.good :) . in short, he owes the game nothing but the game owes him more than a little.

Well I only back Moody trained horses so that will be the end of my punting now.