In this Discussion
- DamienWyer March 2012
- RIO March 2012
- Rodent March 2012
- TheDarkHorse March 2012
- TheDiva March 2012
- whereamigoingwrong March 2012
- whitewash March 2012
Who's Online
0 Members & 40 Non Members
Murray Hansen 6 months for whipping a horse
West Australian Racing
burntcaviar
103 posts
Interesting to read in todays paper a trainer was given 6 months for whipping and kicking a horse
this comes literally days after Hana Dickson was only given 4 months for injecting a horse with steriods (there was topic on here about it but seems to have been deleted for some reason?)
no wonder the racing industry gets a bad name from the animal activists
this comes literally days after Hana Dickson was only given 4 months for injecting a horse with steriods (there was topic on here about it but seems to have been deleted for some reason?)
no wonder the racing industry gets a bad name from the animal activists
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
The stewards report did have very little detail, so it is not for us to fill in the gaps with what we "think" may have happened.
If we can stick to the facts, and what we know, that would be great.
No comment or opinion from me, as i know we have to stick to the facts..and the above is a direct quote from the article in The West...
Imagine what this clown does at home to the horses he trains.
Didn't realise that some trainers are such good judges on alternative treatments for their horses. Cos both this horse and the other one were not effected by the treatment that their trainers were banned from trainer for :?
I found this definition in the online dictionary.
nobble [ˈnɒbəl]
vb (tr) Brit slang
1. (Individual Sports & Recreations / Horse Racing) to disable (a racehorse), esp with drugs
2. to win over or outwit (a person) by underhand means
3. to suborn (a person, esp a juror) by threats, bribery, etc.
4. to steal; filch
5. to get hold of; grab
6. to kidnap
[back formation from nobbler, from false division of an hobbler (one who hobbles horses) as a nobbler]
nobbler n
And by the way to be consistent delete this thread
In both these case there is no way the actions of these trainers could be assured that they wouldn't hurt the horse..There is no place for this type of behaviour in our industry and it should be wiped out.
I am fully aware that to train these animals it is a bit of a case of man v beast at times..And that contest can get willing and dangerous for both man and animal.
But both these actions were done with no regard for the horse..One cos he got angry and the other for ?????? reading between the lines a dispute with the owner!!!!!
Ban me if you like Diva..but this is just not good enough for the people in the industry who are charged with keeping the high morale ground in the industry to simply hand out slaps on the wrist cos a vet inspection revealed no damage to the horse...
So if the kick by the trotting trainer had chipped a knee bone and forced the horse out of racing the penalty would be higher???? Or if the steroid injection made the horse have a heart attack the penalty would have been higher??
Both of these trainers behaved in an unacceptable manner...and the wonderful ethics committee has left itself wide open (again and again and again) for not taking a tough stance against known acts of mistreatment of horses in trainers care.
And we all complain about animal activists giving our industry a hard time. :? :? :? These penalties are close to proof that they might be right.
I own horses that race..My whole life revolves around this industry. I want to be in it for the next 30 years and i know that my kids will also be involved for many years to come....For christsake wake up.....We need to stamp this crap out and self manage the industry...if we don't then some bureaucrat will come in and set rules that will reduce us to pony trots on a Sunday afternoon......... :x :x
Im not going to ban anyone for having an opinion.
Hypothetical......A horse you feel is badly in need of a spell is about to leave your stable and go to a ruthless trainer who you believe is going to run it into the ground. With the horse's welfare in mind, you decide to give it a long acting anabolic steroid to ensure it does well and puts on much needed weight. At the same time, you know it can't be raced for 10 weeks.
This is a hypothetical situation where the wrongful act has been with the horse's best interests at heart.
I'm not saying this was the case but I am illustrating why people who don't know the facts shouldn't be going off half cocked.
I injected my own horse with anabolic steroids on numerous occasions. He was retired sound and given to a local riding school after 80 starts (most over a staying trip). I looked after him. The injections helped him. The abuse of steroids by human athletes has stigmatised them.
They have their place.
This horse was a stayer that was at it's 3rd or 4th start..You could make an assumption that most stayers would have more runs than that in a prep...
The horse was nominated for a start about 2 weeks after the injection and was scratched and then sent for a spell..You can make about a million assumptions as to why this happened.
Human abuse of steroids have proven long term damage and is tightly controlled...I'm sure there are lots of long term studies of the effect of steroids on horses - i just haven't seen them..
Whatever.... it isn't a departing trainers position to treat a horse for future issues..that is the new trainers job...The trainers very rarely pass on any racing and training information so why would this one then take on the extra expense of a steroid injection to help out in what has been reported to be a very contentious and acrimonious situation????
I understand however that the stewards cant write war and peace on every press release they send out.
I think we should leave our comments right there for now. Some of you who have been very outspoken might be surprised and would most likely be retracting those comments.