In this Discussion
- 2lifetimewinners February 2020
- AbbysAce January 2020
- aussiebattler January 2020
- Cant_Refuse February 2020
- Chariotsonfire February 2020
- curmudgeon January 2020
- freodockers February 2020
- Gilgamesh January 2020
- Ivorytrunkey86 February 2020
- JayJay January 2020
- jum January 2020
- MrSmartArse January 2020
- Ridersonthestorm33 January 2020
- savethegame January 2020
- tony January 2020
- VillageKid January 2020
Who's Online
0 Members & 29 Non Members
Comments
:-@
Hmm read this EPO in regular micro tests boost ability, and not necessarily testable.
In NZ our leading trainers, who dominate all group racing in NZ, publicly advertise ‘their’ Blood Solutions services. One can only guess what might happen should they have a blood solution client trainer who was competing again their own trained horses in $100k to $1,000,000k races. This top trainer partnership have the monopoly on public blood solutions service in NZ horse racing. No one in our NZ harness horse policing division seems prepared to challenge this.
Our NZ policing divisions also do not publicly declare that blood spinning is lawful and permitted. Yet it is permitted in NZ, as our industry controllers (HRNZ) passed a rule that enables spun blood to be jugged back into a racehorse 2 days before racing. This is in lay terms is what HRNZ prohibited substance rule says, viz:
The HRNZ regulations relating to Prohibited Substances (see copy of 2014 HRNZ Regulations here on this stated web site) and note that clause 7.11 enables some aspects of blood spinning, where it says excluded from those regulations re out of competition banned practices are administering:
“platelet rich plasma (PRP) and interleukin 1 and interceptor receptor antagonists protein (IRAP)…”
The same prohibited substance rules prohibit a trainer using Vicks on a horse’s nose pre-race — or rubbing muscle soreness lotion onto muscles pre-race? Seems that something is rather imbalanced.
As well, out industry’s chief vet advisor is also a multiple player/participant in our NZ industry, with serious perceived conflicts… so suggested changes from that quarter are unlikely.
— David W Phillips / Pokeno, NZ
freodockers likes this post.
freodockers, curmudgeon likes this post.
Got a link for us?
Cant_Refuse dislikes this post.
I don't know the laws surrounding this behaviour but surely more could be done to retrieve his phone.
Reminds me of an incident 10 years ago where a person was caught with multiple viles of EPO. Nope we won't follow him to see where he's taking them, we will just get him instead.
At this stage I would say the brush is out and the "broom" is still in hiding.
A leopard never changes its spots.
Offthebit likes this post.
Cant_Refuse dislikes this post.
Guilty until proven innocent
"Guilty til proven innocent" don't had over your phone.
Pretty simple.
Cant_Refuse dislikes this post.
Got all the facts have ya? Or just slandering a bloke after you have heard one side of a story?
He did surrender his phone and the stewards returned it the same day, then they wanted it again and he said no as it was the only POC with his children who dont live with him and they couldnt give a time as to when he would get it back. But hey let’s just start attacking the bloke without both sides of the story
Toepuntit likes this post.