G'day Punter!

Sign In Register

In this Discussion

Who's Online

0 Members & 48 Non Members

How long will this inquiry be adjourned for?

West Australian Racing

Comments

  • DamienWyerDamienWyer    7,985 posts
    I can't agree with the position that a Head Trainer / Senior Trainer / Trainer (I emphasis because I want to be clear that it is the guy who runs the business) must be accountable for everything that happens in his or her yard. You simply cannot lay blame at the feet of employees and have them more harshly treated by rule infractions.

    Nothing goes on in a yard that hasn't at some time or another, come from a direction of the Trainer to staff, and if it doesn't it should have. With Trainers having code of conduct, rules of racing, and legal regulations under which to operate a business, they simply cannot allow staff to make untrained decisions without supervision and expect that their defence argument that they were not in attendance will stand being tested in a tribunal.

    In this respect, this has nothing to do with this matter in how it relates to Grant Williams. By allowing this defence, Stewards are laying a precedent in future cases of 'it wasn't my fault I was in Melbourne' defence. RWWA and Stewards need to send a clear message that this is unacceptable and ultimately whoever holds the licence to train is the person responsible. There is no mitigation for absence. 
    +1 -1
  • IntoItIntoIt    659 posts
    Ignorance is no defence and ....what a poisoned chalice being a foreman is. Surely these foreman have to start standing up for themselves. Whose going to employ them otherwise?
    +1 -1
  • LeglessLegless    5,108 posts
    Damien Wyer said:

    I can't agree with the position that a Head Trainer / Senior Trainer / Trainer (I emphasis because I want to be clear that it is the guy who runs the business) must be accountable for everything that happens in his or her yard. You simply cannot lay blame at the feet of employees and have them more harshly treated by rule infractions.

    Nothing goes on in a yard that hasn't at some time or another, come from a direction of the Trainer to staff, and if it doesn't it should have. With Trainers having code of conduct, rules of racing, and legal regulations under which to operate a business, they simply cannot allow staff to make untrained decisions without supervision and expect that their defence argument that they were not in attendance will stand being tested in a tribunal.

    In this respect, this has nothing to do with this matter in how it relates to Grant Williams. By allowing this defence, Stewards are laying a precedent in future cases of 'it wasn't my fault I was in Melbourne' defence. RWWA and Stewards need to send a clear message that this is unacceptable and ultimately whoever holds the licence to train is the person responsible. There is no mitigation for absence. 

    I agree 100%.

    However what if ?? - The foreman declares under oath in his/her evidence that the Trainer gave no direction, past or present, and had no knowledge of the actions taken and he/she did so at their own volition?


    +1 -1
  • RexRex    406 posts
    Damien Wyer said:

    I can't agree with the position that a Head Trainer / Senior Trainer / Trainer (I emphasis because I want to be clear that it is the guy who runs the business) must be accountable for everything that happens in his or her yard. You simply cannot lay blame at the feet of employees and have them more harshly treated by rule infractions.

    Nothing goes on in a yard that hasn't at some time or another, come from a direction of the Trainer to staff, and if it doesn't it should have. With Trainers having code of conduct, rules of racing, and legal regulations under which to operate a business, they simply cannot allow staff to make untrained decisions without supervision and expect that their defence argument that they were not in attendance will stand being tested in a tribunal.

    In this respect, this has nothing to do with this matter in how it relates to Grant Williams. By allowing this defence, Stewards are laying a precedent in future cases of 'it wasn't my fault I was in Melbourne' defence. RWWA and Stewards need to send a clear message that this is unacceptable and ultimately whoever holds the licence to train is the person responsible. There is no mitigation for absence. 

    Legless said:


    Damien Wyer said:

    I can't agree with the position that a Head Trainer / Senior Trainer / Trainer (I emphasis because I want to be clear that it is the guy who runs the business) must be accountable for everything that happens in his or her yard. You simply cannot lay blame at the feet of employees and have them more harshly treated by rule infractions.

    Nothing goes on in a yard that hasn't at some time or another, come from a direction of the Trainer to staff, and if it doesn't it should have. With Trainers having code of conduct, rules of racing, and legal regulations under which to operate a business, they simply cannot allow staff to make untrained decisions without supervision and expect that their defence argument that they were not in attendance will stand being tested in a tribunal.

    In this respect, this has nothing to do with this matter in how it relates to Grant Williams. By allowing this defence, Stewards are laying a precedent in future cases of 'it wasn't my fault I was in Melbourne' defence. RWWA and Stewards need to send a clear message that this is unacceptable and ultimately whoever holds the licence to train is the person responsible. There is no mitigation for absence. 

    I agree 100%.

    However what if ?? - The foreman declares under oath in his/her evidence that the Trainer gave no direction, past or present, and had no knowledge of the actions taken and he/she did so at their own volition?


    Does that mean that Lou Luciani should have been held responsible and been disqualified when Drew Taylor  gave Amaquil a go slow tonic. It has not been proved that Grant Williams has done anything wrong in this instance.
    +1 -1
  • LeglessLegless    5,108 posts
    edited May 2014
    Rex said:


    Does that mean that Lou Luciani should have been held responsible and been disqualified when Drew Taylor  gave Amaquil a go slow tonic. It has not been proved that Grant Williams has done anything wrong in this instance.

    No - not at all.
    If the foreman did it on his/her own accord without the trainers knowledge - hasn't he/she in fact "knobbled" the horse and therefore have to face the consequences of that action?
    +1 -1
  • DamienWyerDamienWyer    7,985 posts
    I agree that nothing is proven. What I am saying though is that the Head Trainer is quite simply that, the buck stops with him. Any infraction should be his issue to carry ultimately because if it occurred due to a lack of staff training or awareness of the rules of racing, that is still his responsibility.

    Individual staff also have to know the rules, that is why all staff should have Industry standard approved training, preferably conducted by a TAFE learning facility with a course written and approved by RWWA, long before they ever reach the heights of a Head Trainer.

    This then doesn't abdicate responsibility in the process.
    +1 -1
  • LeglessLegless    5,108 posts
    edited May 2014
    The 2 cases over East mentioned earlier whereas the trainers got time - I believe an unknown treatment was administered by an unknown person(s) and exactly as you say it should be - the buck stopped with the trainer.

    However when it is proven that someone administered something without the trainers direction or knowledge I think it would be very hard to make any sort of penalty stick.

    In saying that though one would have to think that serious consideration would have to be given to taking some form of action against any licensed person where this scenario was proven and the guilty party is a member of staff.

    Maybe a min 12 month suspension and 50k fine and license not reinstated until they have taken appropriate training in HR ( including hiring the right people, putting procedures - training, understanding of The Rules of Racing by staff, etc etc) and can prove that they have put appropriate systems in place to stop the situation being repeated



    +1 -1
  • RodentRodent    7,470 posts
    I think it unlikely that staff make monumental decisions against the rules of racing without the knowledge of the boss. Why would they? I could only imagine they would do so if they were coerced by nefarious parties for financial gain.
     Of course the buck must stop with the trainer. If he is DQ'd and believes he is innocent, he could always take legal action against the employee whose actions led to the DQ.
     I'm pretty sure if a trainer was outed because a staff member was doing dodgy things behind the boss's back, the trainer would have every right to be extremely angry and within his rights to make the guilty party accountable.
     I wonder why this has never happened???
    =))

    thefalcon, Thoroly_Bread, JustanL likes this post.

    +1 -1
  • LeglessLegless    5,108 posts
    Rodent said:

     I'm pretty sure if a trainer was outed because a staff member was doing dodgy things behind the boss's back, the trainer would have every right to be extremely angry and within his rights to make the guilty party accountable.

     I wonder why this has never happened???
    =))
    No cases ( other than Vanilla essence) come to mind :-?
    +1 -1
  • AndrewCarterAndrewCarter    2,171 posts
    I was on amyquil that day when it was given ace and it still won, it didn't have the same devastating acceleration and I wondered why at the time but it still won, great horse.
    +1 -1
  • Piston_BrokePiston_Broke    2,047 posts
    But you can identify super horses b4 anyone else.

    I am tipping Williams gets 6 months

    TheFunkster likes this post.

    +1 -1
  • thefalconthefalcon    20,483 posts

    and who takes over the peters horses?

    alana?

    primemover likes this post.

    HandbrakeHarry dislikes this post.

    +1 -1
  • primemoverprimemover    141 posts
    Only thing that will change is from a G to a C. In first name! If he gets time.,., he seems to be Blessed! Bit like Edwards! Just keep going till we get around to you.!!!
    +1 -1
  • dungydungy    9,278 posts
    the falcon said:

    and who takes over the peters horses?

    alana?


    +1 -1
  • trojanhorsetrojanhorse    345 posts
    ....how long is it taking to "review" evidence .....this is more than 3 weeks .
    +1 -1
  • GoddGodd    203 posts
    No1 should stick up for him, he's a crook that's gone twice. It's right in front of them, and the turn a blind eye, it's pathetic. He should get at least 12 months... Twice!!!
    +1 -1
  • RIORIO    14,902 posts

    too busy getting someone else licensed to take over his stock to review any evidence...Nothing to see here move along....

    It's pretty easy to work out what they are doing...Why not come out and announce that he has a sentence of XXXXXX period and it starts on ..... whatever date it needs to start so that they can organise his replacement.

    It just amazes me how people keep taking horses to him - well not at the moment as he hasn't been found guilty of anything....but if he does get found guilty of something then you'd just about have to be a conspirator to take horse to them in the future.

    Anyway, as with all these situation it'll be sorted out well before the meeting and we'll get told that the sentence was fair and in the best interest of everyone.......except those owners who miss out on winning cheques whilst the cheats have been cashing in of course!!!!

    lame, notapunta likes this post.

    +1 -1
  • lamelame    1,757 posts
    edited June 2014

    I-)

    RIO likes this post.

    +1 -1
  • thefalconthefalcon    20,483 posts

    sadly, this is wa..if this was in the eastern states it would have been done and dusted weeks ago.

    i cannot fathom why they fart-arse around here, its as though they are too scared to upset the apple cart...for some very strange reason.

    wasn't there a new blind mouse appointed who was going to be the tough man, the go-getter, the mr. fixit?

    +1 -1
  • trojanhorsetrojanhorse    345 posts
    And this is what they say of Mr Shane Edwards enquiry ......
    ......In view of the Stewards decision, it is necessary for the inquiry to be resumed in order to hear submissions on the matter of penalty which shall be scheduled on a date to be fixed as soon as possible.

    See how quick the British horse race authority make a decision with Mr Al Zarooni and he was being received a very big penalty.
    .
    +1 -1
  • theketaminekidtheketaminekid    479 posts
    RIO said:


    too busy getting someone else licensed to take over his stock to review any evidence...Nothing to see here move along....

    It's pretty easy to work out what they are doing...Why not come out and announce that he has a sentence of XXXXXX period and it starts on ..... whatever date it needs to start so that they can organise his replacement.

    It just amazes me how people keep taking horses to him - well not at the moment as he hasn't been found guilty of anything....but if he does get found guilty of something then you'd just about have to be a conspirator to take horse to them in the future.

    Anyway, as with all these situation it'll be sorted out well before the meeting and we'll get told that the sentence was fair and in the best interest of everyone.......except those owners who miss out on winning cheques whilst the cheats have been cashing in of course!!!!

    Pretty inappropriate choice of words I would have thought considering all the evidence has not been taken into account

    thefalcon dislikes this post.

    +1 -1
  • RIORIO    14,902 posts
    i did say..

    well not at the moment as he hasn't been found guilty of anything.

    and from the stewards report it appears all the evidence has been taken into account

    Stewards adjourned the inquiry with respect to Mr Grant Williams to a
    date to be fixed to enable further consideration of the evidence tabled
    during the inquiry.

    But agree i could have worded some of it differently...we all could at times

    full stewards report here

    http://www.rwwa.com.au/home/gottabeyou-trainer-mr-g-williams-19900.html

    +1 -1
  • thefalconthefalcon    20,483 posts
    fair enough..but why to they drag their heels......doesn't happen over east.
    +1 -1
  • trojanhorsetrojanhorse    345 posts
    theketaminekid...why would that be inappropriate what RIO is saying - the Media Release from RWWA says :  Stewards adjourned the inquiry with respect to Mr Grant Williams to a date to be fixed to enable further consideration of the evidence tabled during the inquiry.

    so All evidence has been taken and is now being considered and taken into account.

     Although it is obvious to everyone on here that you are "in the camp" from all of your commenting with this and RANGER matters.

     

    RIO likes this post.

    +1 -1
  • LeglessLegless    5,108 posts
    theketaminekid said:

    .....  considering all the evidence has not been taken into account

    :-? Are you aware of further evidence that may be presented to the Stewards which may help them with their decision making process?

    RIO, trojanhorse likes this post.

    +1 -1
  • GilgameshGilgamesh    5,009 posts

    Was just looking for some info which I couldn't find but came across this tidbit in a harness racing report regarding a trainer presenting a treated horse when he was in another state and felt it related, although in this case the horse was found to be presented not free of substance (TCO2).

    "Stewards accepted Kevin Nolan wasn't in WA when his horse Our Whimaway had an illegal TCO2 level in 2008.

    "But he was held responsible and disqualified for six months."

    Just thought it was interesting, a trainer actually being held responsible.

    thefalcon, RIO likes this post.

    +1 -1
  • thefalconthefalcon    20,483 posts
    all i can say is...stewards show a bit of gumption....stop pussy footing around...you are the upholders of rules and regulations....show it!
    +1 -1
  • trojanhorsetrojanhorse    345 posts
    And this enquiry is being delayed for no reasons at all....it makes me confused when in Europe drugged horse investigations are being done very quickly.

    +1 -1
  • careycarey    6,424 posts
    trojanhorse said:

    And this enquiry is being delayed for no reasons at all....it makes me confused when in Europe drugged horse investigations are being done very quickly.

    WA is short for Wait Awhile trojan
    +1 -1
  • TheDivaTheDiva    13,248 posts
    Friday, 11 July 2014
    MEDIA RELEASE
    Thoroughbred – Stewards Inquiry – GOTTABEYOU (Stable Foreman Owen Gilbride)
    RWWA Stewards today resumed this inquiry to hear submissions in defence of the charge issued to Mr O Gilbride at the Stewards inquiry conducted on 16 May 2014 into the presentation and subsequent withdrawal of GOTTABEYOU from Ascot on 5 March 2014, following a report by the on course veterinarian that an inspection of the mare found it to have a swelling to its near side jugular with traces of blood.
    Samples taken from the mare have been analysed with no prohibited substances detected.
    At the inquiry held on 16 May 2014, Mr Gilbride had pleaded guilty to a charge under AR175 (g) in regard to giving misleading evidence relating to asking Strapper Bonnie Palise to wipe what appeared to be blood from the horses neck, but had pleaded not guilty to a charge under AR178E alleging that he administered a medication by way of injection to the horse GOTTABEYOU on race day prior to Race 8 at Ascot on Wednesday 5 March 2014, a race in which it was entered to run. The inquiry was subsequently adjourned
    At the resumed inquiry today, evidence was heard from Veterinarian Dr Charlie Stewart called on behalf of Mr Gilbride. Evidence was also heard from RWWA Industry Veterinarian Dr Judith Medd.
    Following the veterinary evidence today, counsel for Mr Gilbride requested that the matter be adjourned in order to have a further veterinarian attend to give evidence.
    The inquiry has now been scheduled to resume at 1.30pm on Tuesday,15 July 2014.
    Media Contact: Denis Borovica – General Manager Racing Integrity Ph: 9445 5427 denis.borovica@rwwa.com.au
    +1 -1
Sign In or Register to comment.