THE POLICING OF RACING AND A DISLIKE FOR THE CUSHION TRACKS

WHEN we look back at the year that was, a large number of the e-mails that we have received focused on an alleged lack of policing of racing at south-east Queensland tracks and the perception that the majority of punters dislike cushion tracks.

In recent times we have received e-mails suggesting we are ‘pandering to dumb-ass punters who do their cash betting on cushion tracks’ or ‘sore losers who want to blame the defeat of horses that they back on bad rides or the belief that they were on dead-uns.’

Statistics – not the propaganda put out by supporters of Bob the Builder and his Toowoomba side-kick Nifty Neville – show that only one in four favorites win on cushion tracks. The turnover in the main is ordinary and horses with little or no form seem to win on most cards.

Of course if you put a $100,000 race on a Cushion Track or a bitumen road you are going to get good fields and people desperate enough to bet on them.

We believe – and so do many others in the racing industry – that history will show Toowoomba should never have gone down the Cushion Track – and sadly it was only a handful of votes that enabled this to happen.

The following photograph is run to lighten the tone and add some ‘twisted’ New Year humor to an otherwise serious column:

AS for policing of racing punters are always going to find an excuse for backing a loser but the number of beaten favorites in south-east Queensland is extraordinarily high when compared to other states.

Form analysts and replay watchers with considerable experience regularly complain about lack of action in relation to questionable runners with not a single question being asked by stewards.

There are those who blame this on a lack of experience in the panel in Queensland after losing the majority of its best stewards interstate or overseas.

Certainly, QR is lacking a chief steward with the experience and ability of former Queenslanders Terry Bailey or Alan Reardon, the best in the land, but based in Victoria.

Bailey chose to head south and was head-hunted from harness racing to the gallops but Reardon was driven out of the state in one of the most disgraceful dismissals ever seen in Australian racing. Fortunately, most of those who brought about his demise are no longer there themselves.

We believe the current Integrity Department of QR is trying hard – as they tell us with limited resources – but nothing will change until there is a complete separation of powers.

Racing Minister Peter Lawlor could win plenty of friends by moving the stewards away from QR headquarters at Deagon and placing them under the directorship of an independent Integrity Commissioner for Racing.

We would have suggested it would be a good policy for Opposition Racing Spokesman Ray Stevens but felt that was a waste of time. The industry has given him a one out of 10 for performance in the past 12 months.

If we had stronger politicians and a more independent Integrity Department then some of the terrible events of the past may not have occurred.

Like the allegations of some years ago where a hard working betting steward tells of being telephoned by a prominent bookmaker and told he wouldn’t be sacked if he withdrew a complaint.

We wouldn’t have situations of a former female employee of QR telling of spending a wild weekend at a coastal resort with a prominent trainer, his stable foreman and a 14-year-old girl, then watching at the track the next day while they treated starters with performance enhancing drugs.

And there wouldn’t be the situation that a senior steward alleged occurred some years ago – when he was told to drop an inquiry that he had opened involving a horse from a prominent stable after the trainer allegedly made a phone call to a friend.

To lighten the tone we decided to run the following photograph and trust you will see the funny side of it:

A NEW ERA AND SKY CAN’T EVEN PROVIDE THE DOUBLE DIVIDENDS

THERE have been numerous e-mails over the past few months concerning what we can expect from Sky Channel’s promised ‘racing vision revolution’ and asking if the dawning of a new decade will see UNiTAB at least try to compete with the big two totes.

It would seem that most stay-at-home punters have deserted Sky for TVN, driven away by the annoying and incessant chatter of prime time host, ‘Mute Button.’

Their fears are that Sky will eventually drive TVN out of business and that they will be left with no alternative viewing option.

We raised the question of why Sky cannot provide details of running double dividends at the end of a day’s racing but have been unsuccessful in securing an answer. If you happen to have collected the double on the last two races, all that Sky shows on its dividends panel is ‘Others Quoted.’

No-one quite knows what that means. But one wonders how they are going to deliver this wonderful array of channels and world racing coverage it they can’t even provide something as simple as a running double dividend.

As for UNiTAB and the perception that it continues to fall further behind the big two totes in the land, things don’t seem to be improving. The best we can hope for is an amalgamation.

While there is no sign of UNiTAB introducing ‘running doubles’ or ‘parlez’ betting options, it would be pissing against the wind to expect them to consider a ‘Big 6’ with pools to die for like interstate punters are enjoying.

Our suggestion is to open an interstate account and get a piece of the action. As for the running double dividends, do what the rest of us have been doing for some time – switch to TVN – it’s a superior service to Sky anyway.

In keeping with our New Year humor we thought we would run the following photograph:

INTEGRITY DEPARTMENT RESPONSE PUTS US IN A ‘NO-WIN’ SITUATION

IT would seem that this web-site has reached the cross-roads in our dealings with the Integrity Department of Queensland Racing and whilst their latest stance is understandable we feel it has placed us in a ‘no-win’ situation.

When you are prepared to run e-mails sent to a web-site there is always going to be an element of mischief-makers and scuttlebutt merchants who will jump at the opportunity to stir up some trouble in the racing industry.

We try to confirm the authenticity of e-mails sent to us and are prepared to with-hold the identification of the authors for obvious reasons (in some cases). In more recent times where we cannot satisfy authenticity the e-mails are not run.

Jamie Orchard, the Director of Integrity Operations for Queensland Racing, has been most co-operative with our requests but lately an increasing number of ‘scuttlebutt’ e-mails has tested that relationship.

It prompted this recent response from Mr Orchard: “You will understand that I don’t intend to review every ‘racecourse rumour’ that people bring to you – we simply don’t have the resources.

“Moreover, industry participants should understand that if they have genuine concerns about an issue, they should bring it to QRL to consider rather than just raising it with you or the media.

“It is very easy to question the motives of those that adopt that latter course as if they really wanted the issue resolved, the obvious place to take it is to the Control Body.”

We appreciate that the time and resources of Mr Orchard’s department can be better utilised on more important issues. But we are in a no-win situation here. If we just run the ‘e-mail complaint or rumour,’ we are accused of not checking it out before-hand.

The other issue that he raises is one of industry participants with genuine concerns taking issues to the obvious place – as he puts it – the control body. That is fine – but the stake-holders have lost trust and faith in QR over the years. We feel confident his team can re-build that but it will take time and understanding of what has happened in the past.

This web-site has already expressed our feelings about how things were handled ‘integrity wise’ in a by-gone era, a view shared by many good people in the racing industry in Queensland, to which Mr Orchard previously replied:

“It is clear from your comments that you feel strongly about the Integrity Department, based on your previous dealings with that department.  However, I hope that you will bear in mind that the department, under my and the Chief Steward’s (Wade Birch) leadership, is markedly different from that of the past.

‘We have developed a professional approach to integrity which includes a fairer disciplinary system for those charged with more serious offences (relying upon independent, retired Magistrates), more efficient and transparent procedures and protocols and a much more co-operative approach with members of the industry (based on the understanding that the vast majority of participants will act in accordance with the Rules if they understand those Rules and how to comply with them).

‘Of course, in light of our regulatory role, not everyone will always agree with our actions but nonetheless, we can satisfy ourselves that decisions are made on a proper basis and in accordance with a formal decision making process.”

Our plan in future is to take only the most serious issues to the Orchard Integrity team. How they deal with it is up to them. The rest we will run on their merits and face the music later. But as this web-site has said in the past: ‘The space is always there for an objective reply.’

THE SADDEST – AND MOST SERIOUS COMPLAINT – THAT WE RECEIVED

NOT everyone is prepared to take their case to the authorities and that brings us to one of the most serious and saddest e-mails that we received (and had authenticated) during the year. We thought long and hard before publishing part of this but decided it was in the interest of the racing public.

SOME months ago we had an approach from a concerned lady who claimed that her nephew had been offered drugs shortly after starting part-time work for a stable at a prominent training centre in Queensland.

She said the family wanted to do nothing about it because of fears that they would be ostracized by the racing community in the area and at the end of the day nothing would be done about it because of the profile of those involved.

We had her complaint confirmed by a prominent member of a Racing Appeals Tribunal who had been told the same story from within the stable where the young lad was working.

The allegation suggests that a young woman working for a well-known stable had offered drugs to the stable-hand. A track-work rider, who is said to have witnessed this, sent the woman packing. The next day that track-work rider is alleged to have been threatened by the trainer where the woman works. A fracas is said to have occurred between the two of them.

We raised this matter with the QR Integrity Department who asked that the complainant come forward. She was not prepared to, mainly because she does not want to upset her family. We also suggested she should take it to an authority other than QR but she refused.

Our suggestion to QR was that the matter was serious enough to be investigated independently. We provided the identity of the people that both the woman and the Appeals Tribunal member told us were involved. That was some time ago and the Appeals Tribunal member assures us that he has not been approached.

 

IN CONCLUSION MAY WE WISH OUR GROWING NUMBER OF FOLLOWERS A HEALTHY, HAPPY AND PROPEROUS 2010 FROM THE TEAM AT THE WEB-SITE THAT CARES ABOUT THE PUNTING PUBLIC - LETSGOHORSERACING.