BWRA Corruption

[Tony Taylor]

Join our free community today.

Connect with other like-minded dog lovers!

Login or Register

Mutley,

tony who are you to ban people

The decision to ban larry was a joint one. This site is owned by Nigel and he appoints the moderators noboby else. The moderators decide what posts are allowed following the posting rules of the site..Posting rules are available at the top of the page.

Butch was posting under an assumed name and wasn`t known to all -which isn`t allowed on this forum.

Mark asked Nigel for permission to post and was given permission by Nigel so take that up with him. Mark hasn`t broken any rules and seems to be able to back up his statements with expert opinion and so the term "claptrap" would appear to be incorrect.

Jojess

I`ll give Mark an opportunity to answer the first part of your post before I do

as for deleting post's just because you don't know who the person is........did we not have to put up with all that MADAM X wrote for the whippet news...........

I am not the editor of Whippet News and have no control over its content

 

[mutley]

i think most people know who larry is, is it sticking in your throat cos yuou dont ,maybe nigel needs to rethink having you as a moderator as you seem to have lett it go to your head, mark has gone on for years about drugs, like i said think of the runner up champs who were cheated too ,a lott of people got away with the testing before zero tollerance was brought in with 18 to 24 percent in results, chocolate my arsse...personally i think the money used for testing could be put to a better use, ther again no one wants cheats in our sport......take the hint mark

:angry:

 

[JOHNG]

WHAT"S GOING ON HERE, I THINK EVERYBODY WANT TO CALM DOWN,THIS TOPIC AS GOT EVERYBODY ARGUING WITH EACH OTHER. PERSONALLY I THINK IT AS GOT OUT OF HAND THE TOPIC SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN ALOUD TO BE DISCUSSED ON THIS SITE MARK SHOULD CARRY ON OR STOP HIS ARGUMENT WITH THE BWRA AND NWRF, NOT GETTING PEOPLE ON AT EACH OTHERS THROATS CHILL OUT A BIT

 

[NEILPEM]

well said john,

 

[johnnoble]

It doesnt matter what you give your dog it isnt going to make a good dog any faster over 150yds.

{ Its time this zero tolerance was done away with }

A little bit of coffee, tea or chocolate isnt going to make a good dog run any faster.

Too many people are jealous of good dogs &assume they are on drugs. but the truth is the people with good dogs put a lot of hard work into their dogs &have no need to enhance them.

Its a pity these jealous people didnt put a bit more hard work into their dogs, instead of expecting them to run when they havnt been out all week.

 

[JoJess]

WELL SAID JOHN.............

 

[Vicky]

This topic is already the third most viewed topic EVER on k9 within just 10 days it's got 2360, the most viewed topic was the distances thread which took 1 1/2 months to reach 2648 views & EGM thread 1 month to reach 2593 views!!!

 

[BeeJay]

>PERSONALLY I THINK IT AS GOT OUT OF HAND THE TOPIC SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN ALOUD TO BE DISCUSSED ON THIS SITE

But how can you tell if a topic will get out of hand or not before it actually does? Also why should a topic be banned just because some people get upset about it? No-one needs to read these topics, certainly no-one needs to join into any of the discussions. AND certainly no one needs to be being abusive to anyone else. Yes it's got a bit silly in places because people have lost their temper which can happen with more emotive topics.

As for banning posts well with many Hotmail accounts people have them precisely because they give the writer anonymity. In the past such writers have caused a great amount of trouble on email lists and message boards. As a result on many email lists that I'm on ALL hotmail account holders are blanket banned.

The moderators of the forum have stated at least twice during this topic that they will allow reasonable discussion as long as people don't hide who they are. ie if someone has something to say about this difficult issue then at least they can do everyone the courtesy of telling people who they are. So I really don't understand why the moderators are now being abused for their action against these two posters.

In my view this IS a topic that should have been aired. It's of interest to anyone who's dogs take part in performance events simply because it could happen to them.

 

[mutley]

i agree its getting out of hand ,but i still think this site is not the place for marks on going abusive topic ,on wich most know all about any way, i got a bit annoyed no offence meant to tony , but i still think the bwra needs more support not as i said before all the claptrap thats being thrown at it ,i will say no more on this topic as mark seems to have a captive audience.....................................

 

[Paws123]

I have been using k9 for a number of years now, and never know so much bs, how come it takes 3 people to moderate one little area on a forum,

I have just opened my emails and received this in, its an email from tony to a concerned member ( Pauline Wright was sent this message) that uses k9

Mark had the courtesy to E-mail Nigel before he posted his topic. Nigel is

familiar with the topic and was quite keen for it to get an airing on K9;

Nigel did discuss this with me prior to allowing Mark to post and we both

think it`s a valid point to discuss.

Nigel (and I) are comfortable with the legal aspects of this.I think the

chances of a succesful legal action against the site are slim to none and

would be amazed if the BWRA or any of the committee members would want to

pursue this - but you never know!. Nigel has pots of money and I doubt if

he`d run scared of any of the solicitors the BWRA could afford.

Personaly I think this is a dead subject and no one will be interested. The

BWRA don`t debate on this forum anyway.

I can understand your concerns but I doubt if anything will come of this, so

don`t worry on behalf of K9.

All the best

Tony

All this trouble started when a certain topic was started by mark on this site, the topic been named BWRA corruption...why that name? that spells trouble with a capital T to me

mark says in his first post on the topic

Using this forum may or may not help my campaign, and to be honest I'm not entirely sure what I hope or expect to gain from it. We will have to see

I hope you are pleased with the out come mark

@ tony

you said

Ask yourself how bothered were you that they were dragged through the sh*t the first time?

my answer ..i really didn't give a flying f__k ..it did not surprise me

you said Freinds that prefer to feed you to the wolves for a quite life.

No thanks

my answer.. you must be mixing with the wrong company to much

you said ...

He asked the site owner.This will be the biggest ever non-ped topic

my answer...i really don't think so

first off i would like to say thank you to Nigel for allowing me to use this site, but i will not be back on here again while this subject is on going

 

[JoJess]

I have to agree with Dee, : :w I for one can not stand all the trouble in k9........

I shall not be posting untill people lighten up........k9 is supposed to be a fun site...... :angry:

 

[mutley]

i am going to come clean i am larry, wouldnt of carried it on but tony called him a tit so kept it goin, most knew i was having a laugh anyway not using site any more till a certain topic is done with ............

 

[Vicky]

I personally think the topic title is a bit heavy but that's up to Mark, i'm more interested in the drug testing part of the topic & whether people stop there membership to this forum or don't view this thread it really doesn't matter (ignorance is bliss!) but at the end of the day the drug testing is the biggest thing that's havppened to whippet racing & whether people like it or not there will always be an interest, you can't knock people for wanting to know the facts. Everyone will have different views, i'm in aggreement with John Noble not to have it at all, yet Michelle think's it should go ahead but be done properly - there are substances which the labs don't test for which a way more lethal than methyl-xanthines & non-steroidal anti-inflammatories, personally i don't think we will ever be able to have full reports done at £800 a time but then again it depends on how much the members think it should be done.

 

[michelle]

The tests should still go ahead but only test for known performance enhancers (amphetamines, nandralone etc). The ngrc dont ban people for methylxanthines/nsaids they fine them.

Independent reports have shown that 1 piece of chocolate in a ghd is enough to fail a drug test.

Regardless of what some members on k9 think of mark or any of the moderators.....the evidence was not just something mark knocked up on a computer. There is reports from the ngrc, paddy sweeney,david poulter and also papers from the journal of analytical toxicology, also various internet searches throw up pages and pages of information on methylxanthines.

Mark and the bwra obviously have issues between them......of which im not interested in. what i am interested in is what is gonna fail my dogs drug test.......if its a piece of chocolate (which is proved not to be a performance enhancer) then maybe things should be changed as to the way the drug testing system works.

 

[Tony Taylor]

JoJess

You say "when an obvious injustice is done we all keep quiet while some innocent is shafted", you know for definate that this person is innocent ??enlighten us all then

In English law people are accepted as innocent until they are proven guilty.

The Horseracing Forensic Lababoratory Ltd (HFL) stated on all the reports to the BWRA, and I quote

"THE PRESENCE OF THESE SUBSTANCES IN THE SAMPLE HAS NOT BEEN CONFIRMED BY MASS SPECTOMETRY AND UNTIL THIS IS DONE WE CANNOT ISSUE A POSITIVE REPORT"

These are the words of the HFL not mine. I`ll repeat the important part,

"WE CANNOT ISSUE A POSITIVE REPORT"

The test the BWRA did would NOT stand up, count, be admissable as evidence in an English or European court of law.The BWRA does not have evidence that these people have been proved positive for any substances - Fact.

The BWRA have NO admissable evidence against these people (except for one - but more on this later)

Futher more what are they "not" innocent of? they must be guilty of something if they are not innocent - there is no other way of interpreting the English language; you are either innocent or guilty.

What are they guilty of under BWRA rules? - the BWRA committee cannot show that they have broken any of the rules in the BWRA rulebook.There is no statement or letter from any vet for the BWRA that these substances would affect the performance (of a whippet) . However there is ample evidence to prove these substances don`t have any effect.

"OUR UNANIMOUS VIEW WAS THAT THE LATE SHOWING LEVELS OF THEOBROMINE IN THE 8micrograms/ml and 15micrograms/ml ARE IRRELEVANT AS FAR AS STIMULATING PERFORMANCE IN RACING WHIPPETS. IN OTHER WORDS WE WERE UNANIMOUS THAT THE LEVELS MENTIONED WOULD NOT HAVE A PERFORMANCE ENHANCING EFFECT ON A WHIPPET"

This is a direct quote, that is using his own words not mine from Mr David Poulter BVetMed MRCVS, who is PRESIDENT of the Soceity of Greyhound Vetinarians.

Unanimous means ALL. EVERY MEMBER, NO ONE DISAGREED.

So they are innocent as far as BWRA rules are concerned

"since the drug ban only affects certain individuals, racers don't care ", of course we care thats why we don't give our dogs illegal substances.....

There is no confusion in my previous posts that I meant racers didn`t care about what happened to other racers.

Theobromine is not an illegal substance, it is available, without restriction in the form of tea and chocolate to anyone of any age. No one, least of all the BWRA or NWRF, has suggested that any of those banned has given their pets illegal substances

if some one knows what the levels in these samples were then put it on here .....

Nobody knows the levels in the samples taken because the BWRA or the NWRF have NEVER asked for proof of the levels in the samples. All levels quoted by the BWRA,NWRF and Whippet News are, and I quote the HFL, THESE ARE THE WORDS ON THE REPORTS

"ESTIMATED"

and

"I MUST EMPHASISE THAT THESE FIGURES ARE ONLY A ROUGH APPROXIMATION AND NOT A VALID QUANTITATIVE MEASUREMENT"

No body knows the levels in those banned.

 

[~Dave~]

:8 wow some reading :8

I have never raced my whippets and don't know that much about it..

But what i'm getting at is:- This site is a FORUM, Forum means, meeting, debate, disscussion. Everyone has an opinion some will agree some won't, thats life.

But saying that you are not posting until a post is deleted is INTIMIDATION, Intimidation means threats, pressure, bullying, coerion, terrorization.

IMAO that is worse than this entire post.....

To finish think of things this way...... you have something to eat and you don't like it then you dont have it again..... So... you don't like a thread that has been has posted then don't touch it :b

 

[Tony Taylor]

It doesnt matter what you give your dog it isnt going to make a good dog any faster over 150yds.{ Its time this zero tolerance was done away with }

A little bit of coffee, tea or chocolate isnt going to make a good dog run any faster.

Too many people are jealous of good dogs &assume they are on drugs. but the truth is the people with good dogs put a lot of hard work into their dogs &have no need to enhance them.

Its a pity these jealous people didnt put a bit more hard work into their dogs, instead of expecting them to run when they havnt been out all week.

This is correct. The dogs banned won their races fairly but some people always need some excuse for coming second. They won`t let the evidence get in the way because they want to believe their dog was the best.

 

[Tony Taylor]

JohnG,

WHAT"S GOING ON HERE, I THINK EVERYBODY WANT TO CALM DOWN,THIS TOPIC AS GOT EVERYBODY ARGUING WITH EACH OTHER.

Mutley is making a personal attack on me but so what - it`s obviously unfounded.

This has more to do with the Larry problem and "Jocks Lass" IMHO than the debate on the topic. It`s always going to be a difficult subject but still ought to be discussed IMHO

Denise,

I have been using k9 for a number of years now, and never know so much bs, how come it takes 3 people to moderate one little area on a forum,

To stop one person from being singled out for unfounded abuse. A mistake since now 3 people are being abused but only 1 doesn`t care. What has happened on these forums is a matter of record and others can make up their own minds as to the behaviour of those participating in the debate.

 

[michelle]

Denise Bailey 17th August 2003 at 4.37pm

you said ...This will be the biggest ever non-ped topic

my answer...i really don't think so

Already the most viewed non-ped topic since K9 started

 

[BeeJay]

What I don't understand is this. Why are people saying that they are going to stop viewing/using/posting on this message board. I can see why people don't want to continue with this discussion. Having been involved in discussions which get heated because personal opinions are being voiced I do understand why someone doesn't want to even view a certain topic. (I can get sucked into getting involved in issues that I know that I shouldn't ie that are only going to get out of hand and I'll get angry.)

I can also appreciate that some people feel that this topic is just stirring things up YET again (I've taken the yet again on board). And yes there aren't enough people who want to sit on committee's and there certainly are way TOO MANY people who want to moan but not do anything. For instance I know that it's damned hard in KC registered whippet racing to find line judges and there are nearly always complaints about the line judges. (I wonder why it's so hard to find people to do the job? )

Personally I think that this is some kind of British diease. ie there are always too few people willing to be on committees, local government etc etc. AND it always seems to be the same people doing everything.

However just 'cause this ONE topic is on here doesn't stop anyone joining in and reading others. Or starting a different topic.

One thing that has been said is that this topic keeps being raised about this time of year. Which implies that this time of year rather than any other time is extra sensitive. Why at this time?