New FED Committee persons

[john m]

Join our free community today.

Connect with other like-minded dog lovers!

Login or Register

I would like to extend a warm welcome to the new committee members of the Fed, I hope that you may be able to do a good job whoever you are.

 

[Susan]

Welcome from the Weir family too. Whoever you's are im sure you's will do a very good job.

 

[mutley]

And if you feel the need to have a fed committee vote on my and my dogs ban ..could you please get it lifted thanks it would be much appreciated ..Chris Jade and Pete

 

[JoJess]

HEAR HEAR.........

 

[mutley]

Just a thought but will you three please attend the meeting theres quite a few points that alot of fed members would like to clear up ...to help the fed be successful in the future ...

 

[mutley]

the last post was dee not i dee wants her ban lifted for she did nothing wrong ,i dont want mine lifted as long as tony and yvonne are on the fed, i wouldnt race with them ,good luck to the new ones on the committe .......

 

[johnnoble]

I cant see how any decent person can go on the FED committee while these 2 cheating people are still on it. Why dont they do the decent thing & RESIGN.

 

[mutley]

Well i hope the new fed committee dont get used and abused like a north east man that was invited on a few years ago and traveled and worked every open for them ..only to turn up a year later at a open to find he had been kicked off commmitee and not informed by fed ...

Any way the way things are going there might be a new fed after the meeting on the 18th January 2004 1.30pm at Melton Mowbray ...theres to many good people out there now to let things continue the way things have been going

dee

 

[Scotty]

i think there must be some misunderstanding, jade and myself agreed to write up the fed reports for whippet news and take photo's at events we attended. We did not think this meant we were on the Fed Committee.

 

[Smiffy@VeronnaV]

I had to reply to this, even though not associated with your arm of the sport. My apologies to any of you who may be offended - and that's even before I start! It seems to me that you have a problem with a federation committee member who had a positive drugs test returned and has not resigned. Which has resulted in further altercations and problems. So the crux is the positive drugs test. Unless one can be 100 per cent certain that the banned substance was administered on purpose by the owner or owners, how can you, in good conscience ban that person and their dogs for the first offence? How can there be an absolute certainty that no other person administered the offending drug or that the dog accidentally ate or drank something with a stimulant component? Second or third offences are a different matter, ....... but for a first time positive test, then to be fair to the person concerned, one would expect the punishment to be no more than a written warning. So whether the person is the Lord God Almighty, or a federation committee member, if the rules say that a written warning is what they get for a first offence, then that is what they get. And of course, the precedent has now been set, so even should the punishment actually have been a ban, everyone else may now Appeal and expect to win, should their punishment be any more than a written warning!

Take care of your federation committee members, there aren't many out there who are willing to shoulder the enormous burdens these people take on for the benefit of their chosen sport, the workload can be gargantuan and thus time consuming.

 

[debby]

as to the person who wrote the last report on why ban them....the same fed commitee have banned people for the same said thing without giving written warnings, so they must take a ban themselves. wat goes around , comes around.

debbie

 

[JoJess]

unless you can be 100% sure that the banned substances was administered on purpose, by the owner or owners, how can you, in good conscience ban that person and their dogs for their first offence

There has been people banned allready for their first offence, are you saying that just because certain individuals are committee members that they should get away with a written warning and that the committee is right banning others for their first offence ???????????

The people who have been banned were banned because they told the committee what they believe to be the truth..........

 

[JoJess]

How can  there be an absolute certainty that no other person administered the offending drug or that the dog accidently ate or drank something with a stimulant componant

It is the sole responsibility of each person to know exactly what their dog is eating and drinking...................everyone knows this or should do

maybe a written warning would surfice for the first offence ......

 

[debby]

I had to reply to this, even though not associated with your arm of the sport.  My apologies to any of you who may be offended - and that's even before I start!  It seems to me that you have a problem with a federation committee member who had a positive drugs test returned and has not resigned.  Which has resulted in further altercations and problems.  So the crux is the positive drugs test.  Unless one can be 100 per cent certain that the banned substance was administered on purpose by the owner or owners, how can you, in good conscience ban that person and their dogs for the first offence?  How can there be an absolute certainty that no other person administered the offending drug or that the dog accidentally ate or drank something with a stimulant component?  Second or third offences are a different matter, ....... but for a first time positive test, then to be fair to the person concerned, one would expect the punishment to be no more than a written warning.  So whether the person is the Lord God Almighty, or a federation committee member, if the rules say that a written warning is what they get for a first offence, then that is what they get.  And of course, the precedent has now been set, so even should the punishment actually have been a ban, everyone else may now Appeal and expect to win, should their punishment be any more than a written warning!

Take care of your federation committee members, there aren't many out there who are willing to shoulder the enormous burdens these people take on for the benefit of their chosen sport, the workload can be gargantuan and thus time consuming.

undefined

how can there be absolute certainty that no other person administered the offending drug or that the dog accidently ate or dranksomething with a stimulant componant

undefined

no body could be absolutely sure that this did not happen or sure this did not happen to the other banned people also. I REST MY CASE

 

[mutley]

its not a case of them being banned they should resign from fed, people would of thought more of them t,here own rules no one elses.............

 

[rowley]

In response to John M,and all the others who seem to jump at every opportunity to have a go at the NWRF, can I just say that I feel the NWRF do a good job and, at the end of the day,are there so that you can all run your dogs, get top 10 points, trophies, money and anything else on offer???

This is all done at their own expense, would a new Commitee do that???

What about the time you brought sachets of Bute to Ilkeston Whippet Racing Club, what does that do for your dog, should you be running the IRG????

 

[mutley]

in reply to rowley, if you had a dog that was runner up to hellbound in august champs would you still feel the same, ??? i think not ,the fed rules state anyone giving a positive test in bwra no matter the levels will receive a ban, now they are singing a different tune as its their own test that came back positive ,this needs sorting out, the trust has gone ,i am sure john will reply to you soon ..... :angry: how can tony and yvonne carry on ,this is about them not the fed ,or should the fed name be changed to tony and yvonnes racing club, lett the meeting decide ,this is going to take place like it or not.... one thing i agree on is they did a good job for a long time ,but rules are rules .theres no one elses......... :angry:

 

[john m]

Rowley, Thank you for those few words, I did have access to Bute or Phenol buteimain to give it its correct name, This is an anti-inflammatory drug that was banned by the Jockey club of G.B. because it was being used as a masking agent (to cover the use of other drugs), It was never banned by any other country. The reason for the banning in this country was that the then Jockey club test on horses could not get behind this anti-inflammatory and see what else was being used. Other countries were far more advanced in their screening process. I do not know if it is on the up to date screening list now as I have no excess or need any access to a said screening list. My brother in law who at the time bred race horses, and any knocks or bruises were treated with this drug. I may add that he never trained racehorses for running in races. He gave me five sachets of this and at the same time told me that if used on the dogs I must not run them for two weeks until the drug has passed out of their system. I did show them to some of the folks at Ilkeston W.R.C. and of course some put 2 and 2 together and made 5.

As for decrying the fed, I am in a position to see what this great Body was like some years ago I think and I have every right to say that I think it as changed for the worse.

Rowley, if you think that I am using drugs on my dogs you can pay for a test of any of my dogs at any time and any place, why not put your money where your mouth is, I will guarantee you a loss of £1500 plus vat at the testing of H.F.L. But being as you are afraid to even sign your own name when trying to muddy the waters I doubt that you have the nerve to even contemplate paying money to find the truth.

If any of my dogs fail a test at any time I would straight away hand over the running of the I.R.G. as not to black its name, are not people innocent until proven guilty Rowley

It was not any of my dogs that recently failed a B.W.R.A. test.

 

[john m]

Rowley, other things that you brought up, I run the I.R.G., This is false, I am not capable of running a group on my own. People who run the group are people who have years of practice and expertise in the running of race meetings, they also have years of service in the jobs that need to be done in the organisation of a working whippet race body. The group has ex B.W.R.A. chairman and secretaries, Ex B.W.R.A. Treasurer Ex N.W.R.F. committee people and a current B.W.R.A. and N.W.R.F trap man. The I.R.G. reps that are in place north and south are highly regarded B.W.R.A. officials who also have many years between them in the knowledge of running a group. I am just the person that pulled them all together to work for the betterment of racing.

We use these people because all know they are fair, reliable and above all honest. ( also, they do not claim any expenses)

This group as a working body has no need for me, all I do is take a few photo’s and a few quips off people and produce the Whippet Monthly and I.R.G. news that they kindly report their meetings to me.

We have tried through the I.R.G. secretary ( Bob Osmond) to get top ten status for the I.R.G. events in the same way as other racing body’s are given because this group is not a one man band and that can be clearly seen.

Perhaps you or others would like to direct any criticism of the I.R.G. towards the secretary Mr Bob Osmond, as I am sure that he would be quite willing to give you an answer in his own way.

 

[JoJess]

For your information Rowley who ever you are, we have never had a go at the fed, :angry: we have always said that the fed committee have worked their socks off wherever a race meeting was held, however we have answered in responce to what we believe is an injustice to a fellow member ie the banning of a person who never opened her mouth when her husband told the committee what he believed to be the truth As for John M, he has only tried to help whippet racers all over the country by creating a brilliant and enjoyable days whippet racing just like it used to be in days of old.......