I think the concern is that stewards in all states have different rules for different participants. Whilst one trainer is fined amount x and suspended y other trainers for same offence get fined a and suspended b. This article is hardly trying to sell newspaper. As it states it is Azzopardi's view. Why an agreement was allowed in the first place is the real issue. I think transparency is what the industry needs. It should be played out in public - builds awareness, integrity, absorbs any allegations of corruption and favouritism.Oh - and I think you will find its innocent until proven guilty. Although wouldn't the world be great if it was the other way around.
Mark Azzopardi Furious After GRNSW Act Despite Agreement
Written By Katherine Ernst Saturday 31st August 2013
GRNSW have announced that the inquiry into the analysts’ reports of the finding of benzoylecgonine, a metabolite of cocaine, in the urine sample taken from Transcend Time after the greyhound took out a race at Maitland on the 28th March 2013 will recommence this Monday (2nd September 2013).
The trainer in question, Mark Azzopardi, has faced suspension since the inquiry opened on the 28th June, with all of the greyhounds in his name at the time transferred into the name of Preston Rowles. Since then, Rowles has raced a reasonably large team of greyhounds successfully, under an agreement that he could train both at his Narellan property and from Azzopardi’s Appin setup.
This all changed on Thursday when GRNSW decided to take action against Rowles by refusing the nominations of his greyhounds and scratching his runner, Jagger Swagger, from Maitland when the dog arrived on course.
The matter has created quite a buzz. After the arrangement had been in place for a number of months, why have GRNSW chosen to act now?
Distressed by the situation, Azzopardi has decided to speak out and has explained the entire matter from his perspective
“Earlier this year, I received a positive swab. I was notified the day after the Bulli Cup. Clint Bentley and a private investigator, William Buckman, came to my house and advised me of the swab and searched the premises. I copped it on the chin and they set a date for the inquiry”, Azzopardi said.
“When I got the positive swab my license was suspended. My good friend (Preston Rowles) who I have been doing dogs together with for years moved in and so they didn’t suspend the greyhounds we transferred the dogs into Preston’s name and he took over the training”.
“I went to the first hearing. Bill Fanning and Terrence Hines went through the details about the swab and then agreed with my solicitor that I am allowed to live on the property, trial and handle the greyhounds that I own and that the only thing I couldn’t do was present a dog on race days”.
“I followed their rules. Preston moved in but he also owns a property at Narellan so he has been going back and forth”.
“Bill Fanning agreed with my solicitor that I could still go to the track but I can’t present them on race day and I have obliged by those rules all the way”.
“I have been going to the track to enjoy a night out but I haven’t been handling”.
With this arrangement seemingly running smoothly whilst Azzopardi awaited the recommencement of the inquiry, the former leading trainer was shocked at what happened when he arrived at the track on Thursday
“Preston had four dogs nominated for Dapto, and the best dog, Jagger Swagger, nominated to race at Maitland over 450 metres”.
“Preston has a job and he can’t be everywhere so he paid another bloke to bring Jagger Swagger to Maitland”.
“He got out of the car(at the track) and then I got out of the car and we were approached by the track steward and the private investigator in the car park”.
“They handed me a letter and said that Jagger Swagger was withdrawn because I was presenting him. I said I hadn’t touched the dog and I asked them for proof. The private investigator said he had been watching me for a few days and that he had followed me up from Sydney”.
“I rang Bill Fanning who advised me that Jagger Swagger had been scratched. I asked why and he said that they had sufficient evidence compiled that I had been heavily involved on race day”.
“I said that I would leave the track but I was told the dog was already scratched”.
Assuming the scratching was planned, at least to some degree, in the sense that a letter had been prepared for Azzopardi upon arrival, leaves one wondering why they waited for them to travel all the way to Maitland before announcing the decision.
“They let Preston pay this guy to bring the dog on a 3 1/2- 4 hour trip and had a private investigator follow us. Why couldn’t they have just rung him in the morning?”
Rowles was then given an ultimatum. If he intended to keep racing, his greyhounds must be relocated to his Narellan kennels from Azzopardi’s property at Appin otherwise they would be scratched from upcoming meetings and his nominations would be refused. This is another confusing point - obviously GRNSW realised that Azzopardi was living at his own premises so what has made them change their rules now?
Azzopardi is not impressed, saying that if GRNSW had an issue with the training arrangement in the beginning, he would have moved out of his property.
“If Bill Fanning had have said from the start that I couldn’t touch them and that I couldn’t live here I would have moved out but I have just done what they have told me I could do”.
The matter is frustrating for Rowles and owner Tyrone Whittington, who owns the majority of the greyhounds trained by Rowles, as the greyhound that has been severely affected is kennel star, Jagger Swagger. Jagger Swagger is a three time group winning greyhound currently on his way back from injury. His run at Maitland was no doubt a lead up run in preparation for the group one Dapto Megastar, for which he has received an invitation.
“He (Rowles) hasn’t done anything wrong- he has a house, work and kids, leave him alone”.
“I just want this whole thing to be over and done with”.
As for what comes next, the greyhounds from the Appin property that are engaged over the next few days have been moved to Narellan so that they can compete in their respective races. However, the full kennel could not be transported at such short notice meaning that some will be restricted on the racetrack.
Azzopardi’s inquiry will be held on Monday and, after one of the most controversial and complicated inquiries in recent times, hopefully a verdict will be reached as to his training future and ultimately what will happen with the team of chasers currently racing for Rowles.
It is important to note that the point of this article is in no way to condone the use of banned substances in greyhound racing. In fact, it is one of the most serious and disturbing issues within the industry. Rather, this article seeks to highlight the inconsistencies that present themselves as far as GRNSW is concerned.
The decision to leave the greyhounds at Azzopardi’s property puzzled many to start with however, if GRNSW made this judgment in the beginning when he was originally suspended, then why have they suddenly changed their position and perspective now after all this time?
Is it just that they realised that they made the wrong decision? Or is it a bid to save themselves from recent criticism that the industry does not take integrity and positive swabs seriously enough?
Whatever the reason it leaves a lot to be desired from GRNSW; an organisation that should be encouraging an open and trusting relationship with participants. Instead, the greyhound racing rules implemented by GRNSW in cases such as this one have left people scratching their heads and unsure about their rights and responsibilities as industry participants.
It is time GRNSW establish a firm set of rules, implemented transparently and consistently, and not interpreted on an ad hoc basis from inquiry to inquiry. If for some reason GRNSW find themselves unable to implement their rules as expected by their own participants, then an attempt to explain and inform the public of their position when an exception has been granted or an agreement made would be more practical than leaving participants to come to their to own conclusions.
A number of efforts were made to contact GRNSW Chief Steward Bill Fanning via email and phone for his comment regarding this latest issue, however no response was forthcoming.
If you can fault GRNSW for anything, it's for letting the dodgy setup at Mr Azzopari's place happen in the first place. He should never have been allowed to be there while his licence was suspended, doing goodness knows what with the dogs. If he is suspended, it should be from all training activities, not just from "presenting" the dogs at the track. At least GRNSW saw the error of their ways, even if it was a touch too late!
Robert our dogs are slow dogs compared to Azzopardi...we're not using cocaine to get em going...no-ones rubbishing him,there just stating his stupidity an disrespect for the rules an regulations that are in black an white for all to see..
Why travel to the track in the same car as the dog? If he's just gone for a night out, and isn't supposed to present/handle, then why travel with the other bloke who's handling?.....Had he gone in a different car, like any reasonably smart person in that situation would do, there would presumably be no issue?.....
stewards make a decision and then changed it i wonder why ? HUM HUM ....... maybe they just wised up to the fact that this other trainer was not living there full time...[ agreement ] what agreement ,why don't you just let the stewards handle the positive the way it should be done not in the public arena were reporters report what ever they like just to get attention to there paper , and have no clue of any rules or how to train a greyhound . u do the crime u do the time guilty until proven otherwise same in all states
Its stupid how they GRNSW made such an agreement in the first place! All other people i know have not even been allowed near the dogs let alone handle them on any other day than race day! How stupid! They should not have made that agreement with him, but was it really necessary to let the dog tavel for several hours to prove a point??? Its unnecessary and unfair to the animal! Stupid people.... And if he is travelling with the dog, there is no doubt that he has had involvement with it! No question... He would have known this!
Cocaine just not on federal offence greyhound racing is being screwed by people useing illegal drugs in all states where is it coming
So he is upset that the rules were broken by him, then another set were bent by stewards for some reason, and now try are merely enforcing the rules that everyone else has to live with. Am I missing something here? It seems he had 4 months of pretty favourable treatment, so should be happy with that. Of course, anyone who has ever had a positive and either moved off their property or had dogs moved certainly can ask what the hell is going on. Again I ask if I am missing something. Am I reading this situation correctly? If I am not, then I sorry. If I am, wtf is he complaining about?
Bear in mind its not GRNSW he cheated on ,its his fellow trainers,do we need people like this in racing?
SO WHAT ARE WERE NOW ATTACTING THE NSW BOARD FOR CHANGING THERE POSITION ON A VERY SERIOUS POSITIVE DRUG SWAB, IAM SURE THEY HAD THERE REASON'S AND THATS WHY THERE IN CHARGE, AT BEST THE TRAINNING SET UP AFTER THE POSTIVE WAS A JOKE AND THEY MUST HAVE RECIVED INFORMATION THAT THE OTHER TRAINER WAS NOT ACTUALLY LIVING THERE ON THE PROPERTY FULL TIME .......DO THE CRIME YOU DO THE TIME OL BOYS
Didn't he just answer his own question? Can't present a dog on race day, got out of the same car the dog was in, simple shouldn't have gone to the track, just stay away
What a load of crap...rules for 1 different for others...I think someone needs to read the rule book...ya done with cocaine in ya dog simple...I'm looking forward to the outcome of this..an so are many others...the rule is black an white...suck it up