October
JuneThorough better than quick
Is P. Battistella (30/5) serious about the cobalt saga when he says “(J)ust drop it, instead of tarnishing the reputation of a handful of our leading trainers”?
What’s a prohibited substance between friends, eh? Let’s all go back to making money.
Without wanting to pre-empt any findings on the guilt or innocence of anyone, I am on fairly safe ground in saying that this substance has shown up at prohibited levels in a number of horses across several jurisdictions.
I believe it’s also not seriously disputed that cobalt has the potential to enhance performance — or at the very least that people who have used it believe that it does.
If racing authorities want people to bet with any confidence on any horse race in future, it must be established how the cobalt came to be in the horses’ systems, and measures must be put in place to minimise the chance of it happening again.
One of those measures must be that the guilty parties (if any) are suitably punished to deter others from trying the same or similar things.
Simon Moir (on the same page) makes more sense when he calls for a more transparent investigation process, but I’m prepared to accept that in some instances transparency might have an adverse effect on the outcome.
I’m certain the stewards are aware of the investigation’s importance, and that a just and timely resolution is crucial.
Regular updates would be welcome if they could be made without compromising the investigation. However, it’s clearly a complicated business and shouldn’t be rushed on the basis of what blokes might be saying to each other in pubs.
Cremorne (Vic)