The Greyhound-Data Forum has been created to act as a platform for greyhound enthusiasts to share information on this magnificent animal called a greyhound.
Greyhound-Data reserve the right to remove any post that is off topic, advertisements or opinions they consider to be offensive.
If you answer then please try to stay on topic. It's absolutely okay to answer in a broader scope but don't hijack posts by switching to something off topic.
In case you see an insulting post: DO NOT REPLY TO IT!
Use the report button to inform the moderators so that we can delete it.
Do you have questions about greyhound racing? Do you need advice on how to train a greyhound?
Sanctioning Guidelines For IGB Control Commitee
Brian Walsh (Verified User) Posts 104 Dogs 0 / Races 0 06 Jan 2020 22:57
(2)
(0)
Following the RTE Prime Time Investigates programme, the IGB issued a lengthy response and with regard to the Control Committee it said; ..adjudicate and impose penalties which are laid down in legislation. The sanctions available to the Control Committee are very severe and include large monetary fines, prize money forfeiture, revocation of trainers licences, exclusion from the industry and the imposition of additional testing on an individuals greyhounds. The IGB Control Committee Report for Dec 19 was recently published. Two cases jump out at the reader (well they jumped out at me). A dog tested positive for Acerpromazine; the case was proven and it was accepted that the handler had no sinister motive in administering the 'tablet' to the dog. The fine was 300. The second was a dog testing positive for Amphetamine; again the case was proven. Having taken into account the full co-operation received from the handler in the Amphetamine case, the 1,600 1st prize was forfeited and a fine of 500 was imposed. Having read both cases and taken into account the circumstances described and evidence accepted by the Control Committee, I still cannot help but believe that the fines imposed were far from being severe and large monetary fines. Even with it being accepted that a dog was not intentionally given Acerpromazine to impede a dogs true ability, is a fine of 300 enough of a deterrent to make someone think twice before giving their dog a tablet that was prescribed for a different use? Moreover, a 500 fine for an Amphetamine positive, when guilt is accepted and motive was for monetary gain, is this sufficient to deter? I could not defend these sanctions to anybody who would accuse the IGB (and as a consequence, all those who partake in the the sport) of adopting soft standards. Maybe it is time for the IGB to reflect on the sanctions available to the control committee and suggest some new sanctioning guidelines to be laid down in the legislature. This may go some way to helping us defend our beloved sport that is under such pressure from all sides at the moment. Though they may need to spend a six figure sum to contract a consultancy firm to advise them as to what sanctioning guidelines would be suitable. This is just my opinion and Im open to hearing other peoples views, am I jumping the gun a bit? Were the mitigating factors enough to justify the fines imposed? Please dont use this thread as an opportunity to discuss cases that are still pending or before the courts. This post is about two cases that have been decided upon before the IGB Control Committee and whether the sanctions matched the positive findings and the circumstances that led to them.
Do you have questions about greyhound racing?
