But, back to the topic - Union management is under constant criticism for shortcomings at lower levels and finance is dicey. A major part of the problem has to be assigned to management.

It's a question of recognising and encouraging the grass roots attraction of a sport. UK (social) and NZ (a religion) do it, Oz is falling short.

Similarly, we need first to build up the greyhound breed in the eyes of the public. Not a single state government, racing authority or club has recognised that is the starting point. The former could not care less, the other two don't know that is the challenge.

International rules? Bit of a cheap shot. It's a one-off manufactured game, albeit part of the AFL's desperate attempt to stir up overseas interest. Besides which, we get quite a lot of players from Ireland - including a Brownlow winner.

Greg Perrin
PM meAustralia
(Verified User)
Posts 543
Dogs 31 / Races 0
26 Nov 2012 16:49

" I would of thought their would of been a conflict of interest from 1 or a few members of the board who signed the agreement as I know that 1 of the members was a director on the NJC, Newcastle Jockey Club, what other members on the board were affiliated with the Horses or Trots?
The other thing is from a business point of view, who in the hell would sign such an agreement, did the board not have faith in themselves to be able to grow their market share, they obviously had no strategic plan in place, so why were they appointed in the 1st place.

At the time I think Richard Face was the minister for the sport & guess who his mate was, the Chairman of the GRA, he appointed him.

If people are serious about getting things done, I think it would be a good idea to get a shovel and start digging the dirt around the previous GRA board members & I would even suggest to get a Private Detective to start digging".

OK, my point is that there has always been conflict/dissention when insiders are involved in running the code. The above quote is not quite right but the principle is there. In fact, the GRA Chairman mentioned was also on the NJC committee, where he was assigned the responsibility to "look after" the greyhound operation across the road. He was always strongly supportive of the code, never mind the hassles with (crook) Minister Face. But he also stated (under oath at an inquiry) that he acted to sign the intercode agreement after asking NCA and GBOTA reps what to do. They said sign, so he did. Other board members were not involved, so far as I can ascertain.

Later, when NJC was sick of the dogs, all three organisations - GRA, GBOTA and NCA - had the opportunity to buy up Beaumont Park, lock stock and barrel for $3m. They all knocked it back. Subsequently, many more millions were thrown away trying to get the Gardens built and on an even keel. In my view, that track is still sub-standard from a design angle so we have not got much back from all that investment - by insiders and a board that is not competent about track design. (The belated "fix" of moving the 413m boxes to a 400m start only half repaired the design damage and did not attend to camber and turn problems. And it cost another $50k).

Theoretically, a business man did enter the fray at The Gardens (Gordon) but he obviously could not transfer his engineering expertise to the operation of a raceclub. Hence another crash.

We need hard-nosed successful businessmen with a marketing bent. And with a love for the game and prepared to work for peanuts.

Should people who are affiliated with a political party be on the Board ?

Your 2nd Q - Who isn't?

Who is ?

Famously, I recall a speech he made at the Social Club calling on all participants to avoid using corporate bookies at all costs. More famously, V'Landys did the same thing (eg "parasites).

They changed their spots only because they had no choice legally. Ditto for most other racing bosses, including RV which could not get the commission deal right, even with the help of a tame consultancy firm. V'Landys did on that occasion.

The lesson is that such people have poor business judgement (see also Arthurson). In all these cases it is not a matter of your personal opinion but of assessing the odds and then negotiating the best long term result for your industry.

Editor,

Imre Salusinszky, Fairfax columnist and former media director for Mike Baird went to some pains to castigate the Hadley and Jones duo for telling porkies about the Premiers handling of the greyhound ban (Intimidating strategy damages democracy, Sun Herald Nov 26).

Much centred on alleged meetings with big developers about the Wentworth Park site fantasy, says Imre. Well perhaps, but we have just heard about plans for the new fish market where discussions overlapped or abutted the same Wentworth Park. No doubt there were many competing claims and offers. We may never know.

Imre also failed to mention his bosss clear dislike of greyhounds. But he did state his own view when talking about the cruel and soon-to-be extinct activity of greyhound racing

Yes, a tiny minority of over 3,300 NSW trainers has been found guilty of live baiting, and punished for it. By comparison, the percentages would be much higher than that if we counted up crimes by NSW politicians.

But soon-to-be extinct? Does Imre know something we dont? The government has just re-organised greyhound racing management, appointed former Premier Morris Iemma as chairman, and promised several millions to help tide over the costs of extra government-induced regulations.

Either way, Imre indicates he personally does not like greyhound racing. But neither did his former boss (in the next door office, mind you) and he was strongly criticised by the Auditor General for errors in the governments advertising (which Imre no doubt vetted). The AG also let off Baird very lightly on the question of personal opinions impinging on such advertising. That is not permitted under the governments own rules.

Such is Imres target of achieving democracy in NSW.

That said, let's ask what the industry would lose if Wenty shut down?

My answer is nothing. It's a crook track with impediments that stop the creation of a 600m trip. It has heritage barriers. You have to deal with the Trust. It's getting harder to access. The public face into southern rain but otherwise it was not a bad result for spectators and punters in the days when both were plentiful. But they aren't any longer. They are all sitting in front of screens all over the country (which, coincidentally, suggests we also need better pictures than offered today).

I would adopt the same solution I recommend for Canberra - screw what you can out of the government and go elsewhere. And, when you do that, try to put the track into the middle of a multi-purpose complex, including a licensed club. That not only spreads the burden but offers a captive audience. (No, not at Richmond - it's too remote and offers no bonuses, actual or potential). Homebush would be ideal as Iemma could then walk to the track. Whatever.

The report indicated the design of the stands emergency exits etc contributed to the deaths and injuries.

Therefore redesigns, rebuilds are necessary to comply with recommended new minimum standards - I expect the current Government is taking the opportunity to cover up the must rebuild with a look at a great job we are doing for you

EXTERNAL LINK