Last Monday I published a story about Towcester.
I thought it was an account of many of the failings at the track during the past year, with particular emphasis on the previous month and the debacle that became the RPGTV English Puppy Derby.
What went wrong – in detail – when – and why.
At the time, I thought it allowed the promoter Kevin Boothby to acknowledge his own part in the problem. It included admissions of a failure to manage staff, neglection of equipment and an absence of adequate maintenance procedures.
Last but not least, an acknowledgement that he had made a mistake in buying five sets of traps that were not up to the job. Plus a promise to replace the traps and a pledge for ongoing procedural improvements.
Apparently I didn’t write that.
A torrent of abuse on Twitter accused me of covering up for Kevin Boothby (again). Of being corrupt in doing so.
I was disgrace. ‘What a weapon!’ I had shown my true colours ‘like he always does’. ‘It was embarrassing’
I was bought and paid for by Kevin Boothby which was why I had let him off lightly!!!!
Basically I was/am a fraudulent piece of shit who would write whatever was necessary by whoever paid me.
And when Kevin made a direct comment accusing some trainers of welfare double standards by criticising his tracks while running on tracks with worse injury records – I shouldn’t have allowed it into the article.
Some took exception to me criticising the people who were coating Boothby on-line, but happy to enjoy his hospitality.
Er – yeah!
If you truly believe that the place is that dangerous, and the promoter is such a disgrace, why would you even consider entering a dog there?
At least have the integrity to back up your convictions.
But – I was – to quote one of the many offensive Tweets, “just a cum guzzling cretin”
But of the 100+ Tweets, almost all negative/abusive comments – from a total of roughly 3,300 followers – the thing that really seemed to wind people up was my statement that “an army of trolls” would see this as another welcome opportunity to hammer Towcester/Boothby.
In hindsight, that was wrong. If I was writing the article again I might refer to a ‘regiment’ of trolls. A ‘division’? Possibly even a ‘platoon’.
But that platoon duly showed up as expected.
What did surprise me was some of the number of people who incorrectly ‘self labelled’ themselves as trolls.
Many were people who often commented on stories on the site. In most cases in agreement, sometimes not. But instead of turning abusive, they might normally argue ‘I think you are wrong on that and here is why’
I have zero issue with that.
In fact, I love an argument/debate. You learn nothing from people who share your views, but your opinion might then be adjusted to an angle of the argument that you have never considered.
The world’s greatest thinkers – my heros – are open minded. They are not so insecure as to take personal objection to a well argued or proven counter argument.
I had no problem when the likes of Rab McNair, Patrick Janssens and Jimmy Wright complained about Towcester. The only thing I insisted on – is that complaints should be transparent and reasonable. And of course, they don’t hide their identities.
In my view, the trolls are those, who from day one, have wanted Kevin Boothby to fail. Like the guy who wants GBGB to take all Boothby’s licenses away and throw him out of the industry.
Do people really want that?
As for those who claim, ‘But I have every right to be concerned about welfare . . . ‘
Absolutely you do. 100% you do, and should.
I would never see that, alone, as trolling . But for some reason, some of you clearly thought I was referring to you and decided to throw yourself under the troll bus.
But if you think it is okay to then switch to personal abuse just to show how much you care, well . . . . .
I have never been a beige journalist who sits on the fence. I want to inform where possible, and create discussion when not.
Like everyone I get some right and some wrong. But journalists’ opinions will always be open to wider scrutiny.
As for the concept of ‘taking the money’ and writing whatever you are told, I wish I had thought of that years ago. I would be retired by now having had a working life being wined, dined and nicely ‘looked after’. This is one journalist never to be seen at a junket.
The way I see it, most promoters want to support you because they believe in what you are doing and contribute to the industry. They know there will be rough and smooth and will accept both if delivered with integrity. There are some who would like to guarantee the chance to tell their side of the story when social media, the forums, or even their own owners and trainers turn on them.
(Can you imagine Mark Bird, Rachel Corden or Kevin Boothby trying to explain an action or justify a decision on social media?)
There are also those characters who expect to dictate what you will write and who will, or will not, appear on your website. When you don’t play ball, they withdraw advertising and exclude you from all press releases. They then brief journalists who will write as they are told.
Ask Ian Smyth how that worked out for him!
In my 36 years at the Star I have fallen out with practically everyone in the industry. Virtually everyone has withdrawn their support or blanked me at some stage. The worst was GBGB Chairman Tom Kelly who tried to wipe out the Star while giving private briefings and awards to others journalists.
Why do you think he would want to do that?
Some tracks and individuals later decided to build bridges – others never did. To this day there are some managements with whom I have virtually no communication.
Is it obvious which is which from the content on the website?
In my view – if you want to slag off a promoter – don’t pick on the only one who has opened three tracks in the last 20 years, and kept open another that looked certain to close.
But I can think of at least one other who did the opposite and made off with his cash – or should I say ‘sailed off’?
But this piece isn’t primarily about last week’s article. Being criticised comes with the job and doesn’t unduly bother me. For over 40 years I have operated to one rule, ‘it isn’t about what is said, it is about who said it’. You cannot in life respond to everyone else’s opinion.
No – the reason for this article is the same one that had previously led to by withdrawal from Twitter. I felt it had degenerated into a forum, and I don’t participate in them.
Do we really need the weapons grade negativity and spite that they thrive on?
This industry doesn’t need toxic antis – we have plenty within who also claim to love it.
The ones that irritate me the most are the individuals that have left greyhound racing, or perennially say they are going ‘Because the game has gone.’
The letterbox brigade.
These are the people who turn up at the party, storm out “cos it’s shit”, and then spend the rest of the night shouting abuse through the letter box.
Just go. For everybody’s sake and happiness. Move on.
The remainder of the bitter and twisted platoon are the begrudgers who have never achieved anything in the industry and find it is the only way that they can be noticed.
Years ago, you had to swerve them at the bar when you bought your pint.
‘Yes I know. . . .have a great night mate’.
Now they all have keyboards.
In my view, there are 3 main, totally BOGUS, reasons for the industrial levels of bile that greyhound racing creates.
1) Greyhound racing has never been in a worse state.
Rubbish. Absolute bull.
While there are many aspects of the industry that have undoubtedly declined: crowd numbers, quality of stadiums, betting, and training standards, there have been significant compensations.
So let’s look at trainer conditions.
In the ‘rose tinted days’ trainers were largely treated like 19th century estate workers. They were employed by tracks, not contracted, and they had virtually no rights. They were even told where to live and could be sacked on the spot at the slightest hint of wrong doing with no appeal.
‘There are 20 others waiting to take your place’
Withdraw a dog because you didn’t like the state of the track – you would almost certainly lose your licence. It happened many times. Suspicion of a gamble – gone. Sometimes trainers were blackballed for moaning about unsafe tracks. Pam Heasman was once banned for a year from Southend.
The modern trainer has infinitely more control over his/her own destiny.
The increase in prize money due to the media rights war has made significant differences to many trainers.
Some have even got to a point that they can give up their five-times-a-week, 200 mile round trips because they can get a living closer to home and race less often. Some have halved their kennel strengths, and their headaches.
Are they earning a good living? Well yes, some are. Not that that ever gets mentioned. Good on ’em
Many trainers aren’t – but they never have.
The thing is – did greyhound racing finances suddenly go into a massive nosedive?
As for other issues. Welfare: never been a higher standard, re-homing, injury payments, massively upgraded track kennels, weather cancelled meetings and more time spent on track preparation than ever before.
Or we could talk about ‘the good old days’. Before microchips pups and racers were regularly stolen for flapping or illegal hare coursing. Most greyhounds were routinely PTS because the tracks/NGRC didn’t see it as their problem. Or they might have ended up in Spain, abandoned by travellers or in vivisection labs.
What about doping? When I was a teenager, dogs were sometimes got out, but mainly by their own trainers. Drugs like Cyclizine, Luminal, Largactil, Beta Blockers and the entire Barbiturate family and all their relatives, were active. To speed them up, the drugs of choice might have been amphetamine, cocaine, caffeine, growth hormone, EPO.
When drug testing was improved many well known trainers were caught using bronchial dilators. And of course, the most widespread drug of the lot, anabolic steroids. A significant proportioin of dogs arriving from Ireland tested positive for steroids and a number of well known UK trainers suddenly found it harder to train big race winners.
We could talk about male hormone turning bitches into dogs. Or trainers not being allowed to treat dogs between races, even with wound powders and sprays.
What about prize money? Has it ever been good? It is certainly better, pro rata than a decade ago – before ARC and SIS butted heads.
Or we could talk about £20K PGR comps, 50 Cat One races, including double-header comps at the Entain tracks.
What about £500 greyhounds that are so slow that they would never have graded 10 years ago, running for £50 also-ran money and £40 trainer bonus every time they go to boxes?
2) This is ‘our industry’ and it is being ruined by the promoters/bookmakers/media rights companies.
To kick off – as unfortunate as the truth is – this was never OUR industry.
As I have written, ad nauseum, owners and trainers were invited into greyhound racing to help promoters subsidise their businesses.
Go back to the summer of 1926, and GRA owned greyhound racing. They were followed by a string of other organisations and individuals. They owned the tracks, employed the track staff and trainers, owned the NGRC, and allowed owners to subsidise the cost of producing and keeping the greyhounds.
That power structure remains in place.
It is the reason that we don’t have a system like Australia – keep hammering that agenda on social media guys – and it is the reason that the promoters have so much clout on GBGB.
The tracks – literally – pay the wages through the Special Licence fees.
Bottom line – could tracks survive without owners?
Probably! They could breed their own (inferior) dogs, employ trainers and fund their own homefinding scheme before selling their pictures around the world.
Could owners and trainers survive without tracks? Possibly. Cooperatives operate on the Continent, but it is a hobby industry, run on a shoestring. Let’s all run for our own money!
As for the theme that continues to run through the industry, but few have the balls to confront ‘we are being screwed by the bookmakers/tracks/media rights companies’ – I simply don’t see it.
It is their ball and their game.
They never say it, but they might just be thinking ‘we are subsiding your hobby or giving you a living’
If the betting industry suddenly tired of greyhound racing, to all intents and purposes, it would be wiped out within three months.
3) We are the only ones that care for our dogs.
This is the main reason that I chose to leave social media.
I am sick to the back teeth of blind prejudice.
Which racing managers are deliberately trying to cripple your dogs?
Martin Seal? Tony Williamson, Rob Killingbeck? Andy Lisemore? Danny Rayment? Peter Robinson? Joe Frelford?
Good guys every one. Dedicated to their job and animal lovers.
Yes they may struggle to get every decision right, or have enough dogs with the right seeding to grade ever race as they would choose.
But however way they mix it, they are employed to grade five losers in every race.
Come on you trolls! Which promoters don’t give a damn about your dogs?
Simon Franklin? Jeff McKenna? Robert Watson? Kevin Boothby?
But even within those big corporate organisations, there are decent caring people who are devastated at every injury and do everything within their powers to help.
Does anyone want to suggest that Romford’s Karen McMillan doesn’t care? Or Lena Birch at Hove?
So why does Kevin Boothby get so much airtime?
Simple – nine of the biggest tracks are owned by ‘corporates’ and so many of the employees are unable to make the decisions or speak from the hip in the way that Kevin can – and does.
Also, he owns four tracks including a ‘Manchester United and a ‘Liverpool’. There are fewer big stories around the ‘Bournmouths’ and ‘Southamptons’.
That doesn’t stop the trolls from getting stuck in though – looking for blame. Desparate to hammer someone.
After his dogs are injured, John Mullins has even felt the need to comment “It was a racing injury. There was nothing wrong with the track.”
GBGB also comes in for stick. Over time it – and its predecessor, the GBGB – has been run by some incompetent and dubious charaters. It does have skeletons its cupboards. Bent investigations and people not doing their job with integrity. Some individuals rightly feel bitter at being stitched up by the system.
But after four decades writing about greyhounds, I look at the current GBGB as the best governing body that we have ever had .
With all its financial and political restraints and limitations, I see a group of employees, most of whom are greyhound racing fans, trying their absolute best. That includes unpaid directors Ian Foster and Peter Harnden (feel free to have a pop if you are prepared to do his job).
There have also been many good promoters too who have dedicated thousands of selfless hours in the industry’s cause.
TO CONCLUDE: I have grown weary of being compelled to defend people who shouldn’t have been attacked in the first place.
And I am sick to the back teeth responding to people who have nothing positive to say about the industry they claim to love.
I will miss bits of social media; 90% of Twitter contributors are decent. (There is at least one troll who I will miss sharing some banter with – a very funny guy.)
But overall, until the good people speak up more, I want no part of it.
But why would they want the opinions of a cum guzzling cretin anyway!
So to finish on a positive note, I am delighted to be able to use this opportunity to spotlight a rare musical talent.
This video was anonymously sent to me having apparently been rejected by Britain’s Got Talent. Why!! The artiste is unnamed, he is simply described as “Late-ish 30s, Kent based asylum seeker, with the voice of an angel”
If you were to spot him around the tracks, make sure to comment on his video.
