In or out?
Do you want to be ruled by an undemocratic organisation with the most import person representing a small minority of interests?
Forget Brexit, Britain’s greyhound trainers have their own election issues.
On one side, we have the Greyhound Trainers Association (GTA), a democratically elected organisation whose historical importance to the industry was recognised by the Donoughue report in the formation of the GBGB. Challenging them to a seat at the table are a new group who will have their application heard to join the board of directors at GBGB next month.
Why would a struggling profession feel the need to have two organisations at each other’s throats?
GTA chairman Ricky Holloway undoubtedly has support. Many of his backers must endorse his views on corruption and cover-up in the corridors of power. Others presumably feel that his aggressive, accusative (possibly frustrated) approach is the best way of achieving change through intervention of Government or other agencies. Some are simply embittered and want to inflict as much abuse as possible on the individuals or organisations by whom they feel they have felt slighted. Sadly, as in the case of the GTA’s EFRA submission, the whole industry is tarnished by association.
So why a second organisation? Clearly, there are some trainers who simply don’t like, and have never liked, Holloway. That’s politics! There are others who feel Holloway has had his chance and failed. Some disapprove of his approach.
The Racing Post recently suggested that the new group was simply a ‘Jim Reynolds breakaway group’. They are misinformed. It is a fact that Jim Reynolds, one of the four figureheads within the Professional Greyhound Trainers Association, was approached by other professional trainers prior to taking a role in the new organisation. This was presumably because he had been the other major contender, but withdrew, prior to Holloway’s election victory.
It is has also been suggested that the letter apparently signed by 20 trainers, announcing the launch of the new organisation, was bogus. That is actually true, there was no physical letter. There was an email sent to myself and Jim Cremin at the Racing Post, announcing that the named trainers had endorsed a prepared statement. We each spoke to several trainers confirming this was the case. (Presumably the GTA can produce an actual kitchen-table sized piece of paper with ‘over 700 signatures’ scrawled on it demanding a forensic audit?)
Even Holloway’s staunchest supporters would concede that he does not enjoy the absolute support of greyhound trainers – but then which leader does? Ask Jeremy Corbyn.
Some trainers have, quite logically, suggested that if the dissenters want a change of leader, the answer is to vote Holloway out of office, not set up a separate organisation. Putting aside the fact that the GTA elections are a year overdue, the problem is this – the GTA has expanded way beyond its original concept, an organisation to represent professional greyhound trainers.
The net result is that professional trainers can be outvoted in their own organisation by a larger number of hobby trainers. Yet 20% of trainers supply 80% of the runners. Jim Reynolds himself has more runners in his kennel than the entire GTA committee.
There will be many areas of joint interest between hobby and professional trainers, but there will also be areas of conflict and clearly many professionals do not want to have their position compromised or undermined.
There are a couple of other thoughts to ponder. Firstly, many professions, teachers being one good example, are represented by more than one union.
Secondly, knowing John Coleman as I do, there is no way that he would agree to be the PGTA’s representative at GBGB – subject to board approval – unless he felt he could achieve something. Coleman spent 20 years representing the GTA at the BGRB before bitterly resigning with the view “I could write down everything I achieved on the back of a penny black”.
At least that is something that he and Holloway have in common!
The cynics, doubters and keyboard warriors who reckoned promoters would simply siphon off the live streaming cash have been proven wrong as track after track announce prize money increases.
It is my firm belief that owners and trainers will directly benefit from the future agreement between the bookmakers and the GBGB.
It has also been suggested that Tom Kelly promised trainers that £14m would be delivered ‘by the end of the month’ when he met trainers at the Racing Post Juvenile night in March.
Absolute bull. Total fabrication. Anybody who tells you that Kelly promised anything similar is lying.
The reality is, the bookies won’t agree to hand over a red cent until after the planned merger between Corals/Ladbrokes, so we are talking at least a month away.
Furthermore, the bookies have still not reached agreement with horseracing who rejected the offer of roughly half of what they get from betting shop profits.
Greyhound racing’s deal is already very different, so more horse (or greyhound) trading is expected.
As I pointed out to a greyhound trainer recently, Tom Kelly wouldn’t promise £14 let alone £14m until he had personally counted, inspected, and bitten on, every single coin.
