God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change;
courage to change the things I can; and wisdom to know the difference.

Many of you will be aware of the first part of the serenity prayer. I am starting to interpret the concept into greyhound politics.

I recently explained why, in my opinion, the GTA are misguided in asking for forensic audits into the GBGB and BGRF.

On Tuesday, Linda Jones repeated the demands – as she is perfectly entitled to do in a free society.

I wonder though, after three and a half years of alleging corruption in the industry, and still have nothing to show for it, are the GTA desperately just hoping someone else can unearth skullduggery?

Work away guys – follow your beliefs. I will not try to change opinions that cannot be changed.

My only point – if it transpires that independent auditors have wasted their time with a spurious allegation, it should be the GTA who foot the bill, not the greyhound industry.

Imagine the irony, if the only misuse of funds by the BGRF was agreeing to fund an audit into itself.

 

Anyway, Linda’s other point, and one in which I wholeheartedly support, is the question – why has the BGRF income dropped from £13m to £6m?

Bravo – well said girl!

Except we all know the answer!

The Fund actually reached its peak in 2008/9 at £13.8m and has been falling ever since.

Is that because punters have stopped betting on greyhound racing? Is it because they no longer view greyhound racing as viable?

NO!

Anybody with more brain cells than teeth is fully aware that greyhound punting is more than holding its own.

BAGS currently broadcast 29,000 races per year – by their own figures “a 40% increase since 2006”

But that is just the tip of the iceberg. In addition to the SKY meetings, RPGTV are now broadcasting six nights a week.

Next Tuesday, they will be broadcasting Harlow and Towcester, with Crayford on BAGS and SKY plus BAGS meetings at Kinsley, Newcastle, Nottingham, Perry Barr, Sheffield and Sunderland.

And the Fund benefits by a derisory £6m per year?

THE REASON that greyhound racing is struggling is not due to lack of interest – but because the betting industry is welshing on it. A huge percentage of the money that is bet on greyhound racing goes directly into offshore trading and does not find its way into the BGRF.

Linda’s outburst on Tuesday is quite ironic, given it was the planned boycott of the Trainers Championship meeting that gave sponsors Betfair their golden opportunity to shaft greyhound racing.

Did they plan to bail out anyway? Almost certainly, The TC meeting was just another excuse.

Their main beef was that their commercial opposition, Hills Corals, Ladbrokes, Betfred, Paddy Power and the rest, were not paying into the Fund from their on-line profits, so why should they?

In fact, the only betting organisation who do 100% the right thing by greyhound racing is Bet365.

(If I am wrong about that, I will gladly publicly highlight any other company that does. To this day, the Fund protects non-paying bookies. They produce a list of who pays, but not, who doesn’t).

What’s it all worth? I honestly don’t know, but respect the views of others who have studied the subject, who claim there is actually more betting taking place on greyhounds now than there was in 2008/9 –when the Betfair bill alone was reckoned to be the guts of £1m.

And if you want to know why the Racing Post are more intent of focusing on allegations about the GBGB than non-payment of  internet betting by the big betting companies – check out of the sponsors of RPGTV

(And the toxic forum has a pop at the Star for being ‘bought and paid for!!’)

I understand that the GTA have another protest planned at GBGB headquarters very shortly.

A suggestion guys – when you have finished there, pop down to Hammersmith to Betfair HQ and you can find the people behind the £5bn merged betting giant who are really keeping the greyhound industry skint.

 

But then what of streaming?

BAGS introduced live streaming last year enabling punters all around the world to bet on UK racing.

Word on the grapevine is that BAGS are currently seeking ideas on new ways to spend the extra income that is coming in from sending pictures around the world. Much as they have done with the BAGS Track Championship

I have no idea what amounts are being talked about – I would be the last journalist they would tell – but we are dealing in millions (probably low ones at present).

The thing occurs to me is – is it right that BAGS dictate where the money goes? Legally, I assume they have the whole thing sewn up, but morally, shouldn’t all the tracks have a share?

I can’t remember the figures involved, but back in the early 1980s when my dad was joint promoter at Cambridge (and a BGRF director), there was a deal in place whereby a percentage of BAGS income was shared equally among the tracks.

An extra £100K per year would make a huge difference to the liquidity of most of the smaller tracks.