As a writer, not a broadcaster, I can’t say that I particularly take to appearing on radio or TV. I used to do RPGTV once or twice a year, but not any more.

One step on from the old joke about having a face for radio, I don’t even have a voice for radio. I sound like Micky Mouse’s dodgy brother.

I can truthfully say, I have never watched or listened to any interview I have appeared in. They make me cringe.

But with the GBGB offices unmanned at 8am on a couple of days this week, Greyhound Star appeared to be the only industry outlet available for the early bird researchers.

I am not in Mark Bird’s league as a speaker, I wouldn’t even get into the play-offs, but fearing the industry would end up being represented by someone like McCrirrick (again), I agreed to speak on a couple of BBC regional radio phone-ins.

I thought they went pretty well. To begin with, it felt like me against an army of wild-eyed anti zombies attacking with tales of cigarette burns being applied to dogs’ bums to make them go in the traps.

WTF is that all about?

(One caller phoned up and announced, ‘I have a rescued greyhound, I always wondered what those scars on his hind legs were’)

I think the turning point on the BBC Radio Scotland interview came after I pointed out to the host that the callers weren’t so much ‘anti greyhound racing’ as ‘anti animals in sport’.

She started to question them, and one-by-one, they confessed that they were. Gradually, ‘neutrals’ began to respond in defence of their own personal interest including gymkhana, horse racing and sheep dog trials.

I fear we will have to get used to this media bloodfest every summer.

On the plus side, we now at least have some evidence to fend off the ‘tens of thousands electrocuted, shot or drowned every year’. And – whenever I tell anyone that ‘87% – updated to 88%’ of ex-racers are re-homed, they are usually stunned, in a good way.

The key stats are: 242 trackside euthanasias and the 324 dogs who were put to sleep because no suitable home could be found.

Now there are two schools of thought on these figures. In terms of the track euthanasias, there is no doubt in my mind that some trainers are still abusing the system, by allowing the destruction of otherwise healthy animals for non-life threatening injuries.

Though that door is rapidly closing. It can’t slam quick enough with those toerags on the outside of it.

I think the key here is “progress” though it needs to accelerate beyond the 6% of last year.

Some people take the view that the antis would consider one track fatality as animal genocide.

True. But the antis don’t represent anything other than an extreme edge of society. The average British citizen would set a mouse-trap, enjoys a T-bone and bets on the Grand National and Cheltenham.

The ‘economic euthanasias’ is a different story. That needs to plummet to zero, and fast.

Even ‘unhomeable’ dogs should have a full life in kennels. It is generally where they are happier and more comfortable anyway. The trainers who keep them, should be paid to do so.

The one aspect that really irritates me though, is the need to produce figures for ‘the rest’. The difference between 566 currently and the “nearly 1,000 destroyed greyhounds” that I kept hearing quoted this week.

The Board describe the 12% as “the vast majority of greyhounds either died of natural causes or were put to sleep following vets’ advice for legitimate medical or welfare reasons.”

Quite simply, they should not be included. At least the collection criteria should be modified.

In the last fortnight, my daughter has had a five year old dearly loved German Shepherd put to sleep. He had a heart condition, and it was in his best interest. Had he been a greyhound, he would have been part of the ‘industry destroyed’ statistics.

What about the greyhounds who die from heart attacks? I once paraded a bitch who died minutes before a race from heart failure. Don’t tell me that is a racing injury.

Or those who don’t survive anaesthesia. Or develop cancer, or any other diseases, infected or inherited?

The figures are out there and we need to become more savvy on how we present them.

Who will lay me 6-4 that Battersea Dogs Home alone euthanised more Pit Bull crosses last year than the entire number of greyhounds who were PTS?

Talk of re-homing all ex-racers is cheap. I heard a figure last week which suggests that is costs around £950 for every dog re-homed through the Greyhound Trust.

Now if that is the cost, greyhound racing should be prepared to pay it.

But it ain’t.

There are some exceptional independent homefinders with proven records for successfully re-homing greyhounds over many years – who will do it for about half the price of the Greyhound Trust.

We know that some of the most vociferous ‘anti’ kennels are so bitter because they feel that the dogs have simply been ‘discarded’ by the industry.

Nobody attaches £500 cheques to rubbish. The independent homefinders will play a significant role in wiping out that waiting list of 324 names.

As for GT, they might home a few more dogs if they weren’t spending resources on solicitors letters threatening people who challenge how they operate.

On that subject, if you are going to spend God knows how much on an independent enquiry to clear staff of wrong-doing, why should we accept your verdict on what the report says.

Show us the full report.

On a wider scale, over many years of studying the subject, it seems obvious to me that we need to show much greater flexibility in our thinking about ex-racers. There is no single silver bullet.

John Mullins’ alerted me to just option this week when quoting the massive variations (between 200-300%) in the cost of neutering between a vet that he uses, and a different member of the Member of the Royal College of Veterinary Conmen.

Surely GBGB could compile a list of suitable options in different areas and also get a bulk rate?

Personally, and I know this is a subject I have mentioned before – but I remain frustrated when I see perfectly healthy dogs retired through an owner’s misguided sense of ego.

If a four year old is no longer capable of winning opens, but still loves his racing, why retire him because he is now A3?

Pssst – he doesn’t know he is A3.

A trail-off of performance is inevitable but it doesn’t mean the dog is suffering or has fallen out of love with racing.

Try telling the pot-bellied middle aged Alan Shearers and David Beckams that they are too old for their Sunday morning kickabout.

It was John’s mum Linda who best summed up the retirement conundrum many years ago.

The multi time champion trainer had great success with veterans including El Tenor, Clear Prospect, El Premier and Palace Issue to name but four.

Her words, as best I remember them were ‘You know when they’ve had enough. They are slow to get off their bed to go racing and they are a bit subdued the next day. Don’t worry, they tell you’.

But more races for fit and healthy dogs means less dogs are needed, and less need to be re-homed.

The obvious solution, to appease the sensitive owners, is veterans competitions so I was quite excited to see both Hove and Newcastle recently schedule Caterory Three events.

Unfortunately, Hove’s attracted two entries and Newcastle’s just one.

Now nobody can convince me that there weren’t plenty of suitable runners at each track running in graded races.

Once again – a bit of initiative is required. What about a £50 additional GBGB prize money grant for every veterans race – graded or open? I will certainly publicise them.

The owner of the prematurely retired open racer turned A3 grader, can be back in the game with a ‘veteran open race and prolific V1 winner’.

It will be interesting to see how many trainers are lining up changes of track in the coming weeks and months.

It was in January 2018 that many of them signed 18 month contacts with the GMG tracks. However following recent reduced grants forcing some of those tracks to cut prize money, I hear plenty of mutterings of discontent.

Do I stay or do I jump – and which of the options will still be here in a year’s time?

Finally, I was sent this video by someone who thought this was a greyhound. I don’t think there is any doubt that it does have some greyhound in it (a bit like its mum once did).

Note to Graham Holland: get rid of the gallop – get a trampoline.