2022 will be memorable for many different reasons. Perhaps the most frustrating for me was the continuous drive of the industry to paint itself into a welfare corner.
Overall, I thought GBGB did a decent job, bearing in mind there is no known record of the current governing body, or any of its predecessors, ever having won any plaudits.
(I first went racing in 1972 at which time, the industry hymn ‘The game’s gone’ had moved on from being a big hit on ’78 vinyl to audio cassette. It would eventually become the most played CD and should now be up there with ‘Smack My Bitch Up’ on Spotify.)
Among the things I thought the Board got right was defending the industry corner at the Welsh Senedd as they considered a ban.
They challenged Rishi Sunak when he declined to question some anti racing debate during his hustings, and then came out fighting, when the three animal charities launched their campaign to end greyhound racing.
There was also a vigorous response to the Parliamentary debate following the e-petition.
The second birthday of the Greyhound Retirement Scheme celebrating the 6000th homed hound was a very worthy landmark. There was a new appointment of a new Executive Veterinarian, though outside the inner sanctum, we wouldn’t really have much of an idea of what the role entails.
Moving into less pleasant waters, the Board seemingly just pulled itself back from the precipice in insisting in making all greyhounds trial around a track before being allowed to run in open races.
Both ARC and Entain went ahead with it before realising they had cocked up. Common sense has since returned to the Universe.
But there can be zero excuse for the ‘Four Day Rule’ – without doubt the most ill-considered addition to the rule book during my time in greyhound racing.
It simply isn’t good enough to say, ‘it was done for the right reasons’.
There are many other ways to tackle potential ‘over racing’. Simply limit races in a month.
It wasn’t need. It isn’t needed. It is a shit show.
I wonder how many of those deciding this abortion of a rule are aware that it was once quite common for greyhounds to race twice in a day. When Carntyne staged the Scottish Derby, the top London hounds, including English Derby winner Pigalle Wonder, contested the 525 yard heats on a Saturday afternoon and the final later that evening.
The Board claim the rule change was based on science. So why hide behind it? Let’s see it.
We are already seeing the results: dogs missing out on competitions because re-runs can’t take place. Delayed competitions overlapping each other. ‘Balloting’ has become a thing.
Which leads me to a question.
If the ‘requirement to trial’ was considered of have some merit – and nobody is disputing that in many cases trials can be beneficial – what use is a rule that all but rules out the ‘quick look solo’?
If GBGB are really keen to reduce injuries, they might unleash their team of vets on a major study of track injuries.
Which tracks suffer the most? What kind of injuries? Which tracks have the best returns? How are they prepared? Is there big variation between trainers at the same track? What are the most effective treatments for different types of shoulder or hock injuries? And so on . . . .Create a database.
They haven’t done it because the track promoters are paranoid about the data.
Personally, I think there is a lot of misinformation about injuries, particularly when we are trying to compare a track that has 75 races each week while another stages 25.
I don’t need to know where to point the finger, but simply to be confident that this simplest and most obvious opportunity to improve greyhound welfare is not being ignored.
But trainers don’t get away scot free either.
Suddenly we have a new trend– a ‘slow track’ is a dangerous track.
Do we really want to go down that route?
It is one thing to have a dog run on a track that it a second slow and is absolutely spent for the next couple of days.
Is that cruel though?
Or is it a test? I wonder what a top coursing trainer would make of it.
For years we raced on muddy tracks for three or four months of the year. I remember when the mud was so deep on the inside at Wembley and White City that it threatened to suck the your wellies off your feet.
Greyhound racing only came into its own on a Saturday afternoon when horseracing was cancelled ‘due to weather’ and the World Of Sport team arrived.
If Romford, Oxford, Monmore, wherever, has been running slow, don’t enter. Or certainly don’t enter the your dog who barely gets the trip.
Does that mean that tracks are always safe to run on?
Of course not and there will be occasions when meetings should be cancelled.
That is a job for GBGB to simplify by the implementation of a series of tests to be designed by STRI working with selected track staff.
I can’t begin to describe what it should look like, but I do recall that in the past, STRI have designed a series of tests for things like ‘impact’ and ‘shear’ to determine the condition of the surface.
This works for tracks and trainers. ‘Our track has passed the tests, we race’
The alternative is 20 different trainers with 20 different opinions and at the first sign of an injury, the track gets the blame.
Bottom line – if STRI can’t come up with a workable test to determine a track’s suitability for racing, why the hell have we wasted so many thousands on them?
Last but no least, let’s acknowledge the progress that has been made.
In August there were 15 meetings cancelled due to warm weather. We lost a stack more to waterlogged tracks in the autumn and frozen circuits in the winter.
A greyhound track promoter in the 1950s or 1960s couldn’t begin to get their ahead around the issue.
‘Cancelled meeting due to cold? Did you run out of straw?
‘Cancelled meeting due to rain? A ‘Very Heavy’ going allowance would cover that.’
On Bonfire Night, trainers were encouraged to put cotton wool in their greyhounds’ ears. In 2022, there were no greyhound meetings in built up areas on November 5, with some meetings also cancelled the previous evening.
Finally – a big thanks for the continued support during the last year. Our monthly reader base of 18K remains a source of great pride given the decline in the size of the industry.
Having chosen to ditch social media – excluding adding links to stories on Twitter – I hope to run a few more Editors Chair pieces, in a more ‘diary style’ format, going forward. We should also have a few new contributors too!
Have a great 2023.
Floyd
