Two grooms should be employed for each horse

And owners don't need bookmaker punters

Tigershark wrote: And owners don't need bookmaker punters

Tigershark we are not owners. We are punters. We dont care about anything but our own pockets. If you haven't worked out that owners are not the important cog in this industry, then you need to wipe the shit out of your eyes, and quickly too. Punters fund this industry, end of.

I had to search for OTA post, it sums up the situation perfectly:

The question is what can "we" do for racing.

The answer lies in what your opinion of the efficacy of the operators and the NHRA are. If you think the job is being done well and the forward planning is resulting in a bright future, then you support by betting on the tote and buying horses to ensure that the game thrives. If you believe that the job is being done badly, with self interests and poor administration ruling, then you avoid supporting the tote at all costs.

It is as simple as that

You see Tigershark, we as punters don't care about owners, so if SA racing ceased to exist, very few of us would stop punting.

What a ridiculous argument? I cannot believe some of the sentiments in here...

The owner:

Do you realise what stabling costs per month? To have a horse in a small stable in PE for example = R10 000 per month! Owners keep buying more stock, very few ever show a positive return... Just to keep the game going for the punters??? But we dont need the owners??? Owners are automatically on the losing end before even attempting to strike a bet.

So let's increase the stabling even more now... Let's see owners waking up and realising that this is getting ridiculous and stop buying more stock... Let's see how the game survives if we have no horses to run on raceday... and then? NOBODY has jobs!

Let's create employment - 2 grooms per horse (which was never needed for the last 100 years)

NETT RESULT: Mass unemployment as the game starts to die. Now? How many thousands have just lost their jobs?

And lets not confine this to SA racing... what if the same trends continue all over the world in racing? What if it's not just limited to horseracing? Does ever golfer need 2 caddies? So that 1 can rest between holes? Should a rugby team consist of 46 players to give the guys a breather? Would you be willing to pay double for your tickets now?

If phumelela suddenly increases from 25% to 35% takeout to fund this ridiculous notion, would you as the punter be happy then?

Snel, your sentiments are 100% correct but unfortunately wasted on those that believe that the product they bet on should come at no cost.

Jurgs, you flaunt your ignorance by believing that everyone on this site is just a punter and not also an owner and also believing that there is no corruption in Mauritius & the UK . Maybe you and OTA should actually follow through and stop punting on horse racing locally and internationally rather than just blowing hot air. Play the Lotto, the balls don't need to be fed or trained.

I was a punter before becoming an owner and my opinion is simple, racing needs every role player and the product needs to be funded by all role players.

It amazes me that those who dislike the Tote do not bet on the Tote but still complain, however the same people rely on it for P6's and exotics which is laughable. The same group who do not give a shit about owners want information on the horses well being so that they can go bet with the book maker.... what a joke.

Tigershark you are more than a fool, you are an illiterate fool.

Why should I stop punting on racing because you don't like where I punt? Go to hell man

The sad reality is that (horse racing only) anybody with R10 can be a punter but not everybody can be an owner.
Jurgs people with a view like yours are doing huge damage to horse racing as these funds are not getting back into the "pool" where they belong for the healthy longevity of the sport. Bottom line !

Neigh I am not being argumentative, what you say is correct. However, I do not feel compelled to support something because it is beneficial to the long term health of local racing. I frankly, with apologies, do not give a damn. I am a punter and a sick one at that. I go where my business is appreciated, where I get the best "deal", and that is dfinitely not on the tote. Over the course of a year I used to turn 6 figure numbers through the tote. I am not bragging, but I am definitely not a R10 punter. I wish that I were, I would have a lot more in the bank! The tote do not know who I am. Hollywood treat me like a VIP.

I hear you Jurgs, but if you spend that type of money on punting surely you NEED to buy a share in a horse and enjoy the thrill of owning a thoroughbred :lol:

Jurgs, if i am an "illiterate fool" then you definitely own the Moron space.

It is pleasing to see that you do not follow the advice of remaining silent and having people think your a fool, your eager to prove it.

By the the way, i am having someone read and write for me

Ballydoyle appeal dismissed in ruling that could knock Irish racing
BY TONY O'HEHIR 9:14PM 12 JAN 2018
The Labour Court in Dublin has dismissed an appeal by Ballydoyle Racing against compliance notices issued by the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) over failure to give grooms and exercise riders rest periods to which they were legally entitled.

The ruling, which confirms the removal of agricultural-worker status from racing stable staff, has serious implications for the industry throughout Ireland.

During an inspection in May 2016, a WRC inspector found a number of breaches of the Organisation Working Time Act involving failure to provide sufficient breaks and rest periods for five grooms and exercise riders.

Early last year four compliance notices were issued against the employer in respect of those breaches.

As part of an appeal at which trainer Aidan O'Brien gave evidence, Ballydoyle Racing argued it was exempt from provisions of the Organisation of Working Time Act because its staff were engaged in agricultural activities.

Ballydoyle also contended that its training activities were carried out in conjunction with the activities of Coolmore Stud Farm, which has the same ultimate owners but is a separate legal entity.

Ballydoyle also argued rest breaks were not always possible because highly strung thoroughbreds needed to have the same groom and exercise rider rather than a variety of staff looking after them for shorter periods.

The WRC and Ballydoyle disagreed on the definition of 'agriculture', with Ballydoyle contending it was entitled to an exemption under a broader definition of the word. However, the WRC argued Ballydoyle is not an agricultural operation under the common definition.

In the ruling, Labour Court deputy chairman Alan Haugh cited three dictionary definitions of 'agriculture' and ruled that the Ballydoyle Racing operation fell outside those definitions.

The court rejected Ballydoyle's contention that it was entitled to the derogation from providing statutory rest periods for agricultural activities under the Organisation of Working Time Act, and allowed the WRC compliance notices to stand.

It is expected Ballydoyle will further appeal against the Labour Court ruling in the High Court.

The WRC said it noted the outcome of the case and that it was working with the industry to increase awareness and compliance and would launch an employer guide this month.

Imagine if Grooms are no longer classed as agricultural workers in SA

Bob Brogan wrote: Imagine if Grooms are no longer classed as agricultural workers in SA

What are grooms classed as in SA?