Michael Wigham

  • Thread starter Thread starter ItalianStallion
  • Start date Start date
I

ItalianStallion

Guest
Sendreni has just been withdrawn from the 7.10 Windsor because a vetonary inspector found a suspicious substance within the stables, the matter is being delt with by the BHA.

I backed Sendreni LTO no wonder it ran a stonker :blink:
 
From RP's live reporter (Bruce Jackson):

Wigham heading to London

MICHAEL Wigham has been referred to the BHA after an incident in the stabling block which led to the stewards withdrawing third-race favourite Sendreni.

Stewards secretary Richard Westropp said: "We had a report from the racecourse veterinary officer that an unallowable substance was found in the horse's stable when the stable guard was patrolling. I have not heard of the substance but had the trainer asked the vet whether he could administer it before the race, he would have been told no.

"As the trainer is responsible for everything and anything that enters the racecourse stable yard we withdrew the horse and referred the matter to the BHA."

Wigham countered: "It is not an illegal substance and was there for protection of the horse. When I was told about it, I wanted to withdraw the horse but the stewards did it."
 
Ah, Michael Wigham in trouble with the BHA, makes a change... how he still has a licence is beyond me.

If the BHA want to make racing appeal to the masses, they could start by ousting characters like this who only to go show racing to be an elitist pastime clouded by skullduggery.
 
Lets be fair he hardly has horses that are going to make the front page of newspapers so the sports o.k on the skullduggery bit.
 
That's not the point, the BHA should be eradicating all forms of 'skullduggery' at all levels of the sport.

Plenty of people on the street still have the "ahhh horse racing, that's as bent as a two bob note" attitude.
 
Yes they probally are but there not going to pick up a racing post and read the small article about Michael Wigham in page 36, because they are set in their beliefs racing won't be at the forefront of their mind unlike us who live and breathe racing everyday we know it goes on even from the best of them but because we love our sport we just get on with it, another day another doller
 
I'm interested in this 'stable guard' on patrol! There are a couple of blokes who check the horses as they come off the boxes, run the old magic wand over them to check that their microchip agrees with the passport ID they've had printed out, and that's it. The groom and/or THL brings in the bits and bobs from the box, such as rug, grooming kit, and those go straight in with the horses. I've never seen a stable 'guard' ever check any kit over, let alone 'patrol'. If it's on view, you'd hardly think it would be something illegal, would you? It all sounds a bit weird to me.

Wigham's a dour bugger, never seen the bloke smile, and this won't be his first offence, if he's found against. But it's the set-up, the scene, that just doesn't ring true.
 
Think someone could have been trying to set him up - who could blame them though...
 
I don't know, really, Stallion, but it just seems odd that there's reference to a 'stable guard on patrol'. The 'guards' are Jockey Club appointees who I've never seen wandering around the stable yard at any course I've worked at - they generally sit in a little building at the entrance to the stable block and check the horses in. I'm surprised that one would just happen to be peering into horses' boxes (why?) and 'just happen' to see something visible that shouldn't have been there. If it was something definitely wrong, you'd hide it away carefully, wouldn't you? If it wasn't something wrong, you wouldn't care who saw it. So something doesn't add up there to me. But then, I'm very fond of detective stories!

Of course, the groom might have had it visible and one of the JC chaps wandered over for a chat, and asked what it was. But as for being on patrol... I have serious doubts about that.
 
Last edited:
Irish Stamp said:
Doubt it Colin - that would involve using their initiative ;)
Click to expand...
Unfair Martin, as those with a working knowledge of the authorities will testify. Jinnyj has posted her views on the likely scenario on TRF, but for the sake of repeating them, the crucial point is what is "unallowable" and the answer is anything other than hay and water. It's almost certain that the substance isn't performance enhancing per se, but it's against the rules to have it in the stabling area and there's little doubt that Michael Wigham is being monitored much more closely that most other trainers (with justification). It used to be commonplace for many trainers to administer some kind of drench pre race, but a zero tolerance on possible medication is now taken.
 
Of course, like those other two guys that were caught a while back, there was absolutely nothing to suggest the drug was going to be administered. It just so happens that many people who work in racing also work in the pharmacutical industry and are prone to carrying samples.
 
Honest Tom said:
Of course, like those other two guys that were caught a while back, there was absolutely nothing to suggest the drug was going to be administered. It just so happens that many people who work in racing also work in the pharmacutical industry and are prone to carrying samples.
Click to expand...

:lol::lol::lol:
 
From the RP... This is good...

MICHAEL WIGHAM has denied flouting the strict rule that nothing other than normal feed and water can be given to horses in racecourse stables without prior agreement from the veterinary officer after the stewards ordered the withdrawal of Sendreni, his forecast favourite for the claimer at Windsor on Monday night.
A cardboard tube that had contained Homoplus Performance, a herbal mixture most commonly used in horses to prevent or reduce bleeding, and with the gelding's name written on it, was found outside the five-year-old's box in the stable block during pre-race security checks, but the Newmarket trainer claimed the incident was "a genuine accident".
Wigham, who can expect to be fined when the case goes before the disciplinary panel, said: "There was nothing sinister about happened.
"We had given the Homoplus to Sendreni early in the morning when we galloped him, and the groom who looks after him had thrown the wrapper in his bucket and it was still there when he went to the races. "


The evidence and excuses are just amazing, how long have they had to come up with that shower!
 
I'm a little bit confused over this :confused:

Why if the substance is not banned is it not allowed to be given?

And if it is not allowed to be given prior to the race then why can it be given that morning? :blink:
 
strugglign to believe it was still in his bucket from the morning, but we shall never know. but the fact it's a beelding prevention medication suggests there trying to win, not lose, so is there really any harm done? i suppose rory answers that is rules are rules, no exceptions.
 
jft2005 said:
strugglign to believe it was still in his bucket from the morning, but we shall never know. but the fact it's a beelding prevention medication suggests there trying to win, not lose, so is there really any harm done? i suppose rory answers that is rules are rules, no exceptions.
Click to expand...

Is it only administered when it's trying to win though?
 
very good point. if i was going to back this horse in future, id want to know if it had been giving the drug on morning of race. but that is somehting which will never be in public domain.
 
Oops - just Googled 'Homoplus Performance' and got a link to the Terence Higgins Trust... interesting, but not quite what I wanted!

Jft2005 - well, that's another little bit of info that punters might possibly like to have. I know that pretty much anything in print about runners will mention if they bled last time out, or are known bleeders, but, along with facial decorations, tongue-ties or visors, maybe it would be useful for punters to know which horses are on medication, and why. There are a number of anti-bleeding agents, all of which are legit and legal, but it does seem a bit daft that they can't be administered in the race stables, yet at home stables just before setting off for the racecourse. If you're going to dope a horse, you're hardly going to leave a wrapper in its bucket, with its name on, signifying it's possibly taken something. And if it was just the wrapper, it wasn't, as was first indicated, a 'substance'. You could chuck a Mars Bar wrapper in the bucket, but it wouldn't mean your horse was now on (banned) theobromine.

If they brought in just a wrapper, and the substance was already in the horse, I'm not sure how this isn't an overblown case - yes, I'm sure the BHA is wary of Wigham, but surely this isn't the most heinous of crimes. Jeez, Charley Mann's managed to bring - accidentally, of course - the wrong horse to the races three times, and he's still training! Would you have faith that anything of his you bet, was really the one you thought it was?

SENDRENI runs in the Claimer at Lingfield tomorrow (Wednesday), with or without his Homoplus.
 
Last edited:
Homoplus PMSL!

Take it Wighams horses have been inserting into the wrong gender
 
Oh dear, does Mr Wigham not know the rules of racing, even I knew this and I was only a lowely stable lass.....


Section C - Prohibited Substances & Secuirty of Racehorses
C9 CODE OF MEDICATION PRACTICE FOR HORSES IN TRAINING


4. With the exception of normal feed and water by mouth, no substance shall be given to any horse at any time on the day of a race by injection, orally or any other method until it has left the premises owned, used or controlled by the Managing Executive of the racecourse in question unless dispensation has been granted by a Veterinary Officer. (For details see Instruction C7 section headed "Restrictions on Substances Administered to and Treatment of Horses on Racecourse Premises".)
 
What I see about that paragraph, LE, is that it talks about substances administered to and treatment of horses on racecourse premises. Wigham's saying that they gave SENDRENI the anti-bleed med at his stables that morning, not on the r/c premises at all. I don't read it that he shouldn't have given it beforehand at home, because the phrasing implies that you can give it before you arrive, but once you've brought the horse to the racecourse, you can't administer anything "until it has left the premises... " of the course.

I do like the phrase "... normal feed and water by mouth...." - as against what? Ramming it up its, er, nose?
 
Back
Top