Printer Friendly

Greyhounds: Letter: Unfair penalty.

Byline: D LOVETT

D Lovett is unhappy with the situation SO Sittingbourne trainers are to be pe-nalised for putting the welfare of their dogs first, even though Roger Cearns says ``it was done for the best reasons'' (Racing Post January 7, 2005).

Does he really think that these trainers want the trouble, time and expense of travelling to the track to not run the dogs?

I just hope that all owners and trainers, not just those connected to Sittingbourne, consider the track management's attitude when planning open race entries for this track.

The best of luck to the `Sittingbourne five' for doing the right thing and putting the welfare of the dogs first.

D LOVETT Benfleet Essex
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2005 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Title Annotation:Sports
Publication:The Racing Post (London, England)
Date:Jan 13, 2005
Previous Article:Greyhounds: Letter: Sittingbourne so wrong.
Next Article:Greyhounds: Greyhound Ratings: Stow has a few to keep tabs on too.

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2019 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters