# Jock Paget B Sample Positive



## philamena (26 November 2013)

Sad news, Jock loses his Burghley title. ESNZ has received notification from FEI that the B blood sample taken from Clifton Promise at the Burghley International Horse Trials has tested positive for the banned substance Reserpine. Clifton Promise, owned by Frances Stead, was ridden to victory at the event by Jock Paget in early September.

Paget is now required to submit written documentation to the FEI explaining the presence of the banned substance in Clifton Promises bloodstream. He is confident of providing the FEI with a comprehensive explanation which will be considered at a hearing of the FEI Tribunal.

Paget says that while the B sample result is disappointing, it was expected given the blood in the B sample was taken at the same time as the A sample.

 I will continue to work closely with my team to provide a full explanation to the FEI.

ESNZ was notified of the positive test from the A sample on 14th October, and since then both the rider and horse have been provisionally suspended from FEI and national competitions. In keeping with ESNZs own Clean Sport policy and its full support of the FEIs Clean Sport programme, Paget has been stood down from any official ESNZ activity while the legal process is underway.

Jim Ellis, ESNZ Chief Executive, says Paget is understanding and fully supportive of ESNZs position as the FEI judicial process takes its course.

ESNZ is confident that he will provide a full and persuasive explanation to the FEI.

For any comment, please contact Jim Ellis, ESNZ CEO on 027 477 6786; Jock Paget will not be fielding media enquiries while the remainder of the FEI Tribunal process is underway.


----------



## Nicnac (26 November 2013)

Oh bu**er but to be expected.  Just hope owner's legal team can come up with an explanation so JP doesn't get a long ban and the FEI fast-track the tribunal.  Assume Clifton Pinot's results the same or haven't they been announced yet?


----------



## Tiddlypom (26 November 2013)

As expected, I'm afraid. I still can't make out why there was such a long gap between the results of the A and the B samples, though.


----------



## philamena (26 November 2013)

Though apparently they're wrong to say stripped of Burghley title as that needs the tribunal...


----------



## Goldenstar (26 November 2013)

C**p and very very bad for the sport .


----------



## LittleRooketRider (26 November 2013)

sorry but am i the only one who doesn't see JP as the victim (for want of a better word)? Just because he has always seemd so nice/done well recently etc. doesn't mean that he is innocent.... yes its bad for the sport and its a real shame tha a) if he is innnocent that his name has now been tarnished but more concerningly if he is n't (which looks the most likely) b) he felt right to do it

even if there is a "plausible explanation" of how this accident occured then he should be stripped of the burghley title because it still affected the performance of the horse

and finally if there is a reasonable explanation and he is 100% certain of his facts why would he need a legal team to help him "get off" as it were all rather fishy if you ask me, especially as two closely limked horses tested positive.

i'd like it not to be true but i for one am not just gonna deny the facts


----------



## Tiddlypom (26 November 2013)

I don't think that many people are trying to deny the facts any more, are they? I just feel deflated and disappointed about it all, JP seemed like a really nice guy and good for the sport.

Instead it's all rather depressing.


----------



## maccachic (26 November 2013)

LittleRocketRider said:



			and finally if there is a reasonable explanation and he is 100% certain of his facts why would he need a legal team to help him "get off" as it were all rather fishy if you ask me, especially as two closely limked horses tested positive.
		
Click to expand...

So all innocent people in court should just represent themslves?


----------



## oldvic (27 November 2013)

LittleRocketRider said:



			even if there is a "plausible explanation" of how this accident occured then he should be stripped of the burghley title because it still affected the performance of the horse

and finally if there is a reasonable explanation and he is 100% certain of his facts why would he need a legal team to help him "get off" as it were all rather fishy if you ask me, especially as two closely limked horses tested positive.

i'd like it not to be true but i for one am not just gonna deny the facts
		
Click to expand...

The reason that it has to wait until after the tribunal is that there are several things that could be used in their defence, one of which would be that if they proved that there was a fault in the collecting or handling of the sample then they can't be certain that it was a positive test. This is unlikely but they have to cover all bases. In all probability the result will change but of course they have to be certain first.

With regard to the lawyers, the FEI legal panel can be pretty tough and would eat Jock for breakfast without similarly trained people to help him. It is very easy for sentences to come out wrong when you are under pressure and a bit flustered so you could talk yourself into being guilty when you are not especially when you are a nice and trusting person like Jock.


----------



## LittleRooketRider (27 November 2013)

maccachic said:



			So all innocent people in court should just represent themslves?
		
Click to expand...

not what i meant....why would he need to "work out" and excuse/ (i know i'm not very good at being clear)


----------



## Montyforever (27 November 2013)

Could be him, could be a member of his team, either way as the 'head and face' of his team he should take the fall IMO. I just feel for the horse!


----------



## Luci07 (27 November 2013)

It was always likely that sample a and b would have the same result. Of course he should have proper defense for his appearance in front of the FEI. They will have a prosecuting team and he will need the help. 

I use trawled the net for information on this to try to get some idea of the entire story. I fully appreciate this does not make me an expert but would point out that you really should do the same before you make a judgement on one report.  I actually still think it was an error having read a lot about this and will reserve judgment until after the tribunal. In the meantime I have every hope in a positive outcome for JP and wish him luck.


----------



## NZJenny (27 November 2013)

The rules work both ways - the rider is always responsible, which allows some owners/trainers (thinking endurance here) to get off scot free, and have no name riders take the fall for them.    

In this situation the rider is the "face" and he will cop it whether he knew or had anything to do with it, or not.  

Unfortunately to make owners/trainers etc responsible, you would need to go down the licensing road as per racing, otherwise how do you know who was the owner/trainer?  And that would mean more cost .......and as anyone who rides FEI knows, it isn't cheap.


----------



## Wundahorse (27 November 2013)

I really can't understand why someone would deliberately feed a antipsychotic drug,with many side effects,to an eventer that needs to be alert and have enough energy to deal with a three day event of that calibre.A real shame if it is entirely innocent.Would have to think it was administered by injection though.


----------



## Katikins (27 November 2013)

Personally I really hope and do think that there there wasn't any cheating or malicious intent here, however, if you are going to compete at this level ignorance is no excuse.  Every single thing that comes onto the yard or into contact with your horses should be checked for banned substances.  Whatever the outcome it looks like the Grand Slam is off


----------



## LittleRooketRider (28 November 2013)

this (sort of)


----------



## sunleychops (28 November 2013)

Wundahorse said:



			I really can't understand why someone would deliberately feed a antipsychotic drug,with many side effects,to an eventer that needs to be alert and have enough energy to deal with a three day event of that calibre.A real shame if it is entirely innocent.Would have to think it was administered by injection though.
		
Click to expand...


Apparently Reserpine can help open the airways


----------



## POLLDARK (28 November 2013)

Whether Jock, or the team, were guilty or not the award should not stand as the drug would have affected the horses' performance & it has been undeniably shown that the drug was present. It was not a level playing field for the other horses.


----------



## vanrim (29 November 2013)

I am the only one that wonders if someone doped the horse deliberately so if he won he would get disqualified. My friend used to show dogs and she said it went on all the time. Some people can get very jealous of other's success.


----------



## onemoretime (29 November 2013)

LittleRocketRider said:



			sorry but am i the only one who doesn't see JP as the victim (for want of a better word)? Just because he has always seemd so nice/done well recently etc. doesn't mean that he is innocent.... yes its bad for the sport and its a real shame tha a) if he is innnocent that his name has now been tarnished but more concerningly if he is n't (which looks the most likely) b) he felt right to do it

even if there is a "plausible explanation" of how this accident occured then he should be stripped of the burghley title because it still affected the performance of the horse

and finally if there is a reasonable explanation and he is 100% certain of his facts why would he need a legal team to help him "get off" as it were all rather fishy if you ask me, especially as two closely limked horses tested positive.

i'd like it not to be true but i for one am not just gonna deny the facts
		
Click to expand...

Quite agree LRR.


----------



## maccachic (2 December 2013)

vanrim said:



			I am the only one that wonders if someone doped the horse deliberately so if he won he would get disqualified. My friend used to show dogs and she said it went on all the time. Some people can get very jealous of other's success.
		
Click to expand...

Makes being a professional rider a little  scary as you can't protect your rides from others 100% of the time and have to put trust in others be it grooms, etc


----------



## amandap (3 December 2013)

chrisritch said:



			Apparently Reserpine can help open the airways
		
Click to expand...

http://www.naturevet.com.au/international/prodetails.php?pid=148

http://www.horseandhound.co.uk/news/doping-case-jock-paget-b-sample-tests-positive/


----------



## TarrSteps (3 December 2013)

maccachic said:



			Makes being a professional rider a little  scary as you can't protect your rides from others 100% of the time and have to put trust in others be it grooms, etc
		
Click to expand...

Jock's connections have said they've moved on from suspecting foul play. As this would have been the only route to exonerate all involved, at least from carelessness, I doubt they would have dropped it without a good hard look. 

The obvious question is why would someone use a drug that is unavailable in this country and, if they were using the old tests, difficult to test for. Too much risk of getting caught or not having it come off. Why go that route when it would be so easy to use bute or any number of easily available options.


----------



## maccachic (3 December 2013)

Not saying this happen in this case at all, Ill wait for the results to come out it doesn't affect me either way.  

However as a professional rider this is a big risk and we all there are plenty of unscrupulous types in any industry and people with grudges real or imagined someone does something to one of your rides and there goes a big part of your livelihood.

all I can say is glad I just ride for fun.


----------

