Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There are currently 4 people viewing this thread.
27 Jul 26
21:09
Joined:
Date Joined:
30 Jan 05
Karl Burke was fined £4,500 at an independent judiciary hearing on Monday, at which Arbitration was disqualified from a race at Musselburgh last year after testing positive for a prohibited substance.
The multiple Group 1-winning trainer entered into a plea agreement ahead of the hearing, which concerned the presence of banned raceday substance dantrolene in Arbitration, who finished third as the 2-1 favourite in a 7f handicap in July 2025.
Burke admitted breaches of the rules governing the use of prohibited substances and the maintenance of accurate medical records, for which he was fined £2,500 and £2,000 respectively.
The hearing was conducted almost entirely in a private session, with the press allowed in only for the summary and the chair's verdict.
Panel chair Phillip Sycamore announced the three-person panel had ratified the plea agreement in all circumstances before delivering the penalties, and that full written reasons would be given at a later date.
A post-race sample taken from Arbitration was found to contain a metabolite of dantrolene, a muscle relaxant commonly used in racing for horses who experience muscle cramps, known as tying up.
In her summary of the case, BHA barrister Alice Scanlan said investigating officers visited Burke's yard last August, during which it was suggested that an unnamed filly may have been administered dantrolene, potentially accounting for the positive analytical finding.
A medication review detailed there was no record of dantrolene being administered and that the unnamed filly's veterinary records did not show she had been prescribed the drug at that time.
[b]The report concluded there were "substantial amounts of medication, about 500 doses, unaccounted for at the yard", highlighting the "inadequate medication control at the time".
https://www.racingpost.com/news/flat-racing/karl-burke-fined-4500-and-runner-disqualified-following-positive-test-for-prohibited-substance-a2vgL5R2OMPs/
_________________________
Not entirely reassuring ... It does explain plenty though.
The multiple Group 1-winning trainer entered into a plea agreement ahead of the hearing, which concerned the presence of banned raceday substance dantrolene in Arbitration, who finished third as the 2-1 favourite in a 7f handicap in July 2025.
Burke admitted breaches of the rules governing the use of prohibited substances and the maintenance of accurate medical records, for which he was fined £2,500 and £2,000 respectively.
The hearing was conducted almost entirely in a private session, with the press allowed in only for the summary and the chair's verdict.
Panel chair Phillip Sycamore announced the three-person panel had ratified the plea agreement in all circumstances before delivering the penalties, and that full written reasons would be given at a later date.
A post-race sample taken from Arbitration was found to contain a metabolite of dantrolene, a muscle relaxant commonly used in racing for horses who experience muscle cramps, known as tying up.
In her summary of the case, BHA barrister Alice Scanlan said investigating officers visited Burke's yard last August, during which it was suggested that an unnamed filly may have been administered dantrolene, potentially accounting for the positive analytical finding.
A medication review detailed there was no record of dantrolene being administered and that the unnamed filly's veterinary records did not show she had been prescribed the drug at that time.
[b]The report concluded there were "substantial amounts of medication, about 500 doses, unaccounted for at the yard", highlighting the "inadequate medication control at the time".
https://www.racingpost.com/news/flat-racing/karl-burke-fined-4500-and-runner-disqualified-following-positive-test-for-prohibited-substance-a2vgL5R2OMPs/
_________________________
Not entirely reassuring ... It does explain plenty though.
Show More
I have always found him someone I cannot warm to and I dislike him a lot. I suppose he could get his wife to pay the fines.
Karl Burke and Miles Rodgers
1. The Disciplinary Panel of the BHA has been conducting an Enquiry into allegations of breach of the Rules of Racing made against Fergal Lynch, Darren Williams, Karl Burke and Miles Rodgers relating to various supposed dealings between them between March and August 2004.
Karl Burke
2. The allegations against him were, in summary:
(1) breach of Rule 243 over the supply of inside information to Rodgers about 6 of his runners (these having been laid on Betfair through accounts controlled by Rodgers).
(2) breach of Rule 220(iv) for associating in relation to horseracing with Rodgers, who was a disqualified person for two years from 2 April 2004.
(3) breach of Rule 220(viii) because of misleading BHA investigators when interviewed in August 2008.
... the Panel felt driven to conclude that it was necessary to impose a disqualification on Burke, and that the proper period was 12 months, bringing into account the various features of this case considered above.
https://www.britishhorseracing.com/press_releases/karl-burke-and-miles-rodgers-result/
1. The Disciplinary Panel of the BHA has been conducting an Enquiry into allegations of breach of the Rules of Racing made against Fergal Lynch, Darren Williams, Karl Burke and Miles Rodgers relating to various supposed dealings between them between March and August 2004.
Karl Burke
2. The allegations against him were, in summary:
(1) breach of Rule 243 over the supply of inside information to Rodgers about 6 of his runners (these having been laid on Betfair through accounts controlled by Rodgers).
(2) breach of Rule 220(iv) for associating in relation to horseracing with Rodgers, who was a disqualified person for two years from 2 April 2004.
(3) breach of Rule 220(viii) because of misleading BHA investigators when interviewed in August 2008.
... the Panel felt driven to conclude that it was necessary to impose a disqualification on Burke, and that the proper period was 12 months, bringing into account the various features of this case considered above.
https://www.britishhorseracing.com/press_releases/karl-burke-and-miles-rodgers-result/
Burke appears to have claimed that the prohibited substance might have only shown up in the test because of cross-contamination with a dose given to another horse. But he could not provide any evidence of this prohibited substance being administered to this other horse. Yet it turned out that he in fact had five hundred further doses of this prohibited substance knocking about the yard; and that he had kept these 500 doses under wraps by not recording them in his horses' medical records.
The BHA then swept the matter under the carpet by conducting the whole hearing in private and fining Burke £9 per dose of prohibited substance.
I'm not sure who has the most questions to answer here.
The BHA then swept the matter under the carpet by conducting the whole hearing in private and fining Burke £9 per dose of prohibited substance.
I'm not sure who has the most questions to answer here.
Ah, hang on. Burke had "substantial amounts of medication, about 500 doses, unaccounted for at the yard". So we don't in fact know what these other 500 doses of unrecorded medication were. Could have been dantrolene, could have been anything. The BHA are not willing to tell us.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539