30th October, 2013.

Mr Pat Herbert
Head of Regulation
Irish Greyhound Board

Green Park
Dock Road

Dear Mr. Herbert,

I am writing to you with regard to the independent review of the Dundalk Racing Incident which was published on 20th September 2013.

The following is an extract from the review.

“In respect of trials held on 4th April 2009, no entries were made into the Official Trial Book but trials were instead recorded on the Racing Managers race programme for the night.

The trial involving Mays Hurryonboy on that night was not recorded on the race programme. The Judges Book shows 6 greyhounds trialled while the RMS shows 8.

In respect of trials held on 21st may 2009, the relevant page appears to have been removed from the Official Trial Book. The Judges Book shows 31 greyhounds trialled on that night while the electronic Race Management System shows 37 greyhounds trialled on the night.”

A statement from Bord na gCon said:  “This incident is obviously unacceptable and very disappointing as Irish greyhound racing has a deserved international reputation for integrity. The level of control and supervision of greyhound racing is extremely high and the number of breaches or attempted breaches of regulations or racing rules is miniscule”

I find it difficult to reconcile the two quotations above regarding the Dundalk Review.

There was 8 dogs given fictitious trial form on the days that Mays Hurryonboy trialled. That means 20% of the dogs entered into the RMS , never actually trialled.  These dogs were identified but what action was taken against these dogs and their owners?

The report only mentions the fictitious trials on the days that Mays trialled. The original report said the abuse was far more widespread.

How many dogs in total have been identified as having fictitious trials entered into the RMS?

Have the incorrect trials been removed from the database?

Why is Mays Hurryonboy still being credited with a race of 28.40?

The IGB says the number of breaches is “miniscule”.

Greyhound owners would like to believe this but we would like to see your evidence that allows you to make such a statement.

Has IGB conducted an audit of other tracks to ascertain if this scam or something similar was not just confined to Dundalk ?

The IGOBF would like to see the details of the checks that you as Head of Regulation made at other tracks that allowed IGB to make the “miniscule” statement.


Yours sincerely



Edward Gus Ryan

Chairman Irish Greyhound Owners & Breeders Federation