The BC's "tough steriods rule"
 

http://news.bloodhorse.com/article/46409.htm

Thoughts? Does the (ii)clause cover handing a horse over to an assistant trainer? Sounds like "indirectly" in a trainer's care would indicate his associates that he'd phone instructions to on the down low.

cali already has a no steroid policy which just went into effect. del mar is feeling the pain, as field sizes are reduced while trainers wait for horses to get the roids out of their systems.
perhaps the bc should consider banning trainers who have multiple violations of other drugs as well.

I think indirectly means they can selectively claim whatever they want. indirectly is completely vague. I bet on a horse and I am indirectly involved.

I hate the part of not putting BC money into races of tracks that don't adopt their vague rules.