The following statements have been made by Racing Victoria (RV) Chief Executive, Aaron Morrison, in response to questions from Betsy regarding the on-going Formestane drug saga.
A number of Victorian trainers have been charged after a mysterious breast cancer drug was found in a number
Current State of Play
“There remains ongoing uncertainty around Formestane and its related substances, which is why we’re commissioning and preparing to fund further scientific studies into them and the circumstances around how and why they’re being detected in our horse racing environment.
“We’ve engaged RASL to lead this work and they are currently scoping that project for us with a view to engaging other international racing labs. The end goal is to determine once and for all whether these substances are endogenous in racehorses and if so, at what levels. At the same, our Stewards are continuing their own investigations.
“I’ve received loads of questions about these cases and have asked plenty myself of our teams and others. As it stands, we don’t have all the answers everyone may like at this time, but we’re turning over every stone to find them.
“We’re engaging with experts here and abroad, liaising with other PRAs and their respective integrity and racing labs, as well as with Racing Australia given these are national rules, and we’re commissioning this important research.
“This matter is not just relevant to Victoria. Formestane is being detected in other jurisdictions and codes by RASL and we are aware of other overseas racing labs detecting Formestane in A samples that they have analysed.
“The answers may not come quickly given the complexity and science, but we are determined to get them for everyone’s benefit. This is a complex and unchartered situation and we know it has been a stressful period for all involved.
“Should the scientific studies we’re commissioning determine that Formestane and its metabolites are endogenous at low levels in racehorses then that would most likely require a change to the national rules and a threshold to be implemented if attainable.
“If that occurs in the future, it’s important to note that the Rules of Racing are generally not retrospective. The rules at the time an offence occurred are generally applied so it would unlikely change the outcome for any samples collected prior to that time.”
Handling of Cases to Date
“The Australian Rules of Racing are at the core of all decision making and it’s the Stewards’ role to administer and enforce them. The rules prohibiting anabolic androgenic steroids are clear-cut and the Stewards are obliged to enforce them, including the requirement to stand down horses for 12 months.
“All the Stewards’ decisions have been made on the information available to them at the relevant time and strictly in accordance with the Australian Rules of Racing.
“Penalties are sought by our Integrity Team independent of the CEO which is appropriate governance for a racing regulator and expected of us by Government and the Integrity Commissioner.
“In these cases, the Stewards considered precedents around presentation charges for other anabolic steroids and the fact that these substances are banned at all times which carries a premium compared to therapeutic medications which are banned only on raceday.
“Beyond that, we fully support the work RASL has undertaken in the cases to date and do not believe that contamination or human error has played any role in their findings around those samples.”
Allegations of Cheating
“I reject reports that RV has stated that the trainers have cheated. When asked to opine on what would be the most plausible explanation for the positive samples, an RV witness hypothesized that, in the absence of scientific information to the contrary, a plausible cause would be administration, without singling out one form over the other. As noted in the VRT, there are potentially two types of administration. There’s inadvertent where contamination or an error is at fault, and there’s deliberate where there’s intent.
“In any event, no one was ever charged with administrating a prohibited substance, be that inadvertently or deliberately. They were charged with presenting a horse to race with a prohibited substance in its system and plead guilty to that. That’s an important point of distinction.
“Whilst every effort was made to establish their origin, it’s important to remember that presentation charges aren’t about establishing how a prohibited substance got there, merely that it was present in the sample.
“It is incorrect to suggest that RV accused the five trainers of any deliberate actions that led to these positive detections, however I appreciate that the trainers may feel that their experience has been different and we have to respect that. I understand how this has been a challenging period for all involved given the prevailing uncertainty around what appears to be a new matter for racing.
“In the end, we have to uphold the Australian Rules of Racing, but as always if there are learnings we can take from any case then we will do so. In this case, that includes increasing our efforts to try to better understand the potential circumstances and reasons behind the detection of these substances.”
Future Cases
“The penalties determined by the VRT, an independent panel, in these five cases has now created a precedent. Whilst each case is treated on its merits based upon the information and facts at the time, I expect our Stewards will be proceeding with other cases on the same basis and using that precedent until such time as there is verified information or evidence to the contrary.
“Formestane and its metabolites remain strictly prohibited substances under the Australian Rules of Racing and the Stewards can’t shy away from their responsibility to apply the rules and uphold the integrity of the sport.
“The idea of a local rule has been raised by some, but local rules cannot contradict national rules which take precedence, particularly where a substance is banned at all times, so that is not a current consideration.
“Putting that aside, even if the rules were changed at a national level in the future, the rules are generally not retrospective and therefore would apply as they were written at the time a sample was collected.
“As I stated earlier, we are very keen to get to the bottom of this to try and remove some of the uncertainty that remains around Formestane and its related substances for the sake of all parties. That’s why we’re commissioning and preparing to fund an important global research study. We want all the answers as much as any other person.
“As a relevant aside, the RV Board and VRT have approved the removal of the presentation rule, AR240, from the list of serious offences from 1 July 2025.
“This means that for any breaches of this rule where the sample is collected after this date, regardless of the substance, the Stewards can conduct an inquiry and make a determination rather than it be sent directly to the VRT.
“This change is designed to streamline the process for all parties, minimising costs, timelines and stress, whilst maintaining all appeal rights for participants.”
