Mike Dillon: Let's keep Osama out of contention

Surely the irony struck others. In the past 10 days we have seen Lisa Cropp spend what must be a fortune engaging criminal lawyer Barry Hart to prove she didn't take drugs and Michael Walker, unsolicited, go on television to admit he has taken drugs.

There is considerable and deliberate motivation in both moves, but it takes a bit of analysing to understand Walker's desire to bare his tainted soul to the world when there was no apparent need to. Even our most stringent laws do not provide for self-incrimination.

The initial response - something remaining in some who watched the programme - was why the hell would Walker admit to doing cocaine while riding in Melbourne.

The only sense in it all is the double play. Tell the world of your troubles, admit the drugs and create a situation where racing authorities will be alerted to the possibility of drug-testing Walker every time he steps foot on a racecourse.

Perhaps Walker sees that as a way of forcing into play the self-control his own personality has been unable to muster.

Psychologists will tell you that admitting your faults and baring that to the world is the first step on the road to recovery.

If that's the case, Walker is already halfway down the road after last Thursday week's 20/20 airing.

You rarely see quantum leaps of that magnitude.

Without attempting to be the amateur shrink, clearly most of Walker's problems stem from his troubled childhood. If he gets the right help, that can be overcome.

Racing needs Michael Walker and Lisa Cropp, but it needs them to be at their best.

It's not good enough simply to know that each is outstanding in the saddle at peak - they need to be at peak and, in Cropp's case, they need to be at the races.

They were born with rare talent and racing will have cause to feel bitter towards them if either denies the industry his or her true worth, for whatever reason.

Some of the claims in Cropp's case in Auckland this week have been interesting.

There was considerable argument over whether the original charge papers were signed first by Waikato racecourse inspector Bryan McKenzie or New Zealand Thoroughbred Racing CEO Allan Fenwick.

Cropp's lawyers cited precedents in court cases from 1910 and from an English court in 1797. That's right, 1797. Reliable witnesses from neither case could be found.

Michael Walker is an engaging person. New Zealanders and Australians love nothing better than to champion someone who has succeeded after overcoming a bad start to life and few have had a worse start than Walker.

Self-belief seems to be a problem, but he managed to overcome that during his glittering apprenticeship and is reaching out in search of himself and of outside support to help him attain that level again after a period that has been far too volatile to capture real success.

He's made mistakes and says he wants to correct them. The support will be there if he displays real aptitude with trainer Mark Walker at Matamata, but it's now or never.

Put personalities aside - you don't actually have to like a jockey to employ him - the same as that old line that you don't have to like someone to do business with him.

If a trainer or owner thought they could get a half-length advantage at the winning post they would leg up Osama bin Laden in the birdcage.

If Cropp loses her case the racing game loses with her, the same as it will if Walker fails to hold his grip on that elusive top rung of the ladder he's trying to climb.

The two cases could not be more different.

Cropp's immediate future is already out of her own hands.

Walker's is very much staring back from the palms of his.

No one wants to see Osama bin Laden become the preferred option.