Another Confusing Decision from the NY Stewards

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by whodey17

If you are on a train and someone pushes you and you feel threatned then yes you have the right to protect yourself. I believe this is called self-defense. I am not a lawyer, but I think that holds up pretty well if one can prove they acted to a perceived threat to their person.

It's a good thing you don't ride the NYC subways, as some innocent person would be dead, and you would have a rather large boyfriend.

[whodey17]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

Of course you are entitled to your opinion, but it appeared you came in looking for a fight and I think you recognized it, as you changed your post. Let me ask you, say you owned the horse Coa was riding, would you let him ride your horse again? Now say you owned the horse Martin was on. Would you let him ride it again?

Well I pressed enter by mistake before finishing the post. Sorry for that. If I owned a the horse Coa was on I would most definately let him ride another of my horses. But I would make it well known to his agent that he is on thin ice with me. And I would also let Martin ride for me as well.

[GPK]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Absolutely, and that's part of what made today's decision wrong.

I can't believe I had let this slip my mind from Sunday. I was at the OTB during the race and they showed the replay several times during the objection. I haven't seen the race since then, and I really don't need to. I remember specifically what I saw...and just knew that Coa would be given some days off. But to find they gave Martin the same punishment...that just speaks volumes about the competancy of the stewards. ZERO rational thinking involved in the decision.

[Left Bank]

I personally know the owner of Laurentide Ice and when I see her sat.I will ask her what she thinks of the whole ball of wax.I can say this though,she does like Coa.She calls Santos "The Strangler"

[Grits]

BTW, one can get exceedingly wired about what they see, no matter whether its 1 time or 27 times. With all of this knowledge though, one still cannot prove that which they cannot see.....not you, nor I, nor anyone else knows whether this began in the jocks room, at the start, or at the blind spot on the video.

Hawk is looking at this from a better standpoint, one that is not showing bias. Bias can cloud our judgement making us less acceptable to ALL facts or views.

[whodey17]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

Just out of curiosity, considering Coa put your horse's life in danger as well as Martin and the horse he was on, as well as whoever was behind him, why would you allow him back on. Don't you think stuff like this needs to stop, or someone will get killed? This 10 day slap on the wrist isn't going to get the job done.

I agree that the 10 day suspension is light for Martin and Coa. 30 days would be better in my opinion. I think I have to trust the rider of my horse to make the best possible decisions while racing. If I do not like their decisions, it is up to me to make a change.

[whodey17]

What would be interesting is to see what the stewards would have done if Martin's horse never came out on Coa but Coa still came down on Martin forcing him to check.

[GPK]

Originally Posted by Grits

BTW, one can get exceedingly wired about what they see, no matter whether its 1 time or 27 times. With all of this knowledge though, one still cannot prove that which they cannot see.....not you, nor I, nor anyone else knows whether this began in the jocks room, at the start, or at the blind spot on the video.

Hawk is looking at this from a better standpoint, one that is not showing bias. Bias can cloud our judgement making us less acceptable to ALL facts or views.

Grits...I am a huge Coa fan...and have made that clear many times on here in the past...so I am not being biased here at all. What he did was wrong, dangerous and he deserves more than 10 days. To put other jockeys and their horses in harms way, DELIBERATELY was uncalled for...whether it was something that stemmed from an incident in the jockeys room or not.

Eibar was wrong...and the stewards plainly f*cked up.

[brianwspencer]

I haven't read the second page of this post, but in watching Chicago racing I've found that at Arlington they are way more likely to take a horse down than at Hawthorne.

For what it's worth, I've seen way more questionable calls at Arlington than Hawthorne. Not even sure, out of ignorance, if the stewards are the same in any number, but calls at Arlington are questionable more often then I'd like to remember.

[whodey17]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

I haven't read the second page of this post, but in watching Chicago racing I've found that at Arlington they are way more likely to take a horse down than at Hawthorne.

For what it's worth, I've seen way more questionable calls at Arlington than Hawthorne. Not even sure, out of ignorance, if the stewards are the same in any number, but calls at Arlington are questionable more often then I'd like to remember.

One thing that has bugged my about Stewards is that they will allow for much more bumping in 2 year old races than older horse races. That is something I dont understand.

[whodey17]

Originally Posted by GPK

Grits...I am a huge Coa fan...and have made that clear many times on here in the past...so I am not being biased here at all. What he did was wrong, dangerous and he deserves more than 10 days. To put other jockeys and their horses in harms way, DELIBERATELY was uncalled for...whether it was something that stemmed from an incident in the jockeys room or not.

Eibar was wrong...and the stewards plainly f*cked up.

Why is Coa wrong but not Martin? How do we know that Martin didn't do what he did on purpose?

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by whodey17

One thing that has bugged my about Stewards is that they will allow for much more bumping in 2 year old races than older horse races. That is something I dont understand.

Because 2YOs are usually pretty green and often erratic and harder to control. If you watch a lot of head-ons of 2YO races you see a lot of crazy behavoir that you don't see in races for older horses.

[whodey17]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Because 2YOs are usually pretty green and often erratic and harder to control. If you watch a lot of head-ons of 2YO races you see a lot of crazy behavoir that you don't see in races for older horses.

That is true. So you are saying that the stewards allow for the "greenness" of the horses when they are 2. That does make sense.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by whodey17

27 times. Doesnt matter what we see with our eyes. Only matters what Coa perceived. Coa thought Martin did something wrong. Coa was angered and felt the need to retaliate. It is perception vs reality. But reprimanding one and not the other is not the answer. Obviously Coa felt he was threatened. Doesnt really matter what anything else thinks.

Now that I've read the second page, this is AWSUMZ!

I perceive that you are being a troll, so therefore I am very well within my limits (according to your logic) in demanding that you lay down at the wire in the center of the track of the next quarter horse race at Portland Meadows.

Makes sense, eh? Because I perceived a deliberate action intended to harm my internet wellbeing.

And no, I won't give you the pleasure of being trampled by 4000N1Y claimers at Hawthorne. 2500N1Y claimer quarter horses at PM will have to do.

At the risk of validating ANYTHING PG1985 says, this may be the worst logic I've ever seen on this forum.

[whodey17]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

What did Martin do though? I have watched it over and over and I don't see it.

Martin's horse came in and it caused Coa to check.

[Grits]

Go read the post that I likened this to a couple of 3rd graders--one that was, of course, discounted completely.

Hell yes, they deserve the days, it was not acceptable. WHAT I am saying is this may not simply have been action, but, causal REaction. Either way, yes, it was shoddy and unsafe riding.

Folks rarely read an entire thread before piling it on. That's a drag.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by whodey17

That is true. So you are saying that the stewards allow for the "greenness" of the horses when they are 2. That does make sense.

Within reason. A Mott 2YO ducked out badly on the backstretch of a grass race last summer, and badly interfered with two horses, and was justifiably taken down. It's a judgement call.

[GPK]

Originally Posted by whodey17

Why is Coa wrong but not Martin? How do we know that Martin didn't do what he did on purpose?

You can clearly tell that Martin is trying to right the path of his horse. Where as Coa plainly looks directly over his left shoulder...sees Eddie there...and moves his mount in on him towards the rail.

[whodey17]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Now that I've read the second page, this is AWSUMZ!

I perceive that you are being a troll, so therefore I am very well within my limits (according to your logic) in demanding that you lay down at the wire in the center of the track of the next quarter horse race at Portland Meadows.

Makes sense, eh? Because I perceived a deliberate action intended to harm my internet wellbeing.

And no, I won't give you the pleasure of being trampled by 4000N1Y claimers at Hawthorne. 2500N1Y claimer quarter horses at PM will have to do.

At the risk of validating ANYTHING PG1985 says, this may be the worst logic I've ever seen on this forum.

Again it is perception vs reality. It is a philosophical debate. If a man pushes you causing you to fall back what do you do. Did the man push you because he wanted to cause you harm, or did he push you because you were about to get hit by a car. You have to find out why one acted before you decide what to do. If the man pushed you so you wouldnt get hit by a car you would say thanks. If he pushed you because he was mad at you then you may want to defend yourself.

[whodey17]

Originally Posted by GPK

You can clearly tell that Martin is trying to right the path of his horse. Where as Coa plainly looks directly over his left shoulder...sees Eddie there...and moves his mount in on him towards the rail.

Yes you can tell that while watching the head on re-play. But put yourself in Coa's shoes. Maybe he didnt see it that way. It is easy to play armchair QB.