Another Confusing Decision from the NY Stewards

[blackthroatedwind]

For those of you not familiar, in Sunday's second race, Eddie Martin's mount Light Classic came in on the backstretch causing Eibar Coa's mount Laurentide Ice to be forced to check. As the field entered the turn in this six furlong race Eibar Coa seemingly deliberately forced Martin in tight, in the blind spot, where he was forced to check out. As there were no horses close to these two at the time, and considering the earlier incident and Coa's history of aggressiveness, it is hard not to consider this act deliberate.

Today the stewards suspended both riders for ten days, apparently equating the actions of both men, as equal punishment can mean little else. Now, perhaps Martin's actions were deliberate, though we see horses forced to check in the early stages of many races, and action is almost never taken. However, to punish the retaliator equally, in my opinion sends a very dangerous message to the riders. Any rider who deliberatly retaliates on the racetrack not only jeopardizes himself and the other rider, he jeopardizes both horses and the horses and riders behind them, as well as nephariously altering the outcome of the race in which hundreds of thousands of dollars are wagered. How the stewards could view any in race retaliation as anything other than a very serious matter defies all logic.

This is not the first time the NY stewards have completely misunderstood a situation of this kind. Last winter, when Espinoza and Fragoso engaged in a virtual racetrack fistfight, and the stewards never even had an inquiry despite one of the combatants finishing third, both riders were handed thirty day suspension, despite one clearly going after the other after an early race " incident ". To me these stewards simply do not understand what is going on during races and are equivalent menaces to any overly aggressive rider. Had Eddie Martin, and his mount gone down, would they still have handed out equal punishments? If the answer is no then today's ruling makes absolutely no sense. Actions, and not results, are what should determine penalties.