Coa, Aqu race 2, 3-25

[GMB@BP]

Watch what he does to Martin when he looses his cool....like to see a match race with him and Nakatani!

And the horse was not dq'd after an inquiry!

[GMB@BP]

Coa and Martin both got 10 days, seems a little unfair to Martin who hardly tried to intentionally kill Coa.

[cj]

Absurd. Martin should appeal somewhere, even a court of law if he has to do so. I'm sure he could find 20 incidents just like his in March alone that didn't even draw an inquiry, let alone a suspension.

Coa, on the other hand, should be given many more days. This is hardly the first time he has done this. I distinctly remember a turf race last year where he delibrately tried to cause another horse and rider to go down.

Keep in mind, these are the same stewards that somehow didn't even conduct an inquiry in a race last year when two jocks, in front of the field, basically had a fist fight in plain view of all.

[Bobzilla]

I think I remember that incident. If I'm thinking of the same race it was Pablo Fragoso and Jose Espinoza both on the front, doing a half in 46 and change on the Aqu Inner, while throwing hands at the same time.

[the_fat_man]

Absurd. Martin should appeal somewhere, even a court of law if he has to do so. I'm sure he could find 20 incidents just like his in March alone that didn't even draw an inquiry, let alone a suspension.

Coa, on the other hand, should be given many more days. This is hardly the first time he has done this. I distinctly remember a turf race last year where he delibrately tried to cause another horse and rider to go down.

Keep in mind, these are the same stewards that somehow didn't even conduct an inquiry in a race last year when two jocks, in front of the field, basically had a fist fight in plain view of all.

I agree. But I think the problem is such that the stewards will never be called on their actions and thus will not feel the need to scrutinize consistently.

I mean, look at the non-consensus on this board when it comes to trips. SIMPLE trips. When I/YOU complained about Coa's ride in that race, the usual suspects came out of the woodwork to CONTEST these claims. Without even looking at the race, they wanted to take me to task about taking Coa to task. How dare I criticize a jockey.
In one case, it was claimed that repeated viewings of the race failed to indicate that Coa was in any way at fault.

So, forget about getting a consenus for even the most basic of cases. And a consensus is needed, as a good number of people need to email the stewards and complain about a particular decision --- or demand consistency in their decision making process.

It's incredible to me how much the stewards let go. The KEY point of any race is the break. If you take a horse out at the break, you almost guarantee it won't win the race. Yet, any number of winners (or in the money finishers) of races are guilty of just that. I understand the argument that the impeded horse wasn't in the money BUT every horse in entitled to a fair chance and whether this chance comes early or late should not be the issue. And it certainly doesn't help that the chartman's comments are typically the same whether a horse is bothered slightly at the break or is taken out completely.

[Kelso]

every horse in entitled to a fair chance and whether this chance comes early or late should not be the issue.


I think that is a very sound argument. Just as with other sports ... football comes quickly to mind ... some players will do often whatever they are not adequately penalized for doing.