Quote:
Originally Posted by westernmassbob
Vic since it is my understanding that you have been a racing steward in the past I have a question(s)
Why do stewards sometimes have conversations with jockeys if an inquiry or objection is in progress ? What types of questions are asked and have the answers ever swayed the decision making process? Personally I can’t think of any reason why the stewards should ever talk to the jockeys. If the replay doesn’t show enough evidence to prove without a reasonable doubt then no change. Let me give an example. A horse coming down the stretch suddenly veers out and causes another horse to lose a placing. On the replay it is clear that the horse veered out but after talking the offending jockey he explains a rat ran across the track and spooked the horse. You obviously can’t see this on video but does this jockeys explanation hold any merit in not making a change ? I appreciate all the answers and responses in advance . Thanks !
|
When I re-read this initial set of questions I realized I may have buried the lead a bit. Because I didn't specifically address one of your example questions. As you've now read when Stewards look at replays during an inquiry or objection regarding the placings the actions of lack of actions by the jockeys are completely meaningless. We watch as though the horses are rider less, running freely. Therefore regardless of the reason for the interference. Be it a rat running across the track. A Tetradactyl swooping into to catch prey. Or a sonic boom. What the horses do to each other is all that matters. Even if the jockey did a GREAT job at trying to control his mount when that RAT scampered across.
It reminds me of MAXIMUM SECURITY'S disqualification in the Derby. While we'll never know for sure. IMO something spooked him from the inside. Perhaps someone or something in the infield which is wild and crazy on Derby Day. Unlike any other CD afternoon.
To me that's much more plausible than Luis Saez steering his horse into harms way. Or riding carelessly and fouling those horses deliberately. In fact I thought he did a remarkable job of controlling him, after the duck outward, or the incident could have been much much worse with multiple horses falling.
Was the DQ warranted? 100% yes. It would have taken about 2 minutes if the same thing happened on a sleepy Thursday.
Did Saez deserve a suspension? IMO absolutely not. I see no visual evidence that what happened was deliberate on his part. In fact as I said I think he attempted to correct his mount as quickly as humanly possible.
IMO losing the winning mount in the Derby with all it entails. Was clearly punishment enough. Tacking on days was IMO overkill.
But I'm not a Steward at Churchill Downs and I respect their decision.