Quote:
Originally Posted by azeri98
4. I'm not saying Baffert shouldn't be punished. He should but I think it's excessive.
|
I remain on the 50 yard line with this.
1. This is a therapeutic positive. It's not the same thing as the Navarro and Servis cases.
2. Unless I'm going to believe the picture of the horse's rash, the latest lab report his lawyer is talking about, and any vet treatment reports that exist are all phony, it seems more likely the overage in this case was not from an injection.
3. He's had so many overages and deaths over time (and in the most prestigious races) he's clearly either wildly irresponsible or playing with fire looking for an edge. It may be both. That doesn't even count the possibility that he's doing things we don't know about and/or can't prove.
IMO, the horse should get DQ'd and he should have gotten a suspension far beyond the typical one for an infraction like this because of his long term record and because it was the Derby. But I think 2 years, no points for his wins etc.. is probably excessive. It's understandable though. He's giving the sport a major black eye. I think people are finally saying "enough is enough". That's why they went too far. Now everyone is dug into their positions and it's a mess.
I don't blame him for fighting the DQ even though I think the horse should get DQ'd, but if he had accepted responsibility for the overage right from the start and showed some remorse, maybe the punishment would have been one year or even 6 months and we'd be past this already.
