Originally Posted by Hawk

Trying to "right" the path of where a mount goes on their own accord I suspect is more precarious in the very early stages of a race as the rate of acceleration abruptly takes place. In that light, I would be inclined to be more forgiving of Martin than of Coa.

In regards to Coa, how should the stewards view the case before them. Should they be as a jury and takes the facts of the case/race in front of them or should they consider the antics of late and pass judgment with a enough already decision meant to "reel in" his shenanigans?

After watching the race I almost think they felt the need to do something with Coa and threw Martin in to obfuscate a singling out of Coa.

In the end, who knows.

Originally Posted by Hawk

Trying to "right" the path of where a mount goes on their own accord I suspect is more precarious in the very early stages of a race as the rate of acceleration abruptly takes place. In that light, I would be inclined to be more forgiving of Martin than of Coa.

In regards to Coa, how should the stewards view the case before them. Should they be as a jury and takes the facts of the case/race in front of them or should they consider the antics of late and pass judgment with a enough already decision meant to "reel in" his shenanigans?

After watching the race I almost think they felt the need to do something with Coa and threw Martin in to obfuscate a singling out of Coa.
In the end, who knows.

Originally Posted by paisjpq

actually it does not matter what coa perceived...there is no situation in which it is okay to put horses and riders at risk for injury to settle a score.

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Why would it be acceptable to allow incorrect decisions to be made on a daily basis? How long would you keep your job if you made incorrect decisions on a daily basis? Think about how you would feel if you got taken down in the last leg of a big carryover pick 6 because the stewards made an incorrect decision and they took half a million dollars out of your pocket?

Originally Posted by GPK

Hawk, isn't that part of their job though? To rightfully determine the the culprit and punish them accordingly. To feel like they are singling someone out should not even enter their minds in a case like this.

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.

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?

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

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

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.

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.

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.

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.