90 Days for Dutrow; ARCI calls for license revocation

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

What the state could do is simply refuse to renew his license when it expires. There surely is grounds to do so and plenty of precedent. The state could easily argue its case using the plethora of examples from the Harness business that they have refused to license. While not every state would be required to reciprocate it would probably be more effective than the current situation.

You refuse Dutrow then you had better be willing to refuse TAP and Assumussen because there playbook has just as my issues.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by freddymo

You refuse Dutrow then you had better be willing to refuse TAP and Assumussen because there playbook has just as my issues.

Dutrow has a far more ...uh..."checkered" past with the NYSRWB.

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Dutrow has a far more ...uh..."checkered" past with the NYSRWB.

These are body of work issues from years of different violations. You are suggesting the death penalty for an offense that calls for a 60 day penalty. So if you set precident you had better make sure that you mean it and you are willing to defend it.

BTW I am not defending the guy but this is america

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by freddymo

These are body of work issues from years of different violations. You are suggesting the death penalty for an offense that calls for a 60 day penalty. So if you set precident you had better make sure that you mean it and you are willing to defend it.

BTW I am not defending the guy but this is america

I am not suggesting anything of the sort. A professional license comes with qualifications. What I am suggesting is that his repeated breaking of the rules could disqualify him for eligibility for said license. Just because you apply for a license doesn't mean you will get one. People have been refused licenses for far fewer offenses that Dutrow has.

You have no right to hold a license.

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I am not suggesting anything of the sort. A professional license comes with qualifications. What I am suggesting is that his repeated breaking of the rules could disqualify him for eligibility for said license. Just because you apply for a license doesn't mean you will get one. People have been refused licenses for far fewer offenses that Dutrow has.

You have no right to hold a license.

I side with Chuck here. Quite a number of infractions at this point.

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I am not suggesting anything of the sort. A professional license comes with qualifications. What I am suggesting is that his repeated breaking of the rules could disqualify him for eligibility for said license. Just because you apply for a license doesn't mean you will get one. People have been refused licenses for far fewer offenses that Dutrow has.

You have no right to hold a license.

As a trainer of multiple Grade 1 winners for some for some of the most respected owners in the industry certainly suggests Dutrow is a qualified trainer and practices outstanding horsemanship. Denying him an opportunity to practice his trade because of multiple speeding tix that he has paid for in full shouldn't qualify him for the death penalty.

http://www.drf.com/news/dutrows-atto...onal-president

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by freddymo

As a trainer of multiple Grade 1 winners for some for some of the most respected owners in the industry certainly suggests Dutrow is a qualified trainer and practices outstanding horsemanship. Denying him an opportunity to practice his trade because of multiple speeding tix that he has paid for in full shouldn't qualify him for the death penalty.

http://www.drf.com/news/dutrows-atto...onal-president

This is one of the stupidest defenses I have heard yet.

Acting as though Dutrow is being singled out is laughable. As Steve posted earlier in the thread, if you can afford to hire a competent lawyer to just keep fighting and fighting via the legal system eventually the states tire of the continued legal battles and settle. That doesn't mean he should be allowed to keep his license, just the states really don't care about horseracing enough.

And if your chosen field of profession requires a license than you should be forced to adhere to the rules in order to keep your license.

If a Doctor continually violates the rules, they lose their license.


You acting as though 64 violations, speeding tickets or otherwise, is no big deal is telling

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

This is one of the stupidest defenses I have heard yet.

Acting as though Dutrow is being singled out is laughable. As Steve posted earlier in the thread, if you can afford to hire a competent lawyer to just keep fighting and fighting via the legal system eventually the states tire of the continued legal battles and settle. That doesn't mean he should be allowed to keep his license, just the states really don't care about horseracing enough.

And if your chosen field of profession requires a license than you should be forced to adhere to the rules in order to keep your license.

If a Doctor continually violates the rules, they lose their license.


You acting as though 64 violations, speeding tickets or otherwise, is no big deal is telling

Shouldnt you consider Dutrow has had thousands of starters in 25 years of training. 2.5 violations a year should disqualify a man from earning a living? Until you set up rules that call for the death penalty if broken you have have to stay consisent or face major legal battles that you cant win.

[Kasept]

Dutrow's attorney responds to ARCI president
By David Grening

The attorney representing trainer Richard Dutrow Jr. lashed out at a racing official who earlier this week called upon the New York State Racing and Wagering Board to consider revoking the trainer’s license for repeated rules violations. In an e-mail, attorney Gerard Romski wrote that Ed Martin, president of the Association of Racing Commissioners International, unfairly singled out “Mr. Dutrow while ignoring the actions of others.”

“In our opinion, Mr. Martin’s recent politically motivated letter, is just another example of such an attempt to unfairly prejudice and harm Mr. Dutrow without due cause. We hope that Mr. Martin did not rush to judgment and that he paid more attention to the actual facts when he was in charge at the New York State Racing and Wagering Board than he has demonstrated in his recent unfounded and irresponsible letter."

[The Indomitable DrugS]

The ARCI of 50-years-ago was the greatest friend the bettor ever had in horse racing.

Their leadership bitterly tried to fight against takeout increases and had blistering rhetoric of HANA proportions - and that when the takeout was 12% at most tracks.

I don't remember a peep out of the ARCI about Santa Anita's takeout increase. Not only has horse racing lost the ARCI ... but the DRF columnists of the 20's, 30's, and 40's were very good friends of the bettor. Things started to go down hill fast in the 70's ... the DRF of today isn't a mass producer of silly fluff like in the 70's ... but in terms of the writing (not the data) certainly no one there today is sticking up for the bettor...even though many of them are bettors themselves. As great and talented a writer as Crist is - you couldn't possibly find a guy any more anti-firebrand than him.