Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board

Go Back   Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board > Thoroughbred Horse Racing Discussion > General Racing Discussion


Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old 07-25-2018, 12:51 PM   #91
thaskalos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 28,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by dilanesp View Post
Andy, selective enforcement isn't the most wonderful thing in the world, but the answer to selective enforcement isn't to let all the repeat violators get off scott free. Police are often alleged to let their friends, good looking people of the opposite sex, and celebrities off with warnings instead of tickets. Nonetheless, try using that as a defense in court if you are ticketed for speeding or charged with DUI.

If Kent Desormeaux or Bob Baffert are deserving of suspensions, fine, it would be an outrage if they weren't suspended. I don't know enough about the cases, but it could be you are right. But no, that doesn't mean we should allow even more drugs into the sport in the name of preventing selective prosecution. Dutrow got what he deserved, and with P. Val, it might be less about what he deserved, but he certainly can't be allowed back into the sport given his repeated acts of dishonesty and his substance abuse.

And your statement about "blacklisting" is, frankly, way way over the top. The term "blacklisting" comes from practices whereby private companies and executives colluded to agree to refuse to hire people who had no due process, no opportunity to contest the action, and who were largely innocent (and when they were guilty, were not guilty of serious offenses). That's what happened to alleged Communists in Hollywood in the 1950's and 1960's.

To get barred from a sport by stewards, who take such actions after giving someone an opportunity to be heard and to hire counsel, for serious violations having to do with the endangerment of animals and other jockeys and the possible corruption of a sport with legal wagering, is simply not "blacklisting".

Patrick Valenzuela has been given many, many extra chances. The sport has been far more patient with him than it needed to be or frankly should have been. But this happened-- and he blew every one of them. This "everybody gets a second chance" narrative doesn't apply to him, at all.
Exactly right!

If what Andy Asaro says is true...then the way to remedy this "unfairness" situation is by banning Baffert and Desormeaux as well...not by reinstating Dutrow and Valenzuela.
__________________
Live to play another day.
thaskalos is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 07-25-2018, 03:07 PM   #92
Andy Asaro
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 5,789
I don't think there's anything wrong with people who think differently. Probably the most honest post in the thread was Tom's opinion. He's consistent.
Andy Asaro is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 07-25-2018, 05:02 PM   #93
airford1
Registered User
 
airford1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 510
Michael Baze, Chris Antley and Garrett Gomez and many more needed help and we were not able to help them. Pat this just might be your new calling with the troubles you have had you could be the one to help the recovery rate. It's a noble calling and you have experience.
airford1 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Reply




Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

» Advertisement
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:33 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2023 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program
designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.