![]() |
Quote:
|
Today's second race at LAD featured some young-guns who were clearly green. In the stretch, the eventual winner veered-in and interfered with the ultimate second place finisher. The winner was definitely the better horse, but was DQ'd for the infraction.
In one case it's DQing the obvious infraction, in the other it's not-DQing the obvious infraction because it affected the outcome. I think both sides have legitimate arguments, but regardless, across the industry as a whole, the decisions should be consistent. |
Surprised no one has mentioned this yet, but they somehow decided to take down the #4 Laylaben in the 1st race yesterday. Yes, the horse drifted out in the stretch, however with what they have been letting thus far in the meet this DQ was surprising.
|
Quote:
http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=37932 |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
The horse that was impeded was beaten a nose for 2nd. It's not hard to figure out their decision ... two things have to happen, 1.) a foul has to take place 2.) that foul has to cost a horse a chance at a better placing.
Like Rupert said - it's a little like pass interference in football. If the contact is significant - but the ball flies 15 yards over the recievers head and lands way out of bounds - it's no flag. |
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:52 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.