It is a shame Andy. It's painfully obvious the guy has immense talent, but until he cools his heels and learns to ride without so much wasted emotion, he will continue to go without that high profile horse.

When his head is in the ballgame...hes top notch. When he does sh*t like Sunday...he just leaves you scratching your head.

Exactly... if he needs to settle it, he can wait until after he has dismounted. It's unbelievable that there are people who believe it to be acceptable for him to retaliate. I don't care if Martin hit him over the head with a sledgehammer... he has no right to put other horses and riders in danger.

I think what we are trying to portray to you is the fact that they both got the same amount of days is what is mind boggling to us. If they want to give Martin a couple days for "careless riding", so be it. But for the stewards to actually think they both deserve the same suspension...it just flat bullsh*t and speaks volumes for their competancy in the job they are doing.

Who cares at that point? It's up to Coa to be an adult and not take it out on the track! He put other people (and horses) in danger.

Thank you for clarifying what seems to be being missed by some.

Ok I understand here.....I am defending the decision to suspend Martin. If Martin's horse never came out to force Coa to check then Coa would never had lost his cool and did what he did. One action caused another action. This is why I think the Stewards suspended Martin as well. So what I am saying is that the stewards prob looked at this and thought that Coa wouldnt have acted like he did if Martin's horse didnt cause him to check. Does this make sense here.

So a blind man can never have an opinion. That seems reasonable.

What is also being lost here are the bettors. It is very possible the outcome of the race was altered by Coa's behavoir.

See post #84

Now that is a very good point.

Andy, why do you think they left Ice up for show? I guess they felt the outcome of the race wouldn't have changed had the incident not occured?

I think both should have rec'd 30 days. I do not see where one should have rec'd more days than the other.

You are the one that said how I can have an opinion without seeing something. If I was blind I couldnt have an opinion on this since I cannot see the video.

You are next in line for a stewards job with the NYRA if you actually think that....

Actually, no. You'd have to rely on what other people told you, so your opinion would be skewed. :rolleyes:

You're obviously NOT blind, though, so you COULD appease us and watch the replay. :p