enjoy! I don't miss it....and I dropped about 5 pounds w no beer.

I found it interesting he decided to use a press release instead of facing the press, if you were truly innocent wouldn't you go out screaming and kicking your innocence? It's a classic case of deny, deny, and deny and in time hopefully they will forget. Frankly I expected more from him. To me this was almost an admission of guilt.

yeah, it can add a few...but i've been without for a bit, figured i was due.

if he was truly innocent he wouldn't be in this spot to begin with.

Steve, I am in the middle of listening to yesterday's show. I am quite surprised by what is being said by your guests. Seth Morrow really didn't see the incident? I'm not saying that he's not being honest, but I find it hard to believe that ANYONE with ties remotely close to what he has to the sport hasn't seen the footage. Maggie Wolfendale saying that Rose didn't seem agitated when he returned with the mare tells me nothing. He had a few minutes during the gallop out and return before the unsaddling to realize what he had done. I'm not in his head, but hasn't everyone done something and IMMEDIATELY realized they F'ed UP? 3 minutes is plenty of time to compose yourself and come up with a STORY. And Gary West was the most shocking of all. He makes it seem like the harsh reaction to the incident is by people who don't really get it. People who are just out to ban the whip or are still feeling the sting from the Eight Belles situation. But on this board, we have owners, trainers, writers, professional handicappers, gamblers and die hard fans. With the exception of maybe slodirt, I'm pretty sure everyone else commenting here feels that it was done maliciously. And Gary West was "shocked at the ruling" and he sees "no indication that he was using his whip beligerantly or maliciously" and think this is an "over reaction". Seriously?

Maybe you comment on the show later on, as I said I am just listening Gary West now.

Don't forget jcs.

Not sure what to make of the whole thing now. I think it's interesting that Howard Wolfendale, who prefers to NOT deal with ANY press, seems pretty OK with Rose's version of things and is being supportive of him. Says a lot no matter what anyone says. Wolfendale is an unusual guy.

Maggie said Rose immediately said to her and her mother after the race that he thought he caught the mare across face, so it isn't like he was trying to hide anything about what happened. I'm anxious to hear what Tony Black says today at 6pm as he'll explain if it is even possible to inadvertantly hit a horse across the face while stick handling.

Sure looks like he was taking her to the woodshed, but it's hard to be sure given our collective lack of experience as to where the riders sit....

With the mare almost snapping her own neck off after the smack across the face, I'm pretty sure he knew there would be questions and it wasn't something that would be "missed", even if she had escaped unscathed...

I look forward to Tony's take as well.

The thing is, if the connections are not livid and ready to strangle the kid, then maybe we are just looking at it the wrong way. The only person on this board that can really comment on the possibilities of hitting a horse in the face is the Mig, and hopefully he will comment on the situation to give us a real idea of the possibilities

Just a real strange situation, in what is a very chaotic time in the industry.

The only person on this board that can really comment on the possibilities of hitting a horse in the face is the Mig, and hopefully he will comment on the situation to give us a real idea of the possibilities



The Mig posts here?

Well.. Once so far. But he does lurk, and may be inclined to weigh in on this..

This is the one thing I just can't get past. We can argue all day long about this, and there should be no arguement as to punishment being handed down, but this one thing I just can't get my arms around.

Would I have wanted to see Rose step up and admit he was wrong? Sure. Did it take 24-36 hours or so to craft a statement? OK. Does the connections supporting Rose say something? OK. On and on and on. I got that.

I already spoke with several jocks about this, several trainers, and people who were there and saw the race. Obviously to most, other opinions don't carry a lot of weight, perhaps zero. I guess we'll see how this plays out.

Eric

I personally think the conections like Jeremy and just don't want to throw him under the bus. Maybe they just don't feel the need because of the penalty he has recieved. As much as I want to believe him, I just can't. I am not a jockey and have no idea what it is like to be on a horse in the stretch, but to strike a horse on the shoulder you would think the whip would be coming in a downward motion (like the 2 whacks the mare got after being hit in the face). It looked like to me that it was a clear motion to her face.
The statement is just damage control. The only story that would have made a little sense to me would have been, that she shied away from the whip and lugged in, so I tried to show it to her and accidently whacked her in the face. That would be more believeable. But then you would still have the 2 whacks at the wire. Or he could just admit that he F'ed up and take his punishment like a man and hope the racing community forgives him.

Appeal to the City
 

I called the New Bolton Center this morning to check her status. The receptionist said they weren't allowed to give out information. She did tell me though that Appeal to the City didn't lose her eye.

If he didn't make a roundhouse type motion that was coming across his body. I would have to think that if you are going to strike a horse on its shoulder that a 45 degree motion with your arm pointing downward

I just did this in the office. Stand up, get into what is considered a jockey's stance, then go to the whip and start whipping to the rear, and then act like you are whipping on the shoulder, and then act like you are going to whip the horse in the face, three DISTINCT motions.

Again, I have no idea, I have been on a horse ONCE in my life and that was in the middle of wisconsin when I was like 8 :)

umm...I.....

never mind

I had to do what is available. Chuck won't let me get on any of the horses :), for good reason

do you have a video of this??? Please?!

Flashes of drunk guys at the OTB screaming at the TV's while whipping themselves endlessly....

How can you not love this sport?:D

Oh my

If it looks like a duck...... you know the rest. I saw the race. Glad to hear that the horse didn't lose an eye. The explanations and interviews make me feel badly about the game. It is obvious from the head-on that the horse ducked in rather abruptly and then in a second or less, Rose smacked her accross he face. The horses jerking motion signalled the pain she experienced and after Rose knew he caused her that, HE HITS THE HORSE AGAIN A COUPLE OF TIMES FOR GOOD MEASURE. It is disturbing that the people closest to the animal aren't taking up the animals cause. The horse is depending on them to do that. Not to take up a defense of the one inflicting the harm. They are just openning the door to PETA and other animal rights groups.
But I don't believe we need to reserve judgement here. We have a video that I have scanned a number of times. We don't need to hear from a joc (although they are also a bit quiet on the subject as well), ride a chair in our office, or continue to listen to folks connected to the sport who should know better. They need to look at the horse and protect them.
I would love to hear from Mig. I never knew much about his riding (only been a fan of the sport over the last 6 years) but I saw him get upset when one of his mounts broke down at the beginning of a race in Saratoga in 2006. He needed to be consoled by the attendent at the scene. And it wasn't a horse that was a stakes winner and all. I grew to respect him alot more that day.

My problem with Rose's statement is he is anything but an apprentice rider, surely a rider of his caliber knows when something goes amiss, then we also have the 2nd and 3rd whack to deal with. Let's face it to miss by that much, something isn't right here. As for the Owners I am puzzled by their lack of reaction, one can only speculate is this more of the old guys club establishment that horseracing seems to foster....Let's keep this under wraps. Anyway hearing Tony Black's opinion will be interesting.

What good is there in the owners and the trainer coming to Rose's defense if they didn't actually think the incident was accidental? I sincerely doubt Jeremy Rose of all people is part of the old boys establishment of horse racing.

This is silly, we have the video, I just viewed it again for good measure. The horse was on the rail at that point she was not lugging in, she was running straight, there is no doubt what Rose's intentions were. Maybe he didn't mean to hit her in the eye, but the target was certainly the head.

If Howard Wolfendale felt Rose intentionally hit his horse to do damage, Howard would have been all over him. Reading Wolfendale's press release tells me a lot and I'll trust his judgement since it was his horse.

One thing you don't do in MD - you don't f*** with Wolfendale.....

Right, I'm just saying, if Howard Wolfendale thought this was a deliberate act, I think he'd absolutely be all over Rose, as phystech mentions. Wolfendale's statement definitely muddies the water a bit in this incident.

I don't know Wolfendale and it is hard for me to comment on him.

All I know is any normal person would be upset, unless they view horses as disposable assets. And I am sorry but the truth is like it or not horses are often valued in monetary terms.

I guess my only question would be why is he protecting Rose? That's the part I'm trying to figure.

That will happen right after a herd of cattle flies by my window.

By the way, I think Rose is being unfairly vilified for the sins of others and the whole thing stinks.

MOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Makes you wonder is there an unwritten code between Jockies? And if so how much of what Tony Black says today will be enlightening.

Wow! Really? Your take is that it was unintentional? I'm looking at this situation and not even thinking about other abuses and draw the conclusion that I did. While I'm not on the horse, I don't see one bit of truth from his statement. She wasn't lugging in when he cracked he, she was going straight. And the 2 extra whacks causing her to severely swerve into the oncoming herd behind her, was not only unwarrented but dangerous for the trailing horses and jockeys. What do you think the stews are trying to make up for here?

I think, and I could very well be wrong, that BTW is talking about the chaos that's ensued since derby day.

It was expected that the trainer, owner or both would support Rose. This is a business. They want Rose to ride for them Saturday. Not 6 months from now. The money and the people involved is what is important to these guys, and Rose is a top jockey to have on your team.
It isn't a pretty way to look at, but it's real.

Well I am not in MD so here goes. I think, either way, whether it was an accident or delibrate, taking his defense is problematic.
Either you ride a jockey who can accidentally almost put your horses eye out or gets so pissed in a moment of frustration that he "takes him to the woodshed". Either way, there is a problem there.
I agree with Blackthroat in that he is paying for the collective sins of the past. That is problematic but if the sport is going to police itself it has to start somewhere. And, the horse is in the hospital for the injuries he sustained from the jockey. Why would anyone want to ride a joc who can accidentally or maliciously harm your animal to that extent?
Speaking of policing itself, Asmussen is going for another suspension.:zz:

Agreed. It IS not a pretty way of looking at it. But it is unfortunately real for many in the sport.

Where did I say that?

However, and I have watched it many times, I'm not in the business of deciding intent and I dare anyone to tell me they are 100% sure it was intentional.

But, be that as it may, we are in an hysterical environment right now, and decisions made under these kinds of situations are usually rash and rarely the fairest possible. You need to ask yourself what his punishment would have been had this happened a year ago. Now, I understand that one could argue that perhaps that would have also been too lenient, but the speed with which this verdict was handed down, as well as the haste people had to rush to judgement, leads me to believe he isn't getting a fair shake.

You'll have to trust me on this, but I have absolutely zero tolerance for anyone who would be cruel to animals ( save some of the posters on the internet who deserve all the abuse they can get ), however I am just as resolute in my feelings that a rush to judgement during hysterical times is a recipe for error.