Dutrow

Originally Posted by jman5581

Well, of course!! If I went out and stole a car today and got caught, I'd rather pay a fine and get it out of the way than go to prison for a few years!!! In my opinion, paying your way out of a predicament is hardly any punishment at all... If they wanted to get Dutrow where it hurts (especially given his track record), they'd take him out of the game for a SUBSTANTIAL length of time. And by substantial I don't mean days or weeks; I mean months or years. I would not be in support of permanant disbarment because I believe people can change. But, a two week suspension is nothing. Kids get suspended from school for 2 weeks for fighting. Trainers that cheat and fail to play by the rules (knowing full well what the rules are) should, IMO, get stiffer suspensions every time they break the rules (blame it on whatever you want... false positives, assistant trainer error, whatever) until eventually they get shown the door for a LONG suspension (all ties to the game cut).

I think until something like this happens, we'll continue to see this blatant disregard for the integrity of the game.

I know what your saying but I'd rather go to Brazil for 2 weeks! It really does come down to making them cut all ties but it not as easy as it sounds... the biggest most important issue is.. workmen's comp insurance. I'm sure every trainer that gets a suspension still covers his employees while an assist takes over.. now if the ties are cut someone would have to come up with some BIG money to get insurance. Insurance is one of the biggest financial chokers for us .... it's put many out of business! for no employees (meaning I take care of my own horses and use a jockey in the am) I would still have to put out between 5-8 thousand dollars... now add employees... some pay well over 10,000 a MONTH!!

I don't know how feasible it is, but why couldn't the various tracks require trainers running horses at their tracks to buy into a "group" workman's comp plan??? There, everyone working for any of the trainers at that track would be covered. And, overall, the insurance might be cheaper because of the whole "group" negotiating rather than many individuals purchasing insurance.

Originally Posted by jman5581

I don't know how feasible it is, but why couldn't the various tracks require trainers running horses at their tracks to buy into a "group" workman's comp plan??? There, everyone working for any of the trainers at that track would be covered. And, overall, the insurance might be cheaper because of the whole "group" negotiating rather than many individuals purchasing insurance.

Cause that would make sense!!

mera,

but I'm not just talking about jockey's. all backstretch workers. Actually, I'm not really talking about jockeys at all since I wouldn't think they'd even be considered an employee of the trainer (since they work for various trainers).

I know about the mismanagement scandals...and taking for personal gain. Is this what you're talking about "education?" That's a mess, true, but obviously that was a lack of oversight...right? If there were sufficient oversight, couldn't it work? Isn't the general idea of an umbrella policy for backstretch workers at least a convincing from the perspective of supporting employees while trainers are serving suspensions??