Jeremy Rose

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Jockeys usually get 7 day penalties that they delay until winter when they wont be riding anyway. How many get 6 months? Assmussen got 6 months and Biancone effectively got a year and he didnt even get a positive. I find that jockeys usually get days for things that are either dangerous or intentional. The vast majority of medication positives are neither dangerous or intentional.

I'm thinking about those jockeys at Tampa who got ruled off the grounds immediately - with an effective penalty far worse than a few days, and the "battery" incident where the guy lost his license for a few years, if I recall.

I agree that the jockeys' appeals until December render the "typical" careless riding suspensions meaningless.

The trainers that you referenced are the only ones that I can remember getting penalties that severe, and I doubt their misdeeds were unintentional.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

I'm thinking about those jockeys at Tampa who got ruled off the grounds immediately - with an effective penalty far worse than a few days, and the "battery" incident where the guy lost his license for a few years, if I recall.

I agree that the jockeys' appeals until December render the "typical" careless riding suspensions meaningless.

The trainers that you referenced are the only ones that I can remember getting penalties that severe, and I doubt their misdeeds were unintentional.

I cant say too much about the Tampa situation other than where the is smoke...

I hope you arent saying that using an electrical device is the equal to a medication positive? Maybe for etorphine. As we have discussed far too often about positive tests, the system sucks, most positives have no effect on the horse, and the vast majority are for allowed meds. A "machine" is blatantly illegal.

I can remember lots of trainers getting 30 to 45 day suspensions including Pletcher.

The difference between a jockey getting days and a trainer getting days is that the trainer has employees and expenses that dont go away. A jock packs his stuff and goes on vacation. Not to mention the trouble caused for the connections who have to scramble to find a new rider, often after the best jocks are already locked up.

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I hope you arent saying that using an electrical device is the equal to a medication positive? Maybe for etorphine. As we have discussed far too often about positive tests, the system sucks, most positives have no effect on the horse, and the vast majority are for allowed meds. A "machine" is blatantly illegal.

I can remember lots of trainers getting 30 to 45 day suspensions including Pletcher.

The difference between a jockey getting days and a trainer getting days is that the trainer has employees and expenses that dont go away. A jock packs his stuff and goes on vacation. Not to mention the trouble caused for the connections who have to scramble to find a new rider, often after the best jocks are already locked up.

I'm not talking about the careless medication overage/positive. I'm talking about the intentional stuff. To me, knowingly giving a horse an illegal painkiller (also "blatantly illegal" to use your term) is no less brutal than using a battery; in some ways, its more brutal, because it puts the life of both horse and rider at risk, not to mention those of others in the same race.

The 30 to 45 day suspensions that these high profile trainers received were appealed endlessly, often negotiated down as part of some agreement, and then rendered effectively meaningless when the keys to the store were simply turned over to the assistant. The old adage that "justice delayed is justice denied" applies in these situations.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

I'm not talking about the careless medication overage/positive. I'm talking about the intentional stuff. To me, knowingly giving a horse an illegal painkiller (also "blatantly illegal" to use your term) is no less brutal than using a battery; in some ways, its more brutal, because it puts the life of both horse and rider at risk, not to mention those of others in the same race.

The 30 to 45 day suspensions that these high profile trainers received were appealed endlessly, often negotiated down as part of some agreement, and then rendered effectively meaningless when the keys to the store were simply turned over to the assistant. The old adage that "justice delayed is justice denied" applies in these situations.

If you have a problem with the American legal system then we have have to move the discussion to another forum. Most if not all of those cases dealt with microscopic levels of legal meds. Name one case where a trainer has been found guilty of giving a horse an illegal painkiller that didnt get a long suspension.

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

If you have a problem with the American legal system then we have have to move the discussion to another forum. Most if not all of those cases dealt with microscopic levels of legal meds. Name one case where a trainer has been found guilty of giving a horse an illegal painkiller that didnt get a long suspension.

As a lawyer myself, I'm not going to kill the legal system, but having handled cases for other professionals (doctors, nurses, etc.) who have had disciplinary proceedings brought against them for alleged professional misconduct, the penalties that they face for sometimes ambiguous fact scenarios (where the conduct is unintentional) are far more severe than the penalties that the trainers face even when the conduct is intentional.

That being said, I think we can probably agree that it gets back to the observation that BTW made on a thread in the past few days: the real problem is the use of undetectable designer drugs (often used to mask pain). And someone made the great point (actually, I think it may have been you) that we may need serious penalties for some more innocuous stuff because such penaltes would be akin to trying to put the mob out of business by getting them for tax evasion.

[booner]

Just watched the replay. Unbelievable.

[Cannon Shell]

I'm not trying to make light of trainer suspensions but to say jockey suspensions are harsher than tranier suspensions is strange. If a jockey gets a 7 day suspension they are really only getting a 5 day one simply because they only have 5 and sometimes 4 day work weeks. A trainer usually gets 15 days and like us or not we have a whole lot more people and animals that depend on us daily than jockeys. Neither are really big deals but i am tired of hearing how easy trainers have it. If I were to get a 6 month suspension (most trainers actually) it would kill my business. I would like to see most of the people here close up your business or quit your job for 6 months and see what happens? Maybe the big trainers can get through fine (as we have seen) but can we treat them differently because they are sucessful?

Personally I think that 6 months is excessive for Rose.

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I'm not trying to make light of trainer suspensions but to say jockey suspensions are harsher than tranier suspensions is strange. If a jockey gets a 7 day suspension they are really only getting a 5 day one simply because they only have 5 and sometimes 4 day work weeks. A trainer usually gets 15 days and like us or not we have a whole lot more people and animals that depend on us daily than jockeys. Neither are really big deals but i am tired of hearing how easy trainers have it. If I were to get a 6 month suspension (most trainers actually) it would kill my business. I would like to see most of the people here close up your business or quit your job for 6 months and see what happens? Maybe the big trainers can get through fine (as we have seen) but can we treat them differently because they are sucessful?

I've never suggested that trainers have it easy. God knows, I appreciate the long, hard hours that you guys put in, often for relatively modest pay. Quite the contrary, I fully recognize that suspensions hurt the "little guys" more than the "big guys." They don't have the financial wherewithal to contest (and subsequently appeal) the penalties, and then they face the possibility of the horses going elsewhere as their assistants may not be in a position to run the operation in the head trainer's absence.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

I've never suggested that trainers have it easy. God knows, I appreciate the long, hard hours that you guys put in, often for relatively modest pay. Quite the contrary, I fully recognize that suspensions hurt the "little guys" more than the "big guys." They don't have the financial wherewithal to contest (and subsequently appeal) the penalties, and then they face the possibility of the horses going elsewhere as their assistants may not be in a position to run the operation in the head trainer's absence.

And I am for throwing the book at guys who use illegal stuff. If I use Elephant juice and get caught I deserve life. But they arent catching those kind of guys and that kind of stuff and all the crap that is being spewed in the media doesnt come close to getting that situation under control. Bill Finley wants to get rid of Lasix. I want to get rid of Bill Finley.

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

I've never suggested that trainers have it easy. God knows, I appreciate the long, hard hours that you guys put in, often for relatively modest pay. Quite the contrary, I fully recognize that suspensions hurt the "little guys" more than the "big guys." They don't have the financial wherewithal to contest (and subsequently appeal) the penalties, and then they face the possibility of the horses going elsewhere as their assistants may not be in a position to run the operation in the head trainer's absence.

Is Gary Sciacca a Big little guy or a Big Big guy? Sorry it was such a softball

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I'm not trying to make light of trainer suspensions but to say jockey suspensions are harsher than tranier suspensions is strange.

A jockey can't make any money when he's suspended.

A trainer basically gets a vacation. It would be one thing if cell phones didn't exist - and races couldn't be watched on tv or the Internet - or the trainer's help is so incompetent that they can't be left unsupervised.

The horses just run in someone elses name and the show goes on the same as always.

[slotdirt]

Alan Foreman is obviously biased given his relationship with Rose on this incident, but he said what I was thinking earlier much better than I ever could in his brief segmant with Kasept earlier.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

A jockey can't make any money when he's suspended.

A trainer basically gets a vacation. It would be one thing if cell phones didn't exist - and races couldn't be watched on tv or the Internet - or the trainer's help is so incompetent that they can't be left unsupervised.

The horses just run in someone elses name and the show goes on the same as always.

A trainer gets a vacation, yeah right. But if something happens when they are gone what then? They will still be held responsible. They may still lose the horse or owner. A trainers job day to day is to deal with issues. Those issues dont go away.We dont make any money on a day to day basis as it is. The commissions arent letting us earn any money when you have a 30 day or more suspension.

A jockey who has no expenses gets the vacation. His employees are on commission. He goes to the beach and picks back up when he gets back.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

A jockey can't make any money when he's suspended.

A trainer basically gets a vacation. It would be one thing if cell phones didn't exist - and races couldn't be watched on tv or the Internet - or the trainer's help is so incompetent that they can't be left unsupervised.

The horses just run in someone elses name and the show goes on the same as always.

They have really cracked down on that. They try to make sure that the trainer does not get paid during the suspension. They will even check bank accounts sometimes. Sometimes they will stipulate that the trainer is to have no contact with the barn and they will sometimes check phone records.