NYRA bars Mullins for 6 months

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Three questions
1. Why does the headline read "drug violation" when there was in fact no drug?
2. Why did it take this long to adjudicate the case considering there was no court and Mullins apparently had no legal defense?
3. Why didn't they suspend him for a much longer period of time or even indefinitely since there was no state commissions involved and he clearly had intent to break the rules?

mullins doesnt run in NY he cant it isnt the wild wild west region, so who cares it isnt like its Contessa or Jacobsen with a million starters the guy knows his crap doesnt fly in Ny so who really cares

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by freddymo

mullins doesnt run in NY he cant it isnt the wild wild west region, so who cares it isnt like its Contessa or Jacobsen with a million starters the guy knows his crap doesnt fly in Ny so who really cares

please translate

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

please translate

the guy runs 3 horse a year in NY who cares about him.. If he is smart he will move his tack and juice to delaware park till the slots run dry..

[Duvalier]

Originally Posted by freddymo

the guy runs 3 horse a year in NY who cares about him.. If he is smart he will move his tack and juice to delaware park till the slots run dry..

Delaware Park? What about Penn Nat? I'm sure Mullins can get a few to run 55 BSF's.

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by Duvalier

Delaware Park? What about Penn Nat?

This guy is an earner never mind cheater... Pa. is tough on heroin

[10 pnt move up]

Originally Posted by freddymo

the guy runs 3 horse a year in NY who cares about him.. If he is smart he will move his tack and juice to delaware park till the slots run dry..

yea, the guy aint baffert, he rarely ships to NY.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by freddymo

the guy runs 3 horse a year in NY who cares about him.. If he is smart he will move his tack and juice to delaware park till the slots run dry..

I understand that he doesnt run there which is why once again horse racing officials draw us negative attention without really accomplishing much. I really think NYRA dropped the ball here simply by banning a guy for 6 months when he has no intention of running there anyway, though there may be some legalities that we dont know about. If mullins happens on a good three year old he can march right back into the detention barn and run in the Belmont. I'm sure with the state watching over their back NYRA triple checked to make sure they were ok in doing this. But in the grand scheme, was this a positive as presented?

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I understand that he doesnt run there which is why once again horse racing officials draw us negative attention without really accomplishing much. I really think NYRA dropped the ball here simply by banning a guy for 6 months when he has no intention of running there anyway, though there may be some legalities that we dont know about. If mullins happens on a good three year old he can march right back into the detention barn and run in the Belmont. I'm sure with the state watching over their back NYRA triple checked to make sure they were ok in doing this. But in the grand scheme, was this a positive as presented?

Of course it isn't a positive. Any person with knowledge of the sport knows the ruling is a joke with basically no penalty at all.

[10 pnt move up]

Sounds like NYRA had a weak case and they throw this out there like they are the tough guys of racing.

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I understand that he doesnt run there which is why once again horse racing officials draw us negative attention without really accomplishing much. I really think NYRA dropped the ball here simply by banning a guy for 6 months when he has no intention of running there anyway, though there may be some legalities that we dont know about. If mullins happens on a good three year old he can march right back into the detention barn and run in the Belmont. I'm sure with the state watching over their back NYRA triple checked to make sure they were ok in doing this. But in the grand scheme, was this a positive as presented?

We all know that Mullins doesn't run much in New York, so the deterrent impact with him is minimal. However, might the penalty set the bar for what NYRA may do with other "serial cheaters" if they get caught doing something naughty at a NYRA track. If it doesn't, then I agree that this is just a "window-dressing" penalty.

With ineffective state regulators, the only way that racing is going to clean up the sport is by having tracks assert their private property rights with respect to cheating trainers, just as they are very willing to do with jockeys. The recent decision at Charles Town seems to support their ability to do so without the need for regulatory approval.

[richard]

At least the NY tracks will not have to put up with Mullins shenanigans, as in cheating .

[SOREHOOF]

Karen Murphy, Mullins's attorney, said that the trainer did not plan to take any legal action contesting the order, though she characterized the penalty as "grossly irresponsible, wasteful, and unnecessary" while criticizing NYRA for spending money on pursuing the penalty.

"If anyone should sue, it should be the betting public, because they are being deprived of seeing the best horses in California start in a failing racing jurisdiction," Murphy said.

That was from the DRF article up now. http://www.drf.com/news/article/108546.html

Best horses in California? Failing racing jurisdiction? I can watch the best horses in California race in a failing racing jurisdiction Wednesday thru Sunday on Calracing.com!