Fairgrounds 2-14-15 Race 7

[Gate Dancer]

Maybe I'm clueless but............watching this race it is obvious to me that the winner of this race #2 Lahaina ducks out nearing the wire and interferes with #4 Bulldashanswers who then bumps #5 Sweet Basil. (no dog in the fight) Sweet Basil claims foul against #4 but it was actually the winner (#2) that caused the chain reaction.

My question is this........since the #4 didn't claim any foul against the winner, I assume the Stewards can't then make any changes against the #2 and strictly have to deal with the #5 versus #4 claim of foul? I'm stunned the #4 didn't claim foul against the winner. (watch the head on replay)

Any other opinions are welcome.............maybe all this happened so close to the wire that the Stewards so no reason for the change but it seemed quite obvious to me.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by Gate Dancer

Maybe I'm clueless but............watching this race it is obvious to me that the winner of this race #2 Lahaina ducks out nearing the wire and interferes with #4 Bulldashanswers who then bumps #5 Sweet Basil. (no dog in the fight) Sweet Basil claims foul against #4 but it was actually the winner (#2) that caused the chain reaction.

My question is this........since the #4 didn't claim any foul against the winner, I assume the Stewards can't then make any changes against the #2 and strictly have to deal with the #5 versus #4 claim of foul? I'm stunned the #4 didn't claim foul against the winner. (watch the head on replay)

Any other opinions are welcome.............maybe all this happened so close to the wire that the Stewards so no reason for the change but it seemed quite obvious to me.

That was the explanation -- that the incident occurred essentially on the wire and didn't affect anything.

Also, IIRC, Dooley announced during the decision that there hadn't actually been a claim of foul from the rider of Sweet Basil and that they had only conducted a stewards' inquiry.

ETA: In watching the head-on replay several times during the inquiry, I was also wondering why the #2 was not under review, so I was watching the inquiry the same way you were because the entire incident was caused by the winner.

[Gate Dancer]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

That was the explanation -- that the incident occurred essentially on the wire and didn't affect anything.

Also, IIRC, Dooley announced during the decision that there hadn't actually been a claim of foul from the rider of Sweet Basil and that they had only conducted a stewards' inquiry.

ETA: In watching the head-on replay several times during the inquiry, I was also wondering why the #2 was not under review, so I was watching the inquiry the same way you were because the entire incident was caused by the winner.

Appreciate the comments...........sure looked strange at the time........