I'll have to take exception to this implication. Very irresponsible.

Wow, she's gutsy.

ftfhim

The comments section on that site trump anything on this one in terms of hilarity.

Ray Paulick Says:
January 27th, 2010 at 11:34 pm Maury,
In a word, yes. I won’t go into details, but people who write “anonymous” comments should know anonymity is very difficult to achieve with today’s technology.












And he's the god-damned site owner!

I would have thought that Paulick would be sympathetic to someone like a Mike Gill.

I was subjected to having to listen to otherwise polite and courteous racing writers tell me all about how Paulick is this tremendously horrible person.

I just nodded and said "yeah?" over and over. Few things are less interesting than hearing people info-whoring and whisper campaigning to me against someone I don't know and didn't bring up.

Nothing anyone says about Gill will influence how I view him.

He does the same type of stuff others do ... and he's the one who gets rabidly vilified.

It's not hard to figure out why so many horsemen have an agenda against him. I get why the horsey lovers hate him... but I don't think they really get the low level claiming game.

What's to like about Gill? Pretty much nothing. He's a dopey action fiend .. and that's about the nicest thing to say about him.

Paulick is doing great work to get his site traffic ... but this is not a "closer look at Gill's racing operation" ... it's nothing more than a 'Gill's a bad guy Pile-On-Athon.'

So Tom Clifton is just lying here?

http://www.paulickreport.com/blog/gi...aulick-report/

“We did it for safety concerns,” jockey Tom Clifton was quoted as saying by the Thoroughbred Times. “We’ve got horses left and right snapping legs off in front of us, and every time it happens, three or four guys behind him go down, too. At what point do you say, ‘Listen, this is getting out of control.’ That’s why we did it, strictly as a safety concern. I have nothing against Michael Gill. I’ve ridden races for him before. I’m just getting tired of watching my fellow riders and horses go down that don’t deserve to.”

Your posts are just another example of you just putting your oversized blinkers on, and not trying to hear from all sides or take in viable information on this topic. Just label those who have different opinions "horsey lovers," or people having an "agenda against him," and keep throwing up PP’s from other horses, and labeling those who do not agree with you. If only your arguments were as adept as your research of PP’s and two year old in training sales, I might take what you say a little more seriously on this topic.

If Gill was just an overzealous owner, trying to rack up wins playing the nickel claimer game, I do not believe he would have so many problems at his doorstep. If a jockey colony, numerous race track administrations, racing authorities, other owners, other trainers, State Governments, the IRS, and multiple State Banking Departments have personal, and legal issues with him and his business's, for years, there must be something going on with this person and his actions. You really believe all these people and agencies are just “horsey lovers” or have an anti-Gill agenda? What conspiracy theory is next on your list to prove (9/11, Bush used a Hurricane Weapon to start Katrina, JFK assassination, the moon landing)?

Just take a look at the number of fines or regulatory infractions this guy's mortgage business has had in the last 2 years. Those alone should give anyone some doubt on this man's ethical behavior in his business practices.

Pitchforks!! Guilty until proven innocent!

I love horses!! I love Butternuts!! Butterstuff!

He has been proven guilty on many occasions. Is he guilty on this charge? We will find out, but to back this guy on his previous behavior is about as logical as backing Andrew Fastow or Jeffrey Skilling on their next financial ventures.

Not backing the guy. I'm going after the buffoons with the fake outrage.

Penn accepted entries by Gill for Wednesday, they will meet on Saturday to review the results of the necropsies of Melodeeman and Laughing Moon. Penn has asked for an opinion from the PA Racing Commission.

http://www.drf.com/news/article/110451.html

If anyone didnt get a chance to hear Byk and Black on the subject yesterday please try to.

Byk was trying to defend the process(to his credit) and Black wanted nothing of it.. Steve I dont think the guy who can have a 1100lb animal fall on him, gives a crap about Due Process (not the farm/stable)..It was good radio Byk trying to enlighten Black on being fair and Black telling him to "have a nice day" with a large finger pointing in the air!

I'm sure Anthony Black is a nice guy but if he were put into any job where a decision would be made on someones livelihood then chances are he would be fired in two days or dead.

He is 60 has battled substance abuse(who isn't) and is almost done.. Byk tried to have him be rational but to the guys credit he basically didnt want to hear it. Byk was 100% correct while not defending SWgILL he realized the process was unfair..

Tony Black is probably thinking that the same "due process" that applied to the jockeys that were ruled off for alleged race fixing a few years ago should apply to Gill.

Black always has Blinkers on when it comes to discussions involving Jocks. His conversations with Steve about Jocks being employees rather than independent contractors awhile back comes to mind.

The same thing kind of applies to Kirk Ziadie. I understand he has more than a few bad tests in Florida but he was pretty much just told to remove his horses from the backside and was no longer wanted at Calder. I don't believe there was a specific reason given...just a so called "Management Decision".

Exactly - Tony is 100% correct IMO. These people, whether they are jocks, trainers, agents, or owners have no guarantee of employment from the track, are not employees of the track, and are not entitled to any "due process".

They use the track to make a living, and have no direct responsibility for their actions with regard to the liability they cause the track owners due to their irresponsible actions.

Penn Nat or any other track for that matter can remove anyone they want for any reason they want when they feel that said person represents a threat to the track or it's business. Period. It isn't really a discussion.

That's what I was wondering about. Couldn't Penn National itself just do what both Calder and Tampa did in the above examples? Just claim it as a management or business decision. No explanation...you have 72 hours to be off the grounds.

almost all entries for now say "no rider" and Gill horses have a jock named Jose Baez (23-0-0-0)

Must have paid him off,eh?