Strike Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> If the stewards NOW FEEL the infraction was so
> egregious -- why in the hell did they not post an
> inquiry? I would love to hear their explanation.
> They all should be given suspensions (whether you
> agree with the DQ or not -- fact is they didn't do
> their jobs).

Do they always post an inquiry after a jockey's objection? Have seen jockey's lodge objections after the stewards post an inquiry but have never been sure about objection first, inquiry second. Does it really matter, especially in a legal sense?

If you are referring to the stewards not posting an inquiry [b]prior[/b] to Prat filing an objection maybe they just originally missed it. After all Collmus never acknowledged Maximum Security drifting out in his race call. Not to mention the NBC team of Tirico, Moss and Bailey didn't say boo about it either immediately after the race. Wasn't until about four minutes after the race was over, and interviews of Saez and Servis were completed, that Tirico first said there had been an objection.

Seriously, NBC probably had a dozen guys in their control room/truck monitoring the race, from every camera angle imaginable, and none of them picked it up? None were in Tirico's ear immediately after the race saying "hey, the winner cut off a half a dozen horses on the second turn, we are cutting away from the interviews and going straight to camera "x" for the most glaring angle, you guys take it from there?"

The stewards deserve the scrutiny they are under but there are a lot of other professionals in this game that have really dropped the ball on this one.