Socalman3 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I havent been following closely -- was the
> non-call in today's third normal business in FLA?
> I am prejudiced. The 1 horse was on the outside
> of the 7-5 favorite (the 10 horse). They dueled
> the whole stretch with 1 horse losing by about 1/4
> of a length. Alvarado on the 1 claimed foul
> against Irad on the 10. The head very clearly
> showed that Irad on the 10 did not keep to his
> lane and 3 times came over and phyically bumped
> with the 1. Alvarado thought enough of it to
> claim foul and the final margin of victory was
> close. Three bumps are not good enough? It was
> clear that the transgressor left its lane to bump
> the victim. The victim tried to run straight and
> only moved in reaction to the bumps. Maybe I am
> prejudiced, but i really thought that one should
> come down.
by the way, on reviewing the head on again, it is clear there were three physical contact bumps, all three initiated by the inside horse. It seems to me that they cannot deny the three bumps and who initiated it. The only possible rationale is that somehow the three bumps did not make the difference. Now, I will admit it, it looked like they could run around another lap and the 1 was still not goign to catch the 10...but the 1 was very close and only lost by 1/4 of a length. Do they keep the horse up on the subjective view that the fouled horse wasnt going to beat the committer of the foul? Seems like insane law to me. How is that judgment made. I would sure hate to have to judge such a thing.