Ask the Experts

General Category => Ask the Experts => Topic started by: johnnym on February 21, 2022, 10:21:12 AM

Title: It’s official
Post by: johnnym on February 21, 2022, 10:21:12 AM
https://twitter.com/HR_Nation/status/1495820824133214209

M.S DQ
Title: Re: It’s official
Post by: Fairmount1 on February 21, 2022, 05:35:03 PM
Is there any way that California, the CHRB, or all the folks out there can help Bob out?  Poor Guy. . .

Luckily, he can win the Rebel before the suspension starts. . .although in all seriousness I think that horse is vulnerable based on what I saw in the Southwest live at Oaklawn.  You guys are going to laugh at me and despite Newgrange going 4w and Ben Diesel getting a rail ride into the stretch last time, I like Dallas Stewart in this spot.  

__________________________________


https://www.horseracingnation.com/news/Attorney_Baffert_is_very_upset_with_stewards_DQ_of_Medina_Spirit_123


"He's very upset, which I get, as he should be," said Craig Robertson told Horse Racing Nation\'s Ron Flatter Racing Pod. "He's upset on multiple levels. First of all, to have that victory taken away is extremely disappointing. Then there was the rather hefty and lengthy suspension that was put on him that I think is completely outside the bounds of the rules. That's upsetting to him as well."
Title: Re: It’s official
Post by: shanahan on February 21, 2022, 05:45:43 PM
Dallas Steart?  Hmmm..must be a big day!  See you soon.
Title: Re: Baffert Arguments
Post by: BitPlayer on February 21, 2022, 06:04:58 PM
There is a statement from Baffert\'s attorney to be found in the Paulick Report:

https://paulickreport.com/news/the-biz/baffert-attorney-slams-egregious-medina-spirit-ruling-vows-appeal/

While I don\'t practice law, I generally find that the language of the law is not so obscure as to be inaccessible to laymen willing to struggle through it, so I decided to have a look:

The cited Rule 8:010, Section 4, looks to me like it is intended to distinguish substances like liniments that non-veterinarians may apply from those that require administration by a licensed veterinarian.  The requirement that the treatment \"does not include any drug, medication, or substance otherwise prohibited by this administrative regulation\" indicates to me that the section is not intended to broaden the permitted medications.

The cited Rule 8:020-2 is not actually a list of prohibited medications.  Rather, it is a set of withdrawal guidelines that describes itself as purely voluntary and advisory.  Their purpose is described as follows: \"A licensee may present evidence of full compliance with these guidelines to the Kentucky Horse Racing Commission (the "Commission" or "KHRC") and the stewards as a mitigating factor to be used in determining violations and penalties.\"  The following caveat is also included: \"Medications administered at dosages above manufacturer's recommendations, in compounded formulations and/or in combination with other medications and/or administration inside the withdrawal interval may result in test sample concentrations above threshold concentrations that could lead to positive test results and the imposition of penalties.\"

In that context the argument that the regulations only prohibit injection of betamethasone acetate sems to fall flat.  Rather, the KHRC has only provided withdrawal guidelines for administration in that form.

There is a separate section of those guidelines that applies to ointments:  It reads: \"The following substances may be administered or applied up to the scheduled paddock time of the race in which the horse is to compete: Topical applications such as liniments, leg paints, salves, and ointments which may contain antibiotics or DMSO, but do not contain steroids, anesthetics, or any other prohibited substances.\"

Betamethasone (without reference to any particular salt) is listed a a Class C medication in Rule 8:020.

I know there are good legal minds who read this board and would be interested if anyone thinks I am way off track.
Title: Re: Baffert Arguments
Post by: Strike on February 21, 2022, 06:18:22 PM
I am not a lawyer. Just a thoroughbred owner based in California for 30 years. Your reasoning makes sense. Baffert and his team are imploring those in charge to essentially give him a break. What he doesn\'t understand (being a narcissist) is that people just don\'t like him. He cannot understand that. He is an insufferable bore. Laughs at the rules as if they should\'t apply to him. He needs a total redo via a reputation management firm but again that would be beneath him. We all are tired of his act. His drug positives. His favorable treatment by biased officials. His ridiculous excuses. His appeals. Time to just go away... .
Title: Small problem
Post by: Fairmount1 on February 21, 2022, 07:00:41 PM
Ruh Roh!!  CHRB will need an emergency meeting to amend some rules for the Star of the Show tomorrow!!!


https://twitter.com/raypaulick/status/1495949864202604544
Title: Re: Baffert Arguments
Post by: RICH on February 22, 2022, 02:30:51 AM
and he parks in handicapped spaces too
Title: Re: Baffert Arguments
Post by: johnnym on February 25, 2022, 09:00:26 AM
https://www.horseracingnation.com/news/Baffert_winning_at_highest_rate_of_his_career_123


Just curious on any opinions about this?