New Poll, Jeremy Rose Suspension
Jeremy Rose at Belmont (Sarah K. Andrew)
First off, what a day! I was away from a computer until just an hour ago… I missed quite the news filled afternoon!
In our last poll, Personal Ensign was the overwhelming favorite filly 1988 getting 20 votes, while 14 of you said that you love both Personal Ensign and Winning Colors equally and 7 of you, myself included, said Winning Colors was your favorite. I love them both but Winning Colors’ Santa Anita Derby is what made my decision.
Our current poll asks if what you make of Jeremy Rose’s suspension… is it too much, not enough or just right?
To aid you in your decision, I present this head on race replay (hat tip to partymanners for posting and Jen at Thoroughblog). The incident happens at the 1:00 mark, they’re on the rail. Be warned, you might not want to watch if you’re easily upset or squeamish:
I also present this from Dan Ilman over at his Formblog. When a poster asked if anyone felt that Rose has become “the whippingboy” for racing needing to clean up it’s act (a fair question), Ilman replied with this:
I’ve been following Delaware this meet, and this isn’t the first time that Rose’s actions have come into question. On May 12, I was co-hosting the New York City OTB program with Peter Rotundo, and we noticed Rose tearing the hide off runner-up Chief Export with 100 yards to go, and no hope of winning the race.
If you go to calracing.com (free registration), and load up the May 12 race at Delaware, you’ll see what I mean. Chief Export is breaking from post two, and is program number three. He breaks slowly, and rushes into a tight spot on the inside turning for home. After checking and angling to the outside, he fails to run down win-machine Spooky Mulder. Rose has no chance to win in late stretch, but still gives Chief Export a good beating on his shoulder.
After the race, we called for his head on live TV, and in the wake of the Eight Belles incident, wondered how in the heck Rose could be allowed to ride in the Preakness later that week. I can understand his frustration over the bad trip, but the horse didn’t deserve the hiding.
At first, when I read the news item, I thought the punishment was enough, but after seeing the head on I’m starting to think perhaps it’s not enough… but what do you think?
Posted by dana on Jun 25 2008
Filed Under: 2008, Industry, The Whip, Sarah K. Andrew, YouTube, Race Replay, Injury, Racing
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading ...
Loading ...
It’s been suggested that any longer period of suspension would have been overturned in an appeal; the six months, apparently, is the longest they could give with a good hope of having it stick.
Let’s consider why this is such a big deal:
1. Rose put other horses and jockeys in danger. He was very, very lucky that Appeal to the City’s wide swing didn’t trigger a pileup.
2. His use of the whip was, frankly, egregious. If this was a mistake, if his mount’s head was turned at just the wrong time, etc. etc., then the “humane force” that he would have been using would not have caused this degree of obvious distress and pain. He is obviously whaling on that mare.
3. Rose’s actions threaten the reputation and image of TB racing, which, everyone seems to agree, is already quite vulnerable to bad PR at this moment.
#2 is the reason why I’d spit on JR if I saw him in the street, but I think #1 is a very, very powerful argument against him. #3 I care less about, honestly. The lack of professionalism - evidenced by his lack of regard for the safety of his fellow jocks (and for the wellbeing of his mount) - is reason enough to strip him of his license.
So, do I think he should get a longer suspension? Honestly, yes I do. In my perfect world, he’d never get another mount - but that’s just me. In this reality, six months with no paycheck (and a reputation in ruins) sounds a-ok.
Wow, thanks for the excellent comment! I hadn’t thought of the more time being grounds for appeal angle (and I haven’t had the time to do much reading today). But I have to say, I agree with you 100%!
At first I voted too much, but then I saw the head-on play of the race! Six months is a good MINIMUM punishment, IMO. The reaction of the mare to the blow not only endangered everyone around him, but illustrated the force that was put into it. She was not lugging out at the time it happened. And, as a very experienced horse person, let me say it is very hard to hit an eyeball when you are aiming for a shoulder.
…Just think about it. Move your arm about a bit if it helps demonstrate the difference. The range of motion that you would use in your arm to hit a shoulder versus hitting the head is totally different, making it almost impossible to “miss.” When you aim for a horse’s shoulder, you basically just bring your arm out to the side and bring it straight back down, because you are sitting on the shoulders already. But to reach the head of the horse, you need to stretch out and swing the whip far in front of you. IMHO, that’s a very hard “mistake” to make.
Ever since Afleet Alex introduced me to Jeremy Rose I’ve felt that Rose was excessive with the whip. Jeremy wailing away on a horse doesn’t surprise me a bit and I feel sorry for any horse he gets on.
So it might be no surprise that I voted for not enough. It’s one thing to hit your horse in the face, accidental or not. It’s quite another to do it hard enough to cause “hemorrhaging” where the whip struck.
“And, as a very experienced horse person, let me say it is very hard to hit an eyeball when you are aiming for a shoulder. ”
Thanks for the insight! I would have guessed that but I’ve never ridden a horse.
Nick - Afleet Alex was just before I started following racing so I don’t have any real reference points for him… I totally agree about the hemorrhaging!
I have ridden a horse twice. The first time I didn’t have the heart to hit him with the stick so he kept walking back to his feed tub and all my friends laughed at me—I was the only one of the 10 or so unable to stay on the path. My horse knew he had a sucker. My hound dog takes advantage of me, too. I hope all GBG readers feel bad for me.
nothing useful to say but, wow. i just swore through the computer at Jeremy Rose after seeing what he did.
just a quick comment to what Nick said: i never noticed excessive whip use on Afleet Alex, but i’m gonna go over them again on youtube now.
Clarice’s comment makes alot of sense to me. Before seeing this I wondered how you can be aiming for the shoulder and hit the face instead. Usually a shoulder tap is a short little stroke, or wrist movement. I’M NOT A JOCKEY though, so I’m no expert. I would like to see this in a larger format and play it back slow motion to really analyze it.
If he did it on purpose, he should be put on probation as well as suspended. For how long, I don’t know. I’m not a steward so I have no history of such occurances to draw from/compare to.
Horse Racing need not just go after him though. Everytime some trainer injects his or her horse with whatever shit they are giving them, they are doing more damage than a whip to the face could ever do. They are taking years off of these horses lives etc etc etc. You get my point. These fucking trainers get caught for medication violations or whatever and they’re back a week later. And when they come back these douchebags on TV are up their ass about how great a trainer they are.
It’s like the Barry Bonds thing. (and don’t bother trying to tell me he wasn’t on roids galore). How anyone could stand and cheer for that cheating bastard to break home runs records is beyond me. Same applies to anyone who would don a Terrell Owens jersey. I guess we live in a period of asshole worship.
The next time Big Brown races, let’s all boo him please.
Why boo the horse? He hasn’t played a role in any of the decisions made about him. All he’s done is try, mostly successfully, to win races and he’s run his heart out every time.
I know, I was being sarcastic in reference to the handful of people that booed him in the belmont.
Oops, sorry…didn’t see the sarcasm.
Afleet Alex: I remember J. Rose giving him a few wacks in the Arkansas Derby(?) when he was clear by many lengths at the 16th pole. it was totally lame, especially on the road to the derby. check the replays.
the kid was wrestler, so he probably has a naturally agressive disposition
E - LOL, the image of you on a horse that keeps going back to the feed tub made my day!!
Thx all for the continued discussion!
I’m actually really curious to know what anyone who voted for the suspension being too short thinks. What do you think would have been appropriate and why? C’mon, don’t be shy!
I actually think the suspension is too long. Rose is being deprived of the right to make a living for six months, and his livelihood will be affected after that, as his trainers will look elsewhere. And as he’s not permitted on the grounds, he can’t even work horses in the morning.
I know that what he did was egregious, and I believe that a long suspension and fine are in order, but six months seems excessive to me. One? Two? Three at the most.
I also voted “too much,” for similar reasons T@BB mentioned, and because the suspension seems so out of line with those that have been handed out before. Rose is being made an example by stewards fearful of public outrage post-Derby, and something more along the lines of 30-90 days, plus anger management, plus probation for another 90 days would strike me as a more reasonable response (along with movement toward reforms in whip rules). What happened was terrible (and I’m not buying that it was an accident since that last strike came after he stopped riding Appeal to the City, when it became clear she was not going to do better than second, and seemed spiteful), but six months seems over the top, ineffectual, and not the answer the whip abuse.
Excellent, thanks for commenting J & T!
I have a couple of thoughts, 1) what I don’t think is ineffectual about the whole thing is that hopefully his suspension sends a VERY clear and deterring message that times have changed and the stewards are now actually paying attention. That is the opposite of ineffectual in my mind. However, my fear is that once the media scrutiny has subsided that it will be back to business as usual.
2) out of curiosity, why would 3 months seems more appropriate? I think I would be agreeing with you if it really seemed like an accident. I understand that one has to apply a certain amount of force to control an animal but the second it crosses over into spite or retribution all bets are off in my book… up yours, see you later, step off, game over. They’re professional athletes… in my mind the professional part includes controlling ones emotions.
I actually think some national standards (gasp!) should be created for suspensions off all varieties. This would mitigate suspension seeming like or actually being retributions. To be honest I haven’t been paying too much attention to the Asmussen/Dutrow situation but the are the suspension times any less arbitrary?
trainer suspensions are a joke. A guy has 22 positives in a year and he’s still training, no problem. Rose’s suspension is the result of people ’seeing’ it. If people could only see all the things that happen on a backstretch, all hell would break loose. Racing is more worried about it’s tarnished image than anything else. A guy has a lidocaine violation and he won’t serve anything near six months. He’s numbing a sore or injured horse and sending it out there with a jockey on its back to run 35 mph for a minimum of 6 furlongs. How sad is that? If that horse breaks down and is euthanized right then and there no one will say anything, and he’ll be back at the barn the next morning.
Yeah, I’ve never seen the backstretch but I can imagine that there are things that go on that I’m glad I’ve never seen.
Also, in the light of trainer suspensions being such a joke I can see why Rose’s suspension seems too long.
I should also point out for the record that my views on zero tolerance for anything cruelty related/outside of the scope of “an accident” are not a new thing. Around this time last year I said that I felt “Victor Molina should have his license revoked for kicking the horse at Philly Park. I still believe that.
I think there’s a pretty big difference between horses being on painkillers to mask injuries while racing and having an overage for a legal medication on race day, especially when the time period varies from state to state. I am no Dutrow apologist, but I think it’s likely that his most recent violation is little more than an honest mistake, similar to many others, including Pletcher’s last year. I also found compelling Dutrow’s statement in his interview today that it’s not as if his horses are running lame and breaking down—he’s got a point.
I absolutely agree that Rose is the victim of bad timing here—he made a big, big mistake at a time when racing is under scrutiny, and he’s paying the price for that scrutiny, which seems brutally unfair.
As for why I think three months is better than six—six months doesn’t accomplish anything that three doesn’t. It sends a powerful message, Rose loses significant income, racing gets to show how tough it is. Six months seems gratuitous to me.
T - I think you’ve hit on the problem exactly. 3 months seems right to you, 6 months (or more) seems right to me, who knows what seems right to anyone else… we need standards. Then no one has to be wonder what will happen to them if they cross those lines. It just seems so “wait and see, if I even get caught” right now. And then people end up feeling bad for the folks who have pay a little extra when the party’s over.
And I know this may seem vindictive, but I don’t think Rose’s suspension seems brutally unfair. A touch unfair maybe, but brutally? No way. Brutal was he did to that mare.
>>Rose is being deprived of the right to make a living for six months, and his livelihood will be affected after that, as his trainers will look elsewhere.
Jeremy Rose has not been deprived of his right to make a living for six months - he has been denied his license for six months. There are plenty of things he can do to make a dollar in the next half-year - he probably won’t be doing anything glamorous, and he probably won’t be making as much money as he was before, BUT no one has prohibited him from having a job.
If you can’t do your job right (whether it’s flipping burgers, being a jockey, or performing heart surgery) then you don’t get to continue doing that particular job (at least until you’ve shaped up). It’s just the way capitalism works.
…then you DON’T get to continue doing that particular job… whoops!
Hey Megan - I edited your first comment to make your change.
More easily said than done, Megan, especially for someone without a repertoire of other skills. In the jobs you mention, six month suspensions are hardly common—especially for a first mistake–people are not prevented from working similar jobs in other venues. Lose a job at a hospital, a restaurant, or a brokerage firm, and other firms in those industry generally don’t exclude you. This isn’t about capitalism—it’s about a paranoid industry with a spotlight on it, desperate to look like it’s listening to public perception, which is unfortunately frequently misinformed and hysterical.
I am an animal rights activist and a contributor to a variety of humane causes—animal welfare is high on my list of causes, so I am in no way excusing Rose’s actions. He deserves punishment; I just think this one is excessive.
Wow, actually Megan’s comment takes me back to a personal story I’ll share that’s along those lines.
My dad, who was a commercial airline pilot, got caught flying his girlfriend for free and passing her off as his wife (immediate family could fly for free - and no, he was not married to my mom at the time). He was suspended for a year without pay. He ended up buying a used 18 wheeler and became a truck driver for a year (he had truck driver friends so it was easy for him to get work) because in his words, “he still had bills to pay”. He went back to being a pilot for the same airlines after the suspension was up (and never snuck a lady friend on another flight!).
On the other hand, I have a friend who was a professor who was dating a (grad) student (not the brightest idea) and she ended up accusing him of sexual harrassement (which was not the case). I don’t remember the particulars but he was let go from his position and unable to find work at other universities. He didn’t rebound as well as my dad but ultimately landed on his feet after a very rocky period. It was an awful situation, and in my mind HE’s someone who paid a brutally unfair price (particularly because like many humanity professors, he really wasn’t that well equipped to do many other jobs).
My point (other than I feel like rambling)? Megan has a good point, one can always find a way to support themselves here in the good U S of A (for the most part), perhaps not as easily or to the same standard but one CAN do it. I’m all for creating appropriate support systems for people where there are needs, but I don’t apply that kind of thinking to this situation.
T - I was writing my comment at the same time (jinx!).
As I said before, I think the difference between 3 & 6 months is largely a matter personal interpretation in regards to too much/not enough.
BUT, don’t you think the same damage would be done at 3 months? And if that were the case, would you (the hypothetical you) be arguing that it was too much because his rep would have been ruined, etc?
Ok, one more thought (that may lead to a new poll!)…
Let’s say you were a owner, would you (Teresa, because you’re the only one brave enough to be actively defending the “excessive” point - or anyone else who wants to jump in!) allow Rose to ride any of your horses? I definitely would not, along with a short list of others who I consider to be excessive with the whip.
I guess I don’t feel all that bad about someone getting “weeded out” in a situation like that. Call me extreme but unless you could say that you would feel comfortable putting him on your own horse I don’t think you can call it excessive. Maybe that’s the criteria one can use to determine what they feel is excessive or not… perhaps that makes is less subjective.
Sorry, Dana, I don’t see how the two correlate. Dominguez and Prado are two other riders I think go to the whip too often, too hard and I wouldn’t want them on a horse I owned any more than I’d want Rose. I don’t think that leads though to an acceptance of a six month suspension as the right response to what happened.
With tunza respect, I disagree with Jess, especially regarding Domniguez. I can find examples of every jockey cracking away, but in the big picture—Ramon’s mostly hands. His stick isn’t nearly as fierce as our top jocks—one schmuck’s opinion. And no one gears down more, and sooner, than Ramon. And no one’s web sites look cooler, than Jess’ and Dana’s!!!
P.S. I’m going out now, for the night, so feel free to pile on the bald guitar player
J - Note that I said “Maybe that’s the criteria one can use”… not a definitive correlation, just an attempt. For me 3 months doesn’t *feel* like enough, but as I said before I probably have more extreme views than most players. Also, I don’t have a real sense of what “seems inline” based on prior suspensions, if that’s part of what one uses to determine what they thinks seems right.
I agree that handing out large suspensions is not the only answer, there’s got be real reform and like I said here, the recommendations from the jockey club didn’t feel like real reform to me.
E - we’re all schmucks with opinions! I think that’s a good thing.
Running late–fumigating Jelly Roll…but I agree with Jess about the length of suspension. Wolfendale knows Rose better than we do.
With a gun to your head, would you say Rose was REALLY trying to hi the filly in the eye? Why in Slew’s name would he want to do that??
OK, really have to run now. And haven’t read everyone’s comments so I could be misinformed way outta line gotta run catch ya tomorrow bye!
“Running late–fumigating Jelly Roll” - LOL
“With a gun to your head, would you say Rose was REALLY trying to hi the filly in the eye? ”
Trying specifically to hit her in the eye? My guess is no. Lashing out inappropriately? Looks like it to me.
The eye isn’t the factor what makes X period of time “seem” appropriate to me, it’s the lashing out part… but I’m not doling out suspensions, just commenting on a blog ;)
Let’s face the facts here “head on” like the replay. This was a horse race, for money. Jeremy Rose is a hired gun to go out and bring back the dough. I have been around race riders the last 37 years of my life and the majority of them are not big horse lovers. This is a job for these human athletes and after being thrown, kicked, bitten and generally muscled around by these majestic thoroughbred creatures some less patient jocks tend to over react. Jeremy is guilty of getting caught and shame on he. Animal abuse of any kind is intolerable and retribution must be made to right the scales of universal justice. Six months, no income and a less than stellar reputation upon any return to race riding. Anyone with race track experience knows the old addage ” out of sight out of mind ” is never truer than that of an absent jockey. Upon his return I doubt very much his agent will have a full book for several months if ever again. The mounts Rose was attached to will disperse to other capable less agressive handlers and Jeremy will be starting all over again from scratch. Let’s not crucify Jeremy Rose for this infraction but let’s rehabilitate him so upon his return he is less inclined to use the whip for purposes other than encouragement and guidance. It is regretfull that some of the great riders from the past also used some of these brutal tactics and were never taken to task the way Jeremy Rose has been. I will state unequivocally that I am pro horse but also recognize the financial aspect of race riding for the riders involved and their families.
Ken - thanks for the comment. funny that you mention “out of sight out of mind”, I was wondering if it could actually work in his favor in that by the time he gets back it really won’t be fresh in anyone’s mind. only time will tell + he will always have his rep as Afleet Alex’s rider.
I’m wondering what you would propose when you say “but let’s rehabilitate him so upon his return he is less inclined to use the whip for purposes other than encouragement and guidance”.
I completely agree with that sentiment in spirit but think it’s unlikely unless someone takes it upon themselves to do it, not from the perspective of Jeremy Rose personally but from a process perspective. could there be a process put in place to ensure a rehabilitation. I love the concept, but think it sounds impractical (but this is why I’m asking, because maybe it’s not).
also, I’m a little uneasy with the ‘and their families’ aspect of your last statement. only because it seems to be inching slowly towards a very slippery slope of people with families not being held AS accountable for their actions because of the impact on their families. I know that’s not what you said, at ALL, but it just struck me that I would never want to see someone with a family penalized less than someone who did not… it should not be a factor.
this one of the reasons why I wish there were clear, national standards on penalties of all kinds, to help eliminate the gray areas.
thx again for commenting…