THE WRONG CALL

Kentucky Derby DQ is a bad look for a struggling sport

Getty Images

Saturday's Kentucky Derby will not be remembered for being a great race, or a horse that did something spectacular.

It will be remembered for a controversial disqualification that not only changed the outcome but also stained America's greatest horse race.

Maximum Security finished first but was disqualified and Country House was gifted the win. Maximum Security was placed 17th, while Code of Honor was placed second and Tacitus third.

Maximum Security was gritty, leading all the way and fighting off several challengers along the way. But the problem came near the top of the stretch, where he drifted out, impeding War of Will and Long Range Toddy slightly. The stewards judged it to be serious enough to warrant the first disqualification for interference in the history of the Derby.

Quite simply, it was a bad call.

Did he interfere? Yes. Did it change the outcome of the race? No. And that should always be the standard. You could argue Long Range Toddy came in as well to help sandwich War of Will. While War of Will did slow down, he had ample opportunity to win after that. He just was not good enough.

The chief steward issued a long and rambling statement that defended their actions. She did not answer questions. Transparency be damned.

The decision put a horse that was not impacted and in fact outrun by the winner in the stretch up to first. He was not close to being the best horse in the race.


Poor decision

The Kentucky Derby is roughly run every year. Much like you can call holding on every play in the NFL, you could DQ a horse each year in the Derby. A 20-horse field (19) this year is never going to get you a clean race.

So why this one?

The official stance from Chief State Steward Barbara Borden.: "We had a lengthy review of the race, we interviewed affected riders and we determined the 7 horse (Maximum Security) drifted out and impacted the progress of No. 1 (War of Will), in turn interfering with the 18 (Long Range Todd) and 21 (Bodexpress). Those horses were all affected, we thought, by the interference, and therefore we unanimously determined to disqualify No. 7 and place him behind No. 18."

The second, third and fourth place finishers were not impacted at all. That three stewards determined it changed the outcome is somewhat bizarre.

The big problem is what is a disqualification in Kentucky might not be one in California or New York. Each jurisdiction is different and consistency is right out the window. In 2014, a horse called Bayern took out half the field at the start of the Breeders' Cup Classic. It was much more egregious than this. Yet no DQ. As a fan, how are we supposed to know what is a foul and what is not? Things like this are driving people like me from the sport.

In 30-plus years covering the sport, I have seen countless DQs. Some helped me. Some hurt. This one actually benefitted me since I had a show bet on Tacitus. But I would rather they get it right. Racing has been taking hits for years, and this year's deaths at Santa Anita have contributed. To add on a controversial decision in the biggest race? It's a bad look. We should be talking about Maximum Security as a potential Triple Crown winner. Instead we are talking about a human decision.

And a bad one.

Looking ahead

The Preakness will be in two weeks, and one thing we can probably count on is the "winner" will not be the favorite in Baltimore. The field is far from set, so it will be interesting to see what happens. Of the horses we liked, Tacitus was a solid third, and with a little more room could have been right there. Game Winner was way too far back early, made a wide late run but did not have enough left. If he runs in Baltimore, expect a better effort.

Hopefully the Preakness will give us a fair race, decided on the track.

Most Popular

SportsMap Emails
Are Awesome

Listen Live

RAVENS 33, TEXANS 16

5 observations from the Ravens win over the Texans

Getty Images

Let's be honest; the Texans were not going to beat the Ravens. Baltimore has better players, a better quarterback and a better coaching staff. (And oh, a better kicker). All of that was on display in the Ravens' 33-16 win.

The Ravens move to 2-0, while the Texans dropped to 0-2 after facing the AFC's two best teams.

The Texans will still likely contend for a playoff spot, but nothing the last two weeks indicates they are anywhere near contending in the AFC. A look at five things from the Ravens win:

1) Oh, Brien...It did not take long for Bill O'Brien's goofy coaching to rear its ugly head. Down 3-0 at their own 34 as the first quarter was running out, O'Brien chose to go for it on fourth and one. The play was predictably blown up, the Ravens quickly scored to make it 10-0, and the Texans were instantly in a hole against a superior opponent. You can't give points away against the Ravens. They might have scored anyway with a punt, but there was no stopping them with a short field.

2) Some positives on defense. Despite the score, The Texans looked much better on that side of the ball against an explosive offense. J.J. Watt had two sacks, the team had four total, and they kept Lamar Jackson from destroying them. Seven of the points were scored by the Ravens defense, and O'Brien's gaffe led to seven more. The Ravens wore them down in the fourth quarter, but they played well enough until then to keep the team in the game had the offense been better. They did not force any turnovers, however, and that was one of the differences in the game. They were also blown off the ball on a fourth and one in the fourth quarter that led to the Ravens' 30th points and could not stop the run at all in the fourth quarter. But that's what the Ravens do with a lead, and the Texans offense gave them no breaks by being unable to stay on the field.

3) The difference between real contenders...The Ravens were just so much more skilled on both sides of the ball. Defensively, they focused on taking away the run. David Johnson averaged 3.1 yards per carry. Will Fuller had as many catches as you did. The Ravens forced two turnovers on just really good football plays. The Texans don't make plays like that. They might against lesser teams, but if your goal is to compete with the best, it's just not good enough.

4) Deshaun Watson needs to be better. His numbers looked so so on the surface (25 of 36, 275 yards, 1 TD, 1 interception). He was sacked four times and added 17 rushing yards on five carries. He did not make plays late when they needed one here or there to maybe get back in the game. With his big contract, it's time for Watson to stop being close to elite and take the next step. His interception was more of being fooled by Marcus Peters than throwing a bad ball, but the Texans were just 3 of 9 on third downs. Throw in the ill-advised fourth down play, and they were just 3 of 10 extending drives. Give the Ravens a lot of credit, but again, to compete with the best, you have to be better than that.

5) Now what? The Texans travel to Pittsburgh to take on the Steelers, who have not been impressive in their two wins. Still, it's hard to see Houston as anything but serious underdogs. They are last in the AFC South, and have a lot of work to do. The defense showed some promise at times, but will have to continue to improve. The offense has a long way to go. They match up better with the Steelers than they do the Ravens and Chiefs, but that does not mean they can win. If you were hoping they would give you some indication they can be more than just also-rans, they failed to do that on any level against either the Chiefs or Ravens.

SportsMap Emails
Are Awesome