Nobody asked but …
I don’t even want to hear my opinion on the outcome of the Kentucky Derby, but here it is anyway. There are rules for voluntary participation. And sometimes the rules may be misapplied. But the basic rules of voluntary behavior are 1) end it, and 2) move on. Nobody wants to recontend the Derby, except those who have direct skin in the game.
There was a bump, apparently, and the lead horse was involved. Why have a voluntary rule prohibiting bumps, but then disregard it based on the feelings of the majority? Why have replay, if you can’t review it, and rely on the officials to interpret the rules to make the call in a reasonable time (it might be noted that the time involved may have been unreasonably stretched)?
We are in a newer world where detailed, multiple angled replays are available, in most sports. Some people think this means that the findings are open to debate and determination by clamorous democracy. What is it that they don’t understand about their explicit and implicit risk of not liking the outcome?
— Kilgore Forelle