Jim Best - Suspended for 6 months

[BillyHills]

Trainer Jim Best got a 6 month suspension yesterday after being found guilty of stopping two horses last year. Originally he received a 4-year ban when this case came to court for the first time.

What do you think of his penalty?

It seems very lenient to me and probably sends out a message that it's worth having a go at breaking the rules. While suspended it doesn't stop Best attending race meetings, speaking to anyone in the profession or even watching over his own yard. 

The amounts of money these people can make laying and backing horses that they know have been stopped is unknown but i can imagine its worth doing if the risk is only a few months on the sidelines.

On the other side of the coin the so called experts are saying that the original 4-year ban was just ridiculous in the first place and way too harsh for the crime committed. Maybe the difference between the two is the surprising element here? 

Personally i always treated Jim Best's horses with caution anyway, i don't know what it was about them but i could never get a proper handle on their form so in the main left them alone. I used to know someone who had horses with him and all i will say is they liked a good gamble, when the time was right!

Any thoughts?

[Trotter]

I suppose they might have taken into consideration the fact that he's been under a cloud for a long time as a result of the first botched up 'trial' and has probably suffered in the meantime as to attracting new owners etc

So in a sense he's already served a punishment and that might be reflected in the more lenient 'official' punishment this time round