R Te Aroha 18 July 2018 – R 9 – Chair, Mr A Dooley
ID: JCA13484
Code:
Thoroughbred
Meet Title:
Racing Te Aroha - 18 July 2018
Meet Chair:
ADooley
Meet Committee Member 1:
GJones
Race Date:
2018/07/18
Race Number:
R9
Decision:
For the reasons detailed above we find the charge against Mr McKay proved.
Penalty:
The Committee grants a deferment to Mr McKay’s suspension pursuant to Rule 1106(2).
Accordingly, the Committee suspended Mr McKay’s license to ride in races for the period to commence after racing on 21 July and conclude after racing on 2 August 2018.
The July 22 race meeting at Oamaru was not included in the penalty because the declaration of riders had closed.
Facts:
Following the running of race 9, Te Aroha Supporters Club 1400, an Information was filed pursuant to Rule 638(1)(d). The Informant, Mr Jones, alleged that Mr McKay permitted his mount PACO LAD to shift inwards shortly after the start when not sufficiently clear of ARGYLL which was forced inwards crowding ANSWER BACK and MOUNT MIDORIYAMA which was checked approaching the 1300 metres.
Rule 638(1) (d) provides: A Rider shall not ride a horse in a manner which the Judicial Committee considers to be careless.
Mr McKay denied the breach and acknowledged that he understood the Rule and the nature of the charge.
Submissions for Decision:
Mr Oatham demonstrated the alleged incident using the available video films. He pointed out all the horses involved in the incident prior to the starting stalls opening. He said when the stalls opened it was a “messy” start with PACO LAD jumping outwards from stall 11 and ARGYLL jumping inwards from stall 10.
Mr Oatham said the charge relates to an incident shortly after the start. He identified that Mr McKay had his horse's head turned in on an angle and rode his mount forward when ¾ of a length in front of ARGYLL. He said this required Mr Goindasamy to take a hold of ARGYLL because Mr McKay moved in on too sharp an angle when not the required distance clear. He said that ARGYLL was forced inwards crowding ANSWER BACK which in turn checked MOUNT MIDORIYAMA. He said that Mr McKay's mount was green and he simply misjudged his manoeuvre. Lastly, Mr Oatham demonstrated on the side on film that the check that MOUNT MIDORIYAMA received was very apparent.
Mr McKay did not wish to cross examine Mr Oatham’s evidence.
In response to a question from the Committee, Mr McKay said that he accepted Mr Oatham’s interpretation of the alleged incident.
Mr Jones called Ms Collett, the rider of MOUNT MIDORIYAMA as a witness. She said that she received a little bit of interference from her outside and that horse was ANSWER BACK.
Under cross examination from Mr McKay, Ms Collett stated that the she did not lose her position and she ended up winning the race.
Under re-examination by Mr Jones, Ms Collett confirmed that she did have to take a hold of her mount.
Mr Jones called Ms Newman, the rider of ANSWER BACK as a witness and she was assisted at the hearing by Apprentice Jockey Mentor, Mr N Harris. Ms Newman stated that she suffered some interference from her outside. She confirmed that ARGYLL was racing on her outside.
Under cross examination from Mr McKay, Ms Newman said that she didn’t think she lost much ground from the interference.
Under re-examination by Mr Jones, Ms Newman confirmed that she did have to take a hold of her mount.
Mr Jones called Mr Goindasamy, the rider of ARGYLL as a witness and he was assisted at the hearing by Apprentice Jockey Mentor, Mr N Harris. Mr Goindasamy said that he received pressure from his outside when Mr McKay shifted in when about ¾ of a length clear of him.
Under cross examination from Mr McKay, Mr Goindasamy said that ARGYLL just wanted to run fast and neither confirmed or denied that his mount was racing ungenerously.
Mr McKay was then given the opportunity to present his case and he used the available video films. He identified that when the gates opened his mount jumped outwards and he said he pushed forward to get the horse balanced. He said some runners were cramped for room at the start and when he moved forward he thought he was going to be 1 length in front of ARGYLL. He said his mount was green and the horse laid in. He added that PACO LAD was not an easy ride for the first 50 metres of the race. He pointed out on the head on film that ARGYLL was racing keen and he never made contact with that runner. In conclusion Mr McKay said that his mount was green and he was doing his best.
In summing up Mr Jones said that the Stewards believed the angle in which Mr McKay shifted in was careless and he was 2 to 3 strides too slow in taking any corrective action. He said the Stewards accept that there were some mitigating factors in the incident.
In summing up Mr McKay reiterated that he had done his best to go straight and he made no contact with ARGYLL. He added that ARGYLL was racing ungenerously and it was that runner that made contact with the horses racing to his inside.
Reasons for Decision:
The Committee carefully considered all the evidence and submissions presented and studied the video films of the alleged incident. It was evident that when the starting stalls opened several horses jumped away awkwardly but no fault was attributed to any one horse or rider.
The charge filed against Mr McKay relates to an alleged incident that happened shortly after the start. It was evident on the films that approximately 50 metres after the start Mr McKay (barrier 11) angled his mount in when no more than 1 length clear of ARGYLL. As a result Mr McKay took the rightful running line of ARGYLL which was forced inwards onto ANSWER BACK making solid contact with that runner. As a consequence of the inward shift it was obvious to see on the side on film that MOUNT MIDORIYAMA was also checked losing ground.
The Committee note that “interference” is defined as: a horse crossing another horse without being at least its own length and one other clear length in front of such other horse at the time of crossing.
In our opinion the video evidence was compelling. It was evident to the Committee that due to Mr McKay’s carelessness when crossing the field, he was not the required distance clear of ARGYLL and he failed to take reasonable steps to avoid causing interference to 3 horses that were racing to his inside.
Submissions for Penalty:
Mr Jones produced Mr McKay’s record which showed no previous breaches under this Rule in the last 12 months. He said Mr McKay should be given great credit for his record and in mitigation the horses were green. He described the level of carelessness as low to mid-range and submitted a suspension in line with that would be appropriate.
Mr McKay advised that he had firm commitments up to and including 21 July and any proposed suspension could start after that date. He said that he had a very good record.
Reasons for Penalty:
The Committee carefully considered all the evidence and submissions presented.
The Committee after reviewing the video films, as detailed above, deemed the level of carelessness displayed by Mr McKay to be low to mid-range. The inward shift was low range but the consequential effects to 3 runners was mid-range.
The JCA Penalty Guide starting point for a low to mid-range breach is 7 national days which was adopted.
There can be no discount applied for admission of the breach however, similarly we apply no uplift for the fact that the charge was defended, as that is Mr McKay’s right.
The NZTR records show that Mr McKay has had 531 rides to date this season therefore his record under this Rule is excellent and worthy of a 1 day discount in the penalty.
After taking into account all the above factors the Committee considered that an appropriate suspension was 6 national riding days.
JCA Decision Fields (raw)
Dmitry: This section contains all JCA fields migrated from the raw data.
Data from these fields should be mapped appropriately to display amongst the standard fields above; please make note of any values below that are missing in the above standard fields but should be there.
hearingid: 3c871202375e83e87533643181a67b60
informantnumber: A09655
horsename:
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge: Careless Riding
plea: denied
penaltyrequired: 1
decisiondate: 19/07/2018
hearing_title: R Te Aroha 18 July 2018 - R 9 - Chair, Mr A Dooley
charge:
facts:
Following the running of race 9, Te Aroha Supporters Club 1400, an Information was filed pursuant to Rule 638(1)(d). The Informant, Mr Jones, alleged that Mr McKay permitted his mount PACO LAD to shift inwards shortly after the start when not sufficiently clear of ARGYLL which was forced inwards crowding ANSWER BACK and MOUNT MIDORIYAMA which was checked approaching the 1300 metres.
Rule 638(1) (d) provides: A Rider shall not ride a horse in a manner which the Judicial Committee considers to be careless.
Mr McKay denied the breach and acknowledged that he understood the Rule and the nature of the charge.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
Mr Oatham demonstrated the alleged incident using the available video films. He pointed out all the horses involved in the incident prior to the starting stalls opening. He said when the stalls opened it was a “messy” start with PACO LAD jumping outwards from stall 11 and ARGYLL jumping inwards from stall 10.
Mr Oatham said the charge relates to an incident shortly after the start. He identified that Mr McKay had his horse's head turned in on an angle and rode his mount forward when ¾ of a length in front of ARGYLL. He said this required Mr Goindasamy to take a hold of ARGYLL because Mr McKay moved in on too sharp an angle when not the required distance clear. He said that ARGYLL was forced inwards crowding ANSWER BACK which in turn checked MOUNT MIDORIYAMA. He said that Mr McKay's mount was green and he simply misjudged his manoeuvre. Lastly, Mr Oatham demonstrated on the side on film that the check that MOUNT MIDORIYAMA received was very apparent.
Mr McKay did not wish to cross examine Mr Oatham’s evidence.
In response to a question from the Committee, Mr McKay said that he accepted Mr Oatham’s interpretation of the alleged incident.
Mr Jones called Ms Collett, the rider of MOUNT MIDORIYAMA as a witness. She said that she received a little bit of interference from her outside and that horse was ANSWER BACK.
Under cross examination from Mr McKay, Ms Collett stated that the she did not lose her position and she ended up winning the race.
Under re-examination by Mr Jones, Ms Collett confirmed that she did have to take a hold of her mount.
Mr Jones called Ms Newman, the rider of ANSWER BACK as a witness and she was assisted at the hearing by Apprentice Jockey Mentor, Mr N Harris. Ms Newman stated that she suffered some interference from her outside. She confirmed that ARGYLL was racing on her outside.
Under cross examination from Mr McKay, Ms Newman said that she didn’t think she lost much ground from the interference.
Under re-examination by Mr Jones, Ms Newman confirmed that she did have to take a hold of her mount.
Mr Jones called Mr Goindasamy, the rider of ARGYLL as a witness and he was assisted at the hearing by Apprentice Jockey Mentor, Mr N Harris. Mr Goindasamy said that he received pressure from his outside when Mr McKay shifted in when about ¾ of a length clear of him.
Under cross examination from Mr McKay, Mr Goindasamy said that ARGYLL just wanted to run fast and neither confirmed or denied that his mount was racing ungenerously.
Mr McKay was then given the opportunity to present his case and he used the available video films. He identified that when the gates opened his mount jumped outwards and he said he pushed forward to get the horse balanced. He said some runners were cramped for room at the start and when he moved forward he thought he was going to be 1 length in front of ARGYLL. He said his mount was green and the horse laid in. He added that PACO LAD was not an easy ride for the first 50 metres of the race. He pointed out on the head on film that ARGYLL was racing keen and he never made contact with that runner. In conclusion Mr McKay said that his mount was green and he was doing his best.
In summing up Mr Jones said that the Stewards believed the angle in which Mr McKay shifted in was careless and he was 2 to 3 strides too slow in taking any corrective action. He said the Stewards accept that there were some mitigating factors in the incident.
In summing up Mr McKay reiterated that he had done his best to go straight and he made no contact with ARGYLL. He added that ARGYLL was racing ungenerously and it was that runner that made contact with the horses racing to his inside.
reasonsfordecision:
The Committee carefully considered all the evidence and submissions presented and studied the video films of the alleged incident. It was evident that when the starting stalls opened several horses jumped away awkwardly but no fault was attributed to any one horse or rider.
The charge filed against Mr McKay relates to an alleged incident that happened shortly after the start. It was evident on the films that approximately 50 metres after the start Mr McKay (barrier 11) angled his mount in when no more than 1 length clear of ARGYLL. As a result Mr McKay took the rightful running line of ARGYLL which was forced inwards onto ANSWER BACK making solid contact with that runner. As a consequence of the inward shift it was obvious to see on the side on film that MOUNT MIDORIYAMA was also checked losing ground.
The Committee note that “interference” is defined as: a horse crossing another horse without being at least its own length and one other clear length in front of such other horse at the time of crossing.
In our opinion the video evidence was compelling. It was evident to the Committee that due to Mr McKay’s carelessness when crossing the field, he was not the required distance clear of ARGYLL and he failed to take reasonable steps to avoid causing interference to 3 horses that were racing to his inside.
Decision:
For the reasons detailed above we find the charge against Mr McKay proved.
sumissionsforpenalty:
Mr Jones produced Mr McKay’s record which showed no previous breaches under this Rule in the last 12 months. He said Mr McKay should be given great credit for his record and in mitigation the horses were green. He described the level of carelessness as low to mid-range and submitted a suspension in line with that would be appropriate.
Mr McKay advised that he had firm commitments up to and including 21 July and any proposed suspension could start after that date. He said that he had a very good record.
reasonsforpenalty:
The Committee carefully considered all the evidence and submissions presented.
The Committee after reviewing the video films, as detailed above, deemed the level of carelessness displayed by Mr McKay to be low to mid-range. The inward shift was low range but the consequential effects to 3 runners was mid-range.
The JCA Penalty Guide starting point for a low to mid-range breach is 7 national days which was adopted.
There can be no discount applied for admission of the breach however, similarly we apply no uplift for the fact that the charge was defended, as that is Mr McKay’s right.
The NZTR records show that Mr McKay has had 531 rides to date this season therefore his record under this Rule is excellent and worthy of a 1 day discount in the penalty.
After taking into account all the above factors the Committee considered that an appropriate suspension was 6 national riding days.
penalty:
The Committee grants a deferment to Mr McKay’s suspension pursuant to Rule 1106(2).
Accordingly, the Committee suspended Mr McKay’s license to ride in races for the period to commence after racing on 21 July and conclude after racing on 2 August 2018.
The July 22 race meeting at Oamaru was not included in the penalty because the declaration of riders had closed.
hearing_type: Hearing
Rules: 638(1)(d)
Informant: Mr B Jones - Stipendiary Steward
JockeysandTrainer: Mr S McKay - Class A Rider of PACO LAD
Otherperson: Mr N Harris - Apprentice Jockey Mentor, Ms T Newman - Apprentice Rider of ANSWER BACK, Mr A Goindasamy - Apprentice Rider of ARGYLL, Ms S Collett - Rider of MOUNT MIDORIYAMA, Mr J Oatham - Chief Stipendiary Steward
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: 1e9eaeffdda74ad911ae1b01a353d1e5
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: R9
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: b16fa85fa0007d3b02b8722bae216480
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 18/07/2018
meet_title: Racing Te Aroha - 18 July 2018
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: racing-te-aroha
meet_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
meet_chair: ADooley
meet_pm1: GJones
meet_pm2: none
name: Racing Te Aroha