Canterbury JC 25 May 2012 – R 4
ID: JCA13694
Code:
Thoroughbred
Meet Title:
Canterbury Racing - 25 May 2012
Meet Chair:
JMillar
Meet Committee Member 1:
KHales
Race Date:
2012/05/25
Race Number:
R 4
Decision:
Not proved.
Charge:
Failed to ride his mount out fully to the finish.
Facts:
Stipendiary Steward Mr A Ray filed an information against Licensed Jockey Mr L Robinson alleging a breach of Rule 636 (1) (c). It was alleged that Mr Robinson, riding “Crumb” (1) which started in Race 4, The Berkley Stud Fillies For Lease Haldon Plate Rating 75, failed to ride his mount out fully to the finish.
The Charge reads as follows:
“Failed to ride his mount fully to the finish being beaten 0.1 metre for 5th placing. 5th placing carried prize money of $250.00”
Rule 636 (1) (c) reads as follows:
“being the rider of a horse in a race, must ride his horse out to the end of the Race if there is a reasonable chance of it running into a position for which there is prize money to be awarded or a dividend to be declared”
Mr Robinson had recorded on the information this breach of the Rules was not admitted. He confirmed at the hearing he understood the charge, the rule and confirmed he did not admit the breach.
Submissions for Decision:
Mr Ray gave evidence that Mr Robinson had stopped riding his mount out, 50 metres from the finish of the race. This was illustrated by Stipendiary Steward Mr J McLaughlin by use of race video. It was evident from the video that Mr Robinson had stopped using the whip just past the 50 metre mark, changed his whip into his left hand and appeared not to ride with any vigour for the rest of the race.
Mr McLaughlin gave evidence the margin between Mr Robinson’s mount, which finished 6th, and the 5th placed horse, “Our Premonition”, at the finish was 0.1 metre. (Equivalent of approximately a nose).
Mr Rae gave evidence that stake money totalling $250.00 was payable to the 5th placed horse.
Mr Robinson, with the assistance of the race video, gave evidence his mount, “Crumb” was dead on his feet immediately before the 50 metre mark. He had begun to “lug in” badly and was resenting the use of the whip. Before putting the whip away the horse was under a hard ride and not giving anything. He stated he was aware of the horse (“Our Premonition”) on his outside which was going away from him. As a last resort to stay competitive he had put the whip away and tried to “push him over the line”. He had elected to go back to the reins, put the whip away and “punch” at the horse with his left hand in the area of the horse's neck. From the 50 metre mark the horse had straightened as a result of the revised tactics and improved to the line.
Mr Robinson with the aid of the race video illustrated how the horse was “lugging”, resenting the use of the whip, and losing advantage while under the whip.
Mr Ray conceded that “Crumb” had been a difficult ride but that the horse had improved from the 200 metre mark to where Mr Robinson had stopped riding with the whip. While the Stewards did not encourage excessive use of the whip, riders were at least expected to ride hands and heels. It was not possible to confirm or otherwise Mr Robinson's contention that he had pushed at the horse on its left.
Reasons for Decision:
From viewing the race video it was obvious Mr Ray’s concerns were warranted as it appeared Mr Robinson had simply stopped riding the horse out while still in contention. It was also evident the margin between 5th and 6th placing at the finish was small. If the horse had so narrowly missed being placed in a dividend bearing place, the betting public would be left with a bad impression. The horse’s connections may have also been initially concerned, but if so, may well have been persuaded otherwise from the following evidence.
It was particularly evident from the race video and Mr Robinson’s evidence, that “Crumb” began to “lug” progressively badly leading up to the 50 metre mark. Mr Robinson gave evidence that he did not elect to continue to use the whip unnecessarily, particularly when he believed the horse was “dead on its feet”. His revised tactic being to swap his whip to his left hand, go back to the reins and push at the neck of the horse, on the left side in an effort to straighten the horse and ride it out. It was not possible by use of race video to confirm or otherwise this course of action. We were however prepared to accept Mr Robinson’s evidence to this effect.
Mr Robinson appeared to show a lack of vigour on the race video. However the panel concluded that much of Mr Robinson’s evidence was supported by the “head on” race video, and was persuasive. While it was a finely balanced decision Mr Robinson should be given the benefit of the doubt. Accordingly we found the charge “Not Proved”.
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: 593efecbbdc6b07d8ab76a369bf6a703
informantnumber: A5652
horsename:
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea: denied
penaltyrequired: 0
decisiondate: 24/05/2012
hearing_title: Canterbury JC 25 May 2012 - R 4
charge:
Failed to ride his mount out fully to the finish.
facts:
Stipendiary Steward Mr A Ray filed an information against Licensed Jockey Mr L Robinson alleging a breach of Rule 636 (1) (c). It was alleged that Mr Robinson, riding “Crumb” (1) which started in Race 4, The Berkley Stud Fillies For Lease Haldon Plate Rating 75, failed to ride his mount out fully to the finish.
The Charge reads as follows:
“Failed to ride his mount fully to the finish being beaten 0.1 metre for 5th placing. 5th placing carried prize money of $250.00”
Rule 636 (1) (c) reads as follows:
“being the rider of a horse in a race, must ride his horse out to the end of the Race if there is a reasonable chance of it running into a position for which there is prize money to be awarded or a dividend to be declared”
Mr Robinson had recorded on the information this breach of the Rules was not admitted. He confirmed at the hearing he understood the charge, the rule and confirmed he did not admit the breach.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
Mr Ray gave evidence that Mr Robinson had stopped riding his mount out, 50 metres from the finish of the race. This was illustrated by Stipendiary Steward Mr J McLaughlin by use of race video. It was evident from the video that Mr Robinson had stopped using the whip just past the 50 metre mark, changed his whip into his left hand and appeared not to ride with any vigour for the rest of the race.
Mr McLaughlin gave evidence the margin between Mr Robinson’s mount, which finished 6th, and the 5th placed horse, “Our Premonition”, at the finish was 0.1 metre. (Equivalent of approximately a nose).
Mr Rae gave evidence that stake money totalling $250.00 was payable to the 5th placed horse.
Mr Robinson, with the assistance of the race video, gave evidence his mount, “Crumb” was dead on his feet immediately before the 50 metre mark. He had begun to “lug in” badly and was resenting the use of the whip. Before putting the whip away the horse was under a hard ride and not giving anything. He stated he was aware of the horse (“Our Premonition”) on his outside which was going away from him. As a last resort to stay competitive he had put the whip away and tried to “push him over the line”. He had elected to go back to the reins, put the whip away and “punch” at the horse with his left hand in the area of the horse's neck. From the 50 metre mark the horse had straightened as a result of the revised tactics and improved to the line.
Mr Robinson with the aid of the race video illustrated how the horse was “lugging”, resenting the use of the whip, and losing advantage while under the whip.
Mr Ray conceded that “Crumb” had been a difficult ride but that the horse had improved from the 200 metre mark to where Mr Robinson had stopped riding with the whip. While the Stewards did not encourage excessive use of the whip, riders were at least expected to ride hands and heels. It was not possible to confirm or otherwise Mr Robinson's contention that he had pushed at the horse on its left.
reasonsfordecision:
From viewing the race video it was obvious Mr Ray’s concerns were warranted as it appeared Mr Robinson had simply stopped riding the horse out while still in contention. It was also evident the margin between 5th and 6th placing at the finish was small. If the horse had so narrowly missed being placed in a dividend bearing place, the betting public would be left with a bad impression. The horse’s connections may have also been initially concerned, but if so, may well have been persuaded otherwise from the following evidence.
It was particularly evident from the race video and Mr Robinson’s evidence, that “Crumb” began to “lug” progressively badly leading up to the 50 metre mark. Mr Robinson gave evidence that he did not elect to continue to use the whip unnecessarily, particularly when he believed the horse was “dead on its feet”. His revised tactic being to swap his whip to his left hand, go back to the reins and push at the neck of the horse, on the left side in an effort to straighten the horse and ride it out. It was not possible by use of race video to confirm or otherwise this course of action. We were however prepared to accept Mr Robinson’s evidence to this effect.
Mr Robinson appeared to show a lack of vigour on the race video. However the panel concluded that much of Mr Robinson’s evidence was supported by the “head on” race video, and was persuasive. While it was a finely balanced decision Mr Robinson should be given the benefit of the doubt. Accordingly we found the charge “Not Proved”.
Decision:
Not proved.
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Hearing
Rules: 636(1)(c)
Informant: Mr A Ray - Stipendiary Steward
JockeysandTrainer: Mr L Robinson - Licensed Jockey
Otherperson:
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: e8656d803fc05d4ffde2fba04991324d
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: R 4
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: f22ff0ddc12fb4cfb8e04491f7d43d6c
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 25/05/2012
meet_title: Canterbury Racing - 25 May 2012
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: canterbury-racing
meet_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
meet_chair: JMillar
meet_pm1: KHales
meet_pm2: none
name: Canterbury Racing