Auckland TC 12 May 2017 – R 6 – Chair, Mr B Scott
ID: JCA17525
Meet Title:
Auckland TC - 12 May 2017
Meet Chair:
BScott
Meet Committee Member 1:
GJones
Race Date:
2017/05/12
Race Number:
R 6
Decision:
The Charge is dismissed.
Facts:
After the running of the DAYAVEG MOBILE PACE an Information was lodged by Stipendiary Steward Mr JM Muirhead against Open Horseman Mr P Ferguson alleging that as the driver of RUNCLE he drove in a manner that caused interference to OKLAHOMA THUNDER when shifting ground outwards near the 600 metres mark.
Rule 869(4) states: No horseman shall during any race do anything which interferes or is likely to interfere with his own horse and/or any other horse or its progress.
Mr Ferguson was present at the Hearing and he advised the Committee that he did not admit the breach.
Mr Muirhead gave evidence and also demonstrated the incident by use of the race films. He said that RUNCLE was in the one/one near the 600 metres mark and at that stage Mr MacKinnon was improving on his outside. Mr Ferguson shifted from two wide to three wide and in doing so Mr Ferguson's outside sulky wheel was on the inside of Mr MacKinnon's inside sulky wheel. The off hind leg of OKLAHOMA THUNDER struck the mud-guard on Mr Ferguson's wheel and as a result OKLAHOMA THUNDER broke.
Mr Muirhead said that Mr Ferguson had a responsibility when shifting ground to do so safely. He did say that Mr Ferguson was unlucky in this instance.
Mr Muirhead said that Mr MacKinnon was improving at a good rate but his horse was going straight. He said that Mr MacKinnon tried to move out but it was too late.
Mr Ferguson said that he did not want to cross examine Mr Muirhead.
Mr MacKinnon gave evidence and he said he thought his horse had broken free of interference. He then said that having seen the films he could see that Mr Ferguson had moved him wider on the track and with the outwards movement his horse had swung its hind leg out and this had connected with the mudguard on Mr Ferguson's wheel. He did say that prior to the incident his horse was travelling fine.
In answer to cross-examination from Mr Ferguson he acknowledged that Mr Ferguson's movement was not abrupt. He also acknowledged that similar movements happen in many races.
He said that as Mr Ferguson came out he turned his horse's head out and its hind leg made contact with the mudguard. He did say that his horse has "a big action behind".
There was no re-examination by Mr Muirhead.
Mr Ferguson then gave evidence and said that when he moved out it was steadily and appropriately and well within the Rules. He said it was not an abrupt action. He also said that Mr MacKinnon had an obligation to move out as well but he did not do so. He said that Mr Muirhead in his evidence had said that Mr MacKinnon's horse had run straight.
Mr Muirhead by way of cross examination asked Mr Ferguson if he agreed that when shifting out a Driver has to do so safely. Mr Ferguson acknowledged that but repeated that his was not an abrupt movement and as far as he was concerned it was done safely.
He then said that the response by Mr MacKinnon was not much and he could have done better.
Submissions for Decision:
Mr Muirhead submitted that the outwards movement by Mr Ferguson caused Mr MacKinnon's horse to break.
Mr Ferguson said that there was an unwritten rule that when the inside horse moves out then the outside horse has to move as well. He said that he did not accept that he caused Mr MacKinnon's horse to break.
Reasons for Decision:
The Committee listened to the evidence from the parties and we have viewed the films several times.
We find that when Mr Ferguson moved out it was not an abrupt movement and it was an appropriate movement. Mr MacKinnon should have expected movement from the inside horse as he moved forward and there was an obligation on him to move also. Mr MacKinnon was slow to react and Mr Ferguson is not responsible for that.
Mr Muirhead tells us that Mr Ferguson has obligations as a Driver in a race but so too does Mr MacKinnon.
In our view Mr Ferguson drove as any prudent driver would and as far as this Committee is concerned there was not the level of carelessness that would justify upholding the charge and accordingly we dismiss it.
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: ed80a6c67b53d7f83119f1ecfbad9c1c
informantnumber: A9113
horsename:
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge: Causing interference
plea: denied
penaltyrequired: 0
decisiondate: 15/05/2017
hearing_title: Auckland TC 12 May 2017 - R 6 - Chair, Mr B Scott
charge:
facts:
After the running of the DAYAVEG MOBILE PACE an Information was lodged by Stipendiary Steward Mr JM Muirhead against Open Horseman Mr P Ferguson alleging that as the driver of RUNCLE he drove in a manner that caused interference to OKLAHOMA THUNDER when shifting ground outwards near the 600 metres mark.
Rule 869(4) states: No horseman shall during any race do anything which interferes or is likely to interfere with his own horse and/or any other horse or its progress.
Mr Ferguson was present at the Hearing and he advised the Committee that he did not admit the breach.
Mr Muirhead gave evidence and also demonstrated the incident by use of the race films. He said that RUNCLE was in the one/one near the 600 metres mark and at that stage Mr MacKinnon was improving on his outside. Mr Ferguson shifted from two wide to three wide and in doing so Mr Ferguson's outside sulky wheel was on the inside of Mr MacKinnon's inside sulky wheel. The off hind leg of OKLAHOMA THUNDER struck the mud-guard on Mr Ferguson's wheel and as a result OKLAHOMA THUNDER broke.
Mr Muirhead said that Mr Ferguson had a responsibility when shifting ground to do so safely. He did say that Mr Ferguson was unlucky in this instance.
Mr Muirhead said that Mr MacKinnon was improving at a good rate but his horse was going straight. He said that Mr MacKinnon tried to move out but it was too late.
Mr Ferguson said that he did not want to cross examine Mr Muirhead.
Mr MacKinnon gave evidence and he said he thought his horse had broken free of interference. He then said that having seen the films he could see that Mr Ferguson had moved him wider on the track and with the outwards movement his horse had swung its hind leg out and this had connected with the mudguard on Mr Ferguson's wheel. He did say that prior to the incident his horse was travelling fine.
In answer to cross-examination from Mr Ferguson he acknowledged that Mr Ferguson's movement was not abrupt. He also acknowledged that similar movements happen in many races.
He said that as Mr Ferguson came out he turned his horse's head out and its hind leg made contact with the mudguard. He did say that his horse has "a big action behind".
There was no re-examination by Mr Muirhead.
Mr Ferguson then gave evidence and said that when he moved out it was steadily and appropriately and well within the Rules. He said it was not an abrupt action. He also said that Mr MacKinnon had an obligation to move out as well but he did not do so. He said that Mr Muirhead in his evidence had said that Mr MacKinnon's horse had run straight.
Mr Muirhead by way of cross examination asked Mr Ferguson if he agreed that when shifting out a Driver has to do so safely. Mr Ferguson acknowledged that but repeated that his was not an abrupt movement and as far as he was concerned it was done safely.
He then said that the response by Mr MacKinnon was not much and he could have done better.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
Mr Muirhead submitted that the outwards movement by Mr Ferguson caused Mr MacKinnon's horse to break.
Mr Ferguson said that there was an unwritten rule that when the inside horse moves out then the outside horse has to move as well. He said that he did not accept that he caused Mr MacKinnon's horse to break.
reasonsfordecision:
The Committee listened to the evidence from the parties and we have viewed the films several times.
We find that when Mr Ferguson moved out it was not an abrupt movement and it was an appropriate movement. Mr MacKinnon should have expected movement from the inside horse as he moved forward and there was an obligation on him to move also. Mr MacKinnon was slow to react and Mr Ferguson is not responsible for that.
Mr Muirhead tells us that Mr Ferguson has obligations as a Driver in a race but so too does Mr MacKinnon.
In our view Mr Ferguson drove as any prudent driver would and as far as this Committee is concerned there was not the level of carelessness that would justify upholding the charge and accordingly we dismiss it.
Decision:
The Charge is dismissed.
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Hearing
Rules: Rule 869(4)
Informant: Mr J M Muirhead - Stipendiary Steward
JockeysandTrainer: Mr P Ferguson - Open Horseman
Otherperson: Mr MacKinnon - Driver of OKLAHOMA THUNDER
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: 3495c6002712d926e38757c5cfce00a7
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: R 6
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: 2c9a5bb80d68c40919a25724c1f2507a
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 12/05/2017
meet_title: Auckland TC - 12 May 2017
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: auckland-tc
meet_racingtype: harness-racing
meet_chair: BScott
meet_pm1: GJones
meet_pm2: none
name: Auckland TC