Rangiora HRC 23 May 2021 – R 8 (heard 11 June 2021 at Addington) – Chair, Mr S Ching
ID: JCA18449
Hearing Type (Code):
harness-racing
Decision:
BEFORE A JUDICIAL COMMITTEE
IN THE MATTER of the New Zealand Rules of Harness - Racing
IN THE MATTER of Information No. A13326
BETWEEN -P WILLIAMS
Stipendiary Steward,
Racing Integrity Unit
Informant
AND-R MAY, Licensed Open Driver
Respondent
Date of Hearing:-11 June 2021
Venue: -Addington Raceway
Judicial Committee:-S Ching (Chair)
O Jarvis (Member)
Present:-P Williams, the Informant
R May, the Respondent
L Hanrahan, Observer
DECISION OF JUDICIAL COMMITTEE DATED 11 JUNE 2021
The Charge
[1]-Information No. A13326 alleges that:
On 23 May 2021, Ricky May, Open Driver under the Harness Racing New Zealand Rules and Regulations, whilst driving LOYALIST in Race 8 at the Rangiora HRC meeting, failed to maintain a straight course in the run home and shifted inwards forcing JIMMY ARMA down the track with MISSMOLLYGOODGOLLY racing inside track markers after also being forced down the track.
The Respondent is alleged to have thereby committed a breach of Rule 869(4) and the Passing Lane Regulations Clause 4 of the Harness Racing New Zealand Rules and Regulations and is liable to the penalties that may be imposed on him pursuant to the provisions of Rule 1003(1).
The Rules
[2] Rule 869(4) states:
No driver 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.
Passing Lane Regulations Clause 4 states:
In the last lap of any race the leading horse on the running line shall, upon entering the home straight, maintain as straight a course as possible parallel to the running line and allow the trailing horses full access to the expanded inside lane.
The Plea
[3]-Mr May had endorsed the Information that the breach was not admitted, which he confirmed to the hearing. Mr May also confirmed he understood the charge and Rule it was brought under.
Facts
[4]-On 23 May 2021 at the Rangiora Harness Racing Club’s meeting at the Rangiora Raceway, Open Driver, Mr R May was the Driver of LOYALIST in Race 8, the GJ Gardner Homes Handicap Pace.
Informant’s Submissions
[5]-Mr Williams gave evidence and showed side on and head on video replays of the relevant stage of the Race, being the home run.
[6]-Mr Williams pointed out Mr May, driving LOYALIST, situated in the lead position on the pylons with JIMMY ARMA, driven by Mr J Dunn in the trail and MISSMOLLYGOODGOLLY, driven by Mr L McCormick, positioned in the trail of JIMMY ARNA, as the field entered the home straight. Mr Williams stated that the lead horse of any race on the running line, upon entering the straight, must maintain as straight a line as possible, parallel to the running line to allow trailing horses full access to the passing lane. He showed firstly, Mr Dunn take up a rightful position in the passing lane and further on in the straight, showed Mr McCormick establish himself with a run inside Mr Dunn. Mr Williams then showed Mr May begin a shift inward over the final stages of the race, in his estimation half to two thirds of a cart width, using the pylon at the entrance to the passing lane as reference to Mr May’s movement. He said that as a result, Mr Dunn was placed in restricted room with Mr McCormick being forced over the pylons.
[7]-Mr Williams stated that Mr Dunn was able to improve through on the inside of Mr May after being placed in restricted racing room, but Mr McCormick was forced over the pylons and had to take evasive action to clear the interference. Mr Williams stated that Mr McCormick finished in 5th place and may have had his chances of finishing in a higher placing, affected by Mr May’s actions.
Respondent’s Submissions
[8]-Mr May’s defence was that, in his opinion, the passing lane at Rangiora was not straight in comparison to the outside of the track. He said that the passing lane was put in after the track was formed and was not correctly aligned. Mr May said that he had measured the track at the top of the straight and again at the winning post and found that the track reduced by 2.3m at the post. He used the films to show that the alignment of the passing lane was not correct and added that the line he took in the home straight, was a straight one, and that it was the track that was not straight.
Decision
[9]-We carefully considered the evidence presented and reviewed available video replays of the alleged incident. We find the Passing Lane Regulations quite clear in relation to this charge. They state, “the leading horse on the running line shall, upon entering the home straight, maintain a straight a course as possible, parallel to the running line” We were satisfied that Mr May was positioned on the pylons and was the lead horse upon entering the home straight. We also found that, despite Mr May’s defence that the passing lane was not straight, he has on this occasion, failed to maintain as straight line a line as possible, parallel to the running line over the concluding stages, as required under the Regulation. In doing so he has shifted in from his position at the top of the straight, in our opinion a full cart width, has placed Mr Dunn in restricted racing room and effectively forced Mr McCormick over pylons. As a result, Mr McCormick had to take evasive action and may have had his chances of finishing in a higher placing affected. We consequently found that Mr May was in breach of the Passing Lane Regulations and Rule 869(4), therefore finding the charge proved.
Submissions of Informant on Penalty
[10]-Mr Williams stated that Mr May had driven on 552 occasions so far this season with a total of 369 drives last season. He added that Mr May was only 5 wins away from driving 3000 career winners.
[11]-Mr Williams stated that Mr May had a clear record in relation to the Rule and that there was an aggravating factor to consider, being the consequences to Mr McCormick’s chances. He said the JCA Penalty Guide provides a $300 fine or a 6-drive suspension as starting points for a mid-range breach of this Rule.
[12]-Mr Williams stated that this breach was low range with aggravating factors being the consequences of Mr May’s actions to Mr McCormick. He added that the mitigating factor was Mr May’s good record, which should be considered in penalty.
[13]-Mr Williams stated that the Stewards were seeking a fine on this occasion and submitted that taking all factors into consideration, a fine of $300 be considered as penalty.
Submissions of Respondent on Penalty
[14]-Mr May submitted that a fine as penalty would be preferred.
Reasons for Penalty
[15]-The JCA Penalty Guide provides a $300 fine or 6 drive suspension as a starting point for a mid-level breach of this Rule. We agree with Mr Williams that a fine is an appropriate penalty in this case. We assessed the breach as mid to low and accordingly adopted a starting point of $300. The aggravating factor is the consequences of Mr May’s actions, which warrants an uplift in penalty, which we set at $50. The mitigating factor is Mr May’s good record which we determined, afforded him a discount. This discount we set at $50.
We therefore determined that a $300 fine was an appropriate penalty in this case.
Penalty
[16]-Accordingly, Mr May is fined the sum of $300.
S Ching
CHAIR
Decision Date: 23/05/2021
Publish Date: 23/05/2021
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: 12eefb94c8c39d46b7cb08de8d888611
informantnumber:
horsename:
hearing_racingtype: harness-racing
startdate: 23/05/2021
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: no date provided
hearing_title: Rangiora HRC 23 May 2021 - R 8 (heard 11 June 2021 at Addington) - Chair, Mr S Ching
charge:
facts:
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
reasonsfordecision:
Decision:
BEFORE A JUDICIAL COMMITTEE
IN THE MATTER of the New Zealand Rules of Harness - Racing
IN THE MATTER of Information No. A13326
BETWEEN -P WILLIAMS
Stipendiary Steward,
Racing Integrity Unit
Informant
AND-R MAY, Licensed Open Driver
Respondent
Date of Hearing:-11 June 2021
Venue: -Addington Raceway
Judicial Committee:-S Ching (Chair)
O Jarvis (Member)
Present:-P Williams, the Informant
R May, the Respondent
L Hanrahan, Observer
DECISION OF JUDICIAL COMMITTEE DATED 11 JUNE 2021
The Charge
[1]-Information No. A13326 alleges that:
On 23 May 2021, Ricky May, Open Driver under the Harness Racing New Zealand Rules and Regulations, whilst driving LOYALIST in Race 8 at the Rangiora HRC meeting, failed to maintain a straight course in the run home and shifted inwards forcing JIMMY ARMA down the track with MISSMOLLYGOODGOLLY racing inside track markers after also being forced down the track.
The Respondent is alleged to have thereby committed a breach of Rule 869(4) and the Passing Lane Regulations Clause 4 of the Harness Racing New Zealand Rules and Regulations and is liable to the penalties that may be imposed on him pursuant to the provisions of Rule 1003(1).
The Rules
[2] Rule 869(4) states:
No driver 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.
Passing Lane Regulations Clause 4 states:
In the last lap of any race the leading horse on the running line shall, upon entering the home straight, maintain as straight a course as possible parallel to the running line and allow the trailing horses full access to the expanded inside lane.
The Plea
[3]-Mr May had endorsed the Information that the breach was not admitted, which he confirmed to the hearing. Mr May also confirmed he understood the charge and Rule it was brought under.
Facts
[4]-On 23 May 2021 at the Rangiora Harness Racing Club’s meeting at the Rangiora Raceway, Open Driver, Mr R May was the Driver of LOYALIST in Race 8, the GJ Gardner Homes Handicap Pace.
Informant’s Submissions
[5]-Mr Williams gave evidence and showed side on and head on video replays of the relevant stage of the Race, being the home run.
[6]-Mr Williams pointed out Mr May, driving LOYALIST, situated in the lead position on the pylons with JIMMY ARMA, driven by Mr J Dunn in the trail and MISSMOLLYGOODGOLLY, driven by Mr L McCormick, positioned in the trail of JIMMY ARNA, as the field entered the home straight. Mr Williams stated that the lead horse of any race on the running line, upon entering the straight, must maintain as straight a line as possible, parallel to the running line to allow trailing horses full access to the passing lane. He showed firstly, Mr Dunn take up a rightful position in the passing lane and further on in the straight, showed Mr McCormick establish himself with a run inside Mr Dunn. Mr Williams then showed Mr May begin a shift inward over the final stages of the race, in his estimation half to two thirds of a cart width, using the pylon at the entrance to the passing lane as reference to Mr May’s movement. He said that as a result, Mr Dunn was placed in restricted room with Mr McCormick being forced over the pylons.
[7]-Mr Williams stated that Mr Dunn was able to improve through on the inside of Mr May after being placed in restricted racing room, but Mr McCormick was forced over the pylons and had to take evasive action to clear the interference. Mr Williams stated that Mr McCormick finished in 5th place and may have had his chances of finishing in a higher placing, affected by Mr May’s actions.
Respondent’s Submissions
[8]-Mr May’s defence was that, in his opinion, the passing lane at Rangiora was not straight in comparison to the outside of the track. He said that the passing lane was put in after the track was formed and was not correctly aligned. Mr May said that he had measured the track at the top of the straight and again at the winning post and found that the track reduced by 2.3m at the post. He used the films to show that the alignment of the passing lane was not correct and added that the line he took in the home straight, was a straight one, and that it was the track that was not straight.
Decision
[9]-We carefully considered the evidence presented and reviewed available video replays of the alleged incident. We find the Passing Lane Regulations quite clear in relation to this charge. They state, “the leading horse on the running line shall, upon entering the home straight, maintain a straight a course as possible, parallel to the running line” We were satisfied that Mr May was positioned on the pylons and was the lead horse upon entering the home straight. We also found that, despite Mr May’s defence that the passing lane was not straight, he has on this occasion, failed to maintain as straight line a line as possible, parallel to the running line over the concluding stages, as required under the Regulation. In doing so he has shifted in from his position at the top of the straight, in our opinion a full cart width, has placed Mr Dunn in restricted racing room and effectively forced Mr McCormick over pylons. As a result, Mr McCormick had to take evasive action and may have had his chances of finishing in a higher placing affected. We consequently found that Mr May was in breach of the Passing Lane Regulations and Rule 869(4), therefore finding the charge proved.
Submissions of Informant on Penalty
[10]-Mr Williams stated that Mr May had driven on 552 occasions so far this season with a total of 369 drives last season. He added that Mr May was only 5 wins away from driving 3000 career winners.
[11]-Mr Williams stated that Mr May had a clear record in relation to the Rule and that there was an aggravating factor to consider, being the consequences to Mr McCormick’s chances. He said the JCA Penalty Guide provides a $300 fine or a 6-drive suspension as starting points for a mid-range breach of this Rule.
[12]-Mr Williams stated that this breach was low range with aggravating factors being the consequences of Mr May’s actions to Mr McCormick. He added that the mitigating factor was Mr May’s good record, which should be considered in penalty.
[13]-Mr Williams stated that the Stewards were seeking a fine on this occasion and submitted that taking all factors into consideration, a fine of $300 be considered as penalty.
Submissions of Respondent on Penalty
[14]-Mr May submitted that a fine as penalty would be preferred.
Reasons for Penalty
[15]-The JCA Penalty Guide provides a $300 fine or 6 drive suspension as a starting point for a mid-level breach of this Rule. We agree with Mr Williams that a fine is an appropriate penalty in this case. We assessed the breach as mid to low and accordingly adopted a starting point of $300. The aggravating factor is the consequences of Mr May’s actions, which warrants an uplift in penalty, which we set at $50. The mitigating factor is Mr May’s good record which we determined, afforded him a discount. This discount we set at $50.
We therefore determined that a $300 fine was an appropriate penalty in this case.
Penalty
[16]-Accordingly, Mr May is fined the sum of $300.
S Ching
CHAIR
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Old Hearing
Rules: 869(4) and Passing Lane Regulations Clause 4
Informant:
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid:
race_expapproval:
racecancelled:
race_noreport:
race_emailed1:
race_emailed2:
race_title:
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid:
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport:
waitingforpublication:
meet_emailed1:
meet_emailed2:
meetdate: no date provided
meet_title:
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation:
meet_racingtype:
meet_chair:
meet_pm1:
meet_pm2:
name: