NZ Metro TC – 19 February 2009 – Race 1

hearingid: 1119656b56a7bb082f075ee6c5f5cfce

informantnumber:

horsename:

hearing_racingtype: harness-racing

startdate: 19/02/2009

newcharge:

plea:

penaltyrequired:

decisiondate: no date provided

hearing_title: NZ Metro TC - 19 February 2009 - Race 1

charge:

facts:

appealdecision:

isappeal:

submissionsfordecision:

reasonsfordecision:

Decision:

DECISION AND REASONS:

Following the running of Race 1, The Edge Mobile Trot, an information was filed by Stipendiary Steward, Mr N M Ydgren, against Licensed Open Horseman, Mr P T Court, alleging a breach of Rule 869 (3) (b) in that Mr Court, as the driver of SHING BROMAC in the Race, “drove carelessly when allowing his sulky to contact DOC’S DELIGHT (I L Schwamm) causing his horse to break and lose all chance”.

Mr Court was present at the hearing of the information and did not admit the breach.

Rule 968 provides:

(3)  No horseman in any race shall drive:

     (b)   carelessly.

Mr Schwamm said that he was on the pylons about a half length behind the horse ahead, SHING BROMAC, when that horse “came down” on him. He could have taken hold and pulled right back but did not see the need for it. He was racing inside Mr Court and established on the fence. Prior to his horse’s breaking, Mr Schwamm’s sulky wheel had struck a pylon as a result of being “pressured down” by Mr Court.

Mr Ydgren had Stipendiary Steward, Mr S P Renault, show video replays from various angles of the relevant part of the Race (approximately 200 metres after the start of the 1950 metres mobile start event). Mr Renault pointed out Mr Schwamm go up on the inside of the wheel of Mr Court who then shifted down onto Mr Schwamm. DOC’S DELIGHT went into a break as a result. Mr Schwamm had been “established” on the inside of Mr Court. The sulky wheel of SHING BROMAC made contact with the leg of DOC”S DELIGHT. Mr Renault, who had observed the incident from the patrol box at the end of the back straight, at no stage saw Mr Court having any difficulty with his horse.

Mr Court stated that the runners were “jostling for positions” shortly after the start and all were off the fence. He submitted that Mr Schwamm had “hunted up” and that there was room for his horse’s legs only and not the cart. Mr Schwamm said that he was “up in there”. Mr Court said that he had been holding his line and Mr Schwamm had been pushing up with only room for his horse’s legs, hence his going over a pylon. Mr Schwamm was attempting to go somewhere he should not have. Mr Court submitted that he was “not quite” one cart-width off the fence at all times and had not moved down. He denied that he had caused DOC’S DELIGHT to gallop.

Following a deliberation, the Committee delivered the following oral decision:

“The Committee has carefully listened to the evidence of the parties and we have carefully viewed the video replays.

The Committee finds that, after approximately 200 metres after the start of the mobile 1950 metres event, Mr Schwamm on DOC’S DELIGHT was on the markers with Mr Court on SHING BROMAC just ahead of and outside of DOC”S DELIGHT. Mr Court was, in the Committee’s view, in a one-out position at that point. We are satisfied that Mr Court then shifted down or allowed SHING BROMAC to shift down and its sulky wheel make contact with the off foreleg of DOC’S DELIGHT.

Mr Court’s defence was that the field was jostling for positions and all runners were off the fence. He alleged that Mr Schwamm had “hunted up” when there was only room for his horse’s legs.

We prefer the evidence of the Stipendiary Stewards and Mr Schwamm – in other words, we are satisfied that Mr Schwamm was established on the pylons and entitled to be in the position he was. At that point, Mr Court shifted down and his sulky wheel made contact with Mr Schwamm’s horse’s leg causing it to break and lose its chance.

The Committee is satisfied that, in doing so, Mr Court drove carelessly – he did not show the standard required of a reasonable and competent driver and, accordingly, the charge is found proved”.  

In relation to penalty, Mr Ydgren submitted that the consequences of Mr Court’s actions were that Mr Schwamm’s horse was “removed from the Race” – he had his chances of earning stake money taken away by Mr Court. The Stewards recommended a fine of $250, Mr Ydgren said. Mr Court had no recent breaches of the Rule. He has had 56 drives in the current season.

Mr Court asked the Committee to take into account his good record, in the light of which a fine of $250 was excessive, he submitted. The Committee asked Mr Court if he would like the Committee to consider a term of suspension but he confirmed his preference for a fine.

In determining penalty, the Committee took into account the submissions of the parties including Mr Court’s previous good record. However, the Committee agreed with Mr Ydgren that Mr Court’s actions had resulted in the chances of DOC’S DELIGHT being extinguished with the consequential effect on Mr Schwamm as the owner of DOC’S DELIGHT and the betting public who had invested on DOC’S DELIGHT. Mr Court had commented that the filly had been at long odds and not supported by many bettors but that it is not, in any way, a mitigating factor.

Mr Court was fined the sum of $250.  

R G McKenzie

sumissionsforpenalty:

reasonsforpenalty:

penalty:

hearing_type: Old Hearing

Rules: 869.3.b

Informant:

JockeysandTrainer:

Otherperson:

PersonPresent:

Respondent:

StipendSteward:

raceid: 586d9f875091ac543cf62f9ce78d1a93

race_expapproval:

racecancelled: 0

race_noreport: 0

race_emailed1: 0

race_emailed2: 0

race_title: Race 1

submittochair:

race_expappcomment:

race_km:

race_otherexp:

race_chair:

race_pm1:

race_pm2:

meetid: f895671c658159fc2c79389dcbbce074

meet_expapproval:

meet_noreport: 0

waitingforpublication: 0

meet_emailed1: 0

meet_emailed2: 0

meetdate: 19/02/2009

meet_title: NZ Metro TC - 19 February 2009

meet_expappcomment:

meet_km:

meet_otherexp:

tracklocation: nz-metro-tc

meet_racingtype: harness-racing

meet_chair:

meet_pm1:

meet_pm2:

name: NZ Metro TC