Otago RC 2 March 2019 – R 5 (heard 10 March 2019 at Gore) – Chair, Prof G Hall

hearingid: 1d9502db9e885e3d9b4e0e32c80acd52

informantnumber:

horsename:

hearing_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing

startdate: 02/03/2019

newcharge:

plea:

penaltyrequired:

decisiondate: no date provided

hearing_title: Otago RC 2 March 2019 - R 5 (heard 10 March 2019 at Gore) - Chair, Prof G Hall

charge:

facts:

appealdecision:

isappeal:

submissionsfordecision:

reasonsfordecision:

Decision:

Otago Racing Club - R 5

Informant: Mr J McLaughlin – Stipendiary Steward

Respondent: Mr B Murray – Apprentice Jockey

Information No: A5433

Date: 2 March 2019

Rule No: 638(1)(d)

Also Present: Mr D Walsh, Apprentice Jockey mentor

Mr Mudhoo, Apprentice Jockey

Mr Campbell, Apprentice Jockey (10 March only)

Mr Davidson, Stipendiary Steward (10 March only)

Charge: Careless Riding

Plea: Not admitted

Following the running of Race 5, the KB CONTRACTORS 1200 metres, an information was filed by Stipendiary Steward, Mr McLaughlin alleging that B Murray (TOUCH THE SKY) allowed his mount to shift inwards when not clear of DREAMING EASY (R Mudhoo) which was taken inwards onto CABERNET (C Campbell) shortly after the start.

Mr Murray did not admit the breach and appeared at the hearing assisted by Mr Walsh.

Mr McLaughlin demonstrated on the head-on and side-on videos that Mr Murray had drawn gate 8 and had commenced an angled run towards the rail when not his length and another clear of horses to his inside. Mr Mudhoo and Mr Campbell had both had to take hold of their mounts.

Mr Mudhoo said he had jumped okay and was crossed by the respondent. He believed Mr Murray was clear and his horse had over-reacted. He said the respondent was close but only fractionally.

Mr Mudhoo said in response to questioning by Mr McLaughlin that on looking at the videos it was evident that the respondent was not clear. He said he had had to grab hold of his horse. He thought the respondent was about a length and a half clear. There was room, but he was dictated in a little bit. He could not relieve the pressure because his horse had over-reacted a little bit. Mr Mudhoo agreed that he had taken hold of his horse before the incident as it was fresh and had its head down and was wanting to go way too fast. It was not an easy horse to ride.

Mr Walsh opened the respondent’s defence stating that Mr Mudhoo was pulling his horse back before the respondent had come across. He believed it was a marginal call whether Mr Murray was clear when he came across. Both Mr Mudhoo’s and Mr Campbell’s horses had over-reacted. He said Mr Mudhoo had shifted inwards through his taking hold of his horse.

Mr Walsh wished to call Mr Campbell but Mr Walsh had to leave the course due to travel commitments. The hearing was adjourned and recommenced at Gore on 10 March. Mr Davidson, Stipendiary Steward, appeared for the RIU on that day.

Mr Walsh questioned Mr Campbell who said his horse was travelling very keenly early. It was first up in blinkers. He had not received interference from Mr Murray. He said his horse was an awkward horse to ride and he had been taking hold after coming out of the gates. He thought Mr Murray was 2 lengths clear. He said Mr Mudhoo’s horse was racing erratically and was moving in and away from Mr Murray. He believed Mr Mudhoo’s horse had over-reacted a little bit to what was really happening. He did not believe either he or Mr Mudhoo had received pressure from their outside. He agreed there had been light bumping between his and Mr Mudhoo’s mount. He said his horse had had its head up before the incident.

Mr Walsh asked for the video to be showed at normal speed. He said both Mr Mudhoo and Mr Campbell were clearly restraining their mounts prior to Mr Murray coming across. Mr Mudhoo’s horse was racing erratically and was over-racing. He used google maps to demonstrate that the angle of the side-on video was such that gaps were much greater in fact than what the video would suggest. He reiterated that Mr Campbell had said his horse was over-racing and had received no interference.

Mr Walsh alleged that Mr Mudhoo had said when first questioned by Mr McLaughlin that he had not received interference. Mr Davidson called Mr Munro, Stipendiary Steward, who refuted this. He said when questioned immediately after the race Mr Mudhoo had said he had received interference from his outside and was taken down the track. Mr Campbell had said he had not received interference.

The Committee questioned Mr Murray as to whether there had been yelling. He said he had not heard yelling. When he looked behind both jockeys were taking hold.

Mr Davidson summed up by stating the respondent was riding his mount forward and had shifted in when not clear of Mr Mudhoo. Mr Mudhoo had taken his mount inwards and the only reason to shift was to avoid Mr Murray’s heels. Mr Davidson accepted that Mr Campbell’s mount was over-racing and that he put the difficulty he was in down to this. Mr Davidson accepted that Mr Mudhoo’s mount was over-racing as well. But the obligation upon Mr Murray was to be clear and, in these circumstances, to give the two jockeys more room. He did not think the side-on angle was distorted to the extent that Mr Walsh had submitted.

Mr Walsh said the angle was hard to quantify. He believed Mr Mudhoo’s horse over-racing was the primary cause of the incident. He had taken a severe hold of his horse some 5 or 6 strides before Mr Murray came across. He said there were too many question marks and the two witnesses did not support the RIU case.

Decision

What was or was not said in the pre-hearing should not deflect us from the issue which is whether or not Mr Murray was his length and another clear when he shifted towards the rail shortly after the start of race 5.

We are satisfied from the evidence of Mr Mudhoo before us at the hearing on the day of racing and from the video evidence, after making due allowance for Mr Walsh’s submission as to the side-on angle being a little misleading, that Mr Murray was not his length and another clear. The result was that Mr Mudhoo’s mount was crowded, shifted in when Mr Mudhoo took hold, and there was light bumping with the mount of Mr Campbell. All parties agree that both Mr Mudhoo’s and Mr Campbell’s mounts were over-racing prior to the incident. The video evidence supports this as well. But this does not alter the obligation upon Mr Murray.

To put it in simple terms, a jockey’s obligation under the Rules when shifting ground inwards is to give horses to the inside room, ie to stay clear, which Mr Murray did not do.

We find the breach of the careless riding rule proved.

Submissions for Penalty:

Mr Davidson identified five careless riding breaches by Mr Murray in the previous 12 months:

4 August 2018 – 8 days
8 August 2018 – 10 days
22 November 2018 — 7 days
23 December 2018 — 6 days
7 February 2019 — 7 days

Mr Davidson said the record was thus “not that great”. He believed this breach was low-range. Mr Murray was only perhaps 1/2 a length short of being clear.

Mr Walsh agreed with Mr Davidson’s assessment of the breach. Mr Murray asked for a deferment until after Trentham. Mr Davidson had no objection to this.

Reasons for Penalty:

We agree with the assessment of the breach as being low end. Mr Mudhoo received a check as a result of the respondent’s actions. However, both Mr Mudhoo’s and Mr Campbell’s mounts were over-racing prior to the incident. And Mr Campbell does not blame the respondent for the bumping he received. We reduce the 6-day starting point in the Penalty Guide for a low range breach by one day in recognition of its low end nature.

Mr Murray is a busy apprentice and is highly sought after for South Island meetings. He averages some 6 or 7 rides per meeting. His record needs to be considered in that light, although we are concerned that this breach occurred the first day Mr Murray was back riding from an earlier suspension. We believe a one day uplift is appropriate.

Penalty:

Mr Murray is suspended for 6 national riding days, from the conclusion of racing on 17 March up to and including 24 March 2019.

sumissionsforpenalty:

reasonsforpenalty:

penalty:

hearing_type: Old Hearing

Rules: 638(1)(d)

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: