Forbury Park TC – 9 September 2004 –

Mr Knowles has demonstrated on the head-on video that at approximately the 1500 metre mark Mr Kay improved on the inside of Mr Norman when there was insufficient room resulting in SIMON?S PRIDE being tightened onto STARRY STARRY NIGHT. Mr Knowles also demonstrated that the line of the horses was clearly set before Mr Kay commenced to move down and he emphasised that Mr Kay continued to improve on Mr Norman's inner despite being aware that the bend was approaching. The only consequence of this action, he said, was pressure on the outside horses, driven by Mr Lowe and Mr Norman.

Mr Kay stated he believed he had sufficient room to improve and that the pressure placed upon Mr Norman's horse was the consequence of Mr Lowe moving down on to Mr Norman on entering the bend.

I have listened carefully to Mr Kay's arguments and his demonstration on the video as to where he was positioned before the commencement of the incident and of Mr Lowe allegedly moving in. I find, however, that I agree with Mr Knowles in that Mr Kay simply continued to progress into a gap that didn?t exist. The distance he continued to progress is again as Mr Knowles says, about 80 metres. The bend was approaching. Mr Norman was going to run out of room. This is in fact what happened with STARRY STARRY NIGHT being interfered with and breaking. I do not accept that Mr Lowe moved from 3 wide to 2 wide. There were 3 horses across the track prior to the bend only because Mr Kay was pushing up on the inner, in so doing, I observe, knocking over a marker peg, to improve to a position to which he was not entitled. His continuing to push through on the inside with the bend approaching, I find constitutes careless driving. I therefore find the charge proved.

Mr Knowles produced Mr Kay's record which was clear for this season and asked for a suspension of 3 or 4 days or a fine of $300. Mr Kay indicated that he had not "been in the room for some 10 ten years" and said that he thought a brief suspension was appropriate. He emphasised he had lost over a $100 through the relegation of VIALLI.

I give weight to Mr Kay's excellent record. I accept that he genuinely believed he was entitled to push through on the inner and for this reason he did not admit the charge. The relegation of the horse has cost Mr Kay the sum of $106. Had VIALLI finished in a dividend bearing position and been relegated then clearly the incident would have been more serious but nonetheless Mr Kay's actions caused SIMON?S PRIDE to break affecting its chances.

Taking all these matters into account a suspension of three days is appropriate. Mr Kay is suspended from the conclusion of racing tonight up to an including September 17. This is three days. I take this opportunity to remind Mr Kay of his obligations under the Rules of Harness Racing.