Canterbury Racing – 4 October 2008 – Race 3

hearingid: 28e6deef380d042b603c7c77220ebf7d

informantnumber:

horsename:

hearing_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing

startdate: 04/10/2008

newcharge:

plea:

penaltyrequired:

decisiondate: no date provided

hearing_title: Canterbury Racing - 4 October 2008 - Race 3

charge:

facts:

appealdecision:

isappeal:

submissionsfordecision:

reasonsfordecision:

Decision:

Following the running of Race 3, the D&E John Deere & Polaris Maiden, Stipendiary Steward Mr J. P. Oatham laid an information pursuant to Rule 871(1)(d) alleging careless riding by Jockey Mr T. R. Moseley.

Following the running of Race 3, the D&E John Deere & Polaris Maiden, Stipendiary Steward Mr J. P. Oatham laid an information pursuant to Rule 871(1)(d) alleging careless riding by Jockey Mr T. R. Moseley.

The information reads as follows.

“I the abovenamed informant allege that the abovenamed Defendant

committed a breach of Rule 871(1)(d) in that T. Moseley rider of SLADDENS shifted in shortly after the start, when not sufficiently clear, causing a check to GENERAL BEN ridden by C. Anderson.”

Rule 871(1)(d) reads as follows.

“(1) Every rider commits a breach of these Rules who in the opinion of the

Judicial Committee is guilty of riding which was:

(d) Careless….”

Mr Moseley had indicated on the information that he did not admit this breach of the Rules and he confirmed this at the hearing. Mr Moseley also agreed that he understood the Rule and the nature of the charge.

Mr Oatham used video coverage to show that Mr Moseley’s horse had started awkwardly from the number 2 barrier position when the race began, moving inwards.  This movement did not form part of the charge.  Mr Oatham pointed out that after a short distance Mr Moseley again shifted inwards ending up on the fence.  At that time Jockey Ms C. I. Anderson (GENERAL BEN), which started from the number 1 barrier position, was inside Mr Moseley’s horse and she had to check to avoid contact being made.  Mr Oatham said that it was the Stipendiary Stewards’ case that Mr Moseley was not a length plus a length clear (as required by the Rules) at that time.

Ms Anderson gave evidence that shortly after the start Mr Moseley came across in front of her when he was not two lengths clear, and that she had to check and lost ground.  In answer to questions from Mr Moseley, Ms Anderson agreed that her horse had “missed the kick” a little, and that it was over racing slightly.

Mr Moseley gave evidence that he was clear when he crossed to the fence, and to illustrate this he used the video coverage taken from the 600 metre mark. The view from this angle did appear to show a gap.

There was quite a lot of evidence about the different angles of the video coverage.

After hearing the evidence we adjourned to consider our decision. 

We were satisfied that the angle from the 600 metre mark to the site of the incident is very much front on.  The view from the back straight head on camera clearly showed Mr Moseley crossing over in front of Ms Anderson.  The view from the video camera sited at the winning post gives the best view of what happened and this clearly showed that Mr Moseley crossed over when not sufficiently clear.

On returning to the Enquiry room we advised that a full written decision would be delivered later, and we gave the following oral decision.

“Having seen the video coverage, and having heard the evidence we are satisfied that the two horses involved drew 1 and 2 at the start.  SLADDENS started awkwardly and moved inwards before straightening, and settled about two horse widths off the fence.  Ms Anderson was on the inside with clear space.  It was then that Mr Moseley moved on to the fence.

At this stage the video coverage showed Ms Anderson checking her horse.  Ms Anderson gave evidence that she did this because Mr Moseley was not the two lengths clear as required.  In answer to a question Ms Anderson stated her horse was over racing “slightly”.

Mr Moseley used video coverage taken from the 600 metre mark to illustrate his belief that there was a clear gap between his horse and Ms Anderson’s horse at the time of this incident.

We find that the best angle to judge this matter is the video sited at the winning post.  This clearly shows that Mr Moseley was not a length plus a length clear as required by the Rules.  We also accept Ms Anderson’s evidence that she had to check to avoid Mr Moseley’s horse.

We find the charge proved.”

Penalty:

Mr Oatham advised that Mr Moseley has an excellent record with no relevant charges within the last 12 months.  Mr Moseley advised that it has been 2 years since he was last charged.  Mr Oatham also said that this breach was at the bottom end of the scale, but that a term of suspension of 4 days should be imposed.

We adjourned to consider the matter of penalty, and on returning to the Enquiry Room we gave the following oral decision.

“We have heard submissions on penalty.  Mr Oatham advised that Mr Moseley has no previous relevant convictions in the past 12 months, and Mr Moseley said his last breach was 2 years ago.  Mr Moseley therefore has an excellent record, with which Mr Oatham agrees, and Mr Oatham has also said that the breach was at the bottom end of the scale. Mr Oatham recommended a suspension of 4 days, and Mr Moseley thought that this was a bit harsh.

A starting point for a suspension for careless riding is four days.  We believe that Mr Moseley should be given credit for his excellent riding record, and the fact that the breach was relatively minor.  Mr Moseley is suspended from the completion of racing tomorrow, the 5 October 2008 to after the completion of racing on 19 October 2008, this being 3 days.”

J. M. Phelan

sumissionsforpenalty:

reasonsforpenalty:

penalty:

hearing_type: Old Hearing

Rules: 871.1.d

Informant:

JockeysandTrainer:

Otherperson:

PersonPresent:

Respondent:

StipendSteward:

raceid: bb7eee19aed6e8f794f32020d995deb3

race_expapproval:

racecancelled: 0

race_noreport: 0

race_emailed1: 0

race_emailed2: 0

race_title: Race 3

submittochair:

race_expappcomment:

race_km:

race_otherexp:

race_chair:

race_pm1:

race_pm2:

meetid: b2a6f53e749e98787c04fab54828f438

meet_expapproval:

meet_noreport: 0

waitingforpublication: 0

meet_emailed1: 0

meet_emailed2: 0

meetdate: 04/10/2008

meet_title: Canterbury Racing - 4 October 2008

meet_expappcomment:

meet_km:

meet_otherexp:

tracklocation: canterbury-racing

meet_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing

meet_chair:

meet_pm1:

meet_pm2:

name: Canterbury Racing