Non-Raceday Inquiry – NWE Tiley

hearingid: 2d74c16201f0aa5314e2cae17aa48327

informantnumber:

horsename:

hearing_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing

startdate: 01/01/2001

newcharge:

plea:

penaltyrequired:

decisiondate: no date provided

hearing_title: Non-Raceday Inquiry - NWE Tiley

charge:

facts:

appealdecision:

isappeal:

submissionsfordecision:

reasonsfordecision:

Decision:

IN THE MATTER of the New Zealand Rules of Racing

AND

IN THE MATTER of Information No.64995

BETWEEN New Zealand Thoroughbred Racing Inc  -  Informant

AND

NIGEL WILLIAM EDWIN TILEY, Licensed Trainer  -  Defendant

 DATE OF HEARING:                     Monday, 23 May 2005

RESERVED REASONS FOR DECISION OF JUDICIAL COMMITTEE ON PENALTY   

THE CHARGES:

Information No. 64995 alleged that, at the race meeting of Waikato Racing Club held at Te Rapa Racecourse on Saturday, 7 May 2005, Mr Tiley, a licensed person within the meaning of Rule 303 of the Rules of Racing, did misconduct himself within the meaning of Rule 304 in that being the trainer of ROYAL ENTERTAINER, an acceptor for Race 9 on the programme:

1.      He did prior to such race approach and attempt to dictate riding tactics to Apprentice Jockey, Lee Callaway, who was engaged to ride the horse HAILWIN in the race; and

2.      In the unsaddling stalls after the running of the race, he did use threatening language directed at Apprentice Jockey, Lee Callaway.

THE RULES:

Rule 303 provides as follows:

Where the holder of a Licensed Trainer's, Jockey's or Apprentice Jockey's Licence, or a Permit to Train, or of any Amateur Rider's Certificate, or of an Emergency Rider's Certificate issued under Rule 533 hereof, or a Rider's Agent permit, or where any registered Owner-Trainer or Racing Manager is called before the Stewards or Committee of any Club or a Judicial Committee and punished, reprimanded or warned, a report of the proceedings shall (in the case of proceedings before the Stewards or Committee) be sent by the Secretary of such Club to the Chief Executive.

Rule 304 provides as follows:

Every holder of any licence or permit or certificate mentioned in [Rule 303] and every owner, owner-trainer, stablehand, unlicensed apprentice or racing manager who misconducts himself in any way commits a breach of these Rules.

Mr Tiley admitted both charges. Both charges were, accordingly, found to be proved and the hearing proceeded in relation to the matter of penalty.

THE FACTS:

Mr J W McKenzie presented a Summary of Facts which can be summarised as follows:

1.      Mr Tiley was the trainer of ROYAL ENTERTAINER, a runner in Race 9 of the Waikato Racing Club's meeting at Te Rapa on 7 May last. ROYAL ENTERTAINER was ridden by L C Tiley.

2.      Also in the race was HAILWIN, trained by Miss K A Gibbons and ridden by Apprentice Jockey, Lee Callaway.

3.      In the race, both horses were ridden by their riders in a ?neck and neck duel? with neither horse gaining a clear lead over the other and neither rider easing their mount. Both horses tired and ROYAL ENTERTAINER finished 4^th and HAILWIN 5^th.

4.      Having been made aware of ?certain altercations' that took place between the Defendant and Miss Gibbons and Mr Callaway in the birdcage area, the Stipendiary Stewards questioned Miss Gibbons and Mr Callaway and ascertained that HAILWIN had been ridden in accordance with the instructions of the trainer.

5.      During the course of those inquiries, it was revealed that Miss Gibbons had been approached by the Defendant, in the stabling area prior to the race, and questioned by him as to the tactics to be adopted on HAILWIN. Miss Gibbons told Mr Tiley that her horse would jump and go and was going to race up there.

6.      Mr Tiley then suggested to Miss Gibbons that HAILWIN should not take ROYAL ENTERTAINER on but, rather, should just sit off it and, because ROYAL ENTERTAINER was fresh, it would come to the end of its run with 200 metres to go and HAILWIN should win the race.

7.      Inquiries also revealed that, shortly before the race, the Defendant approached Mr Callaway who was sitting alone in the Jockey's Room waiting for the call to mount. Mr Callaway, who did not know who Mr Tiley was, is an inexperienced, young apprentice.

8.      When asked by the Defendant, Mr Callaway said that he was going to ride HAILWIN as he had been instructed to do.

9.      According to Mr Callaway, the Defendant's attitude changed and he said to Mr Callaway words to the effect of ?Oh, don?t take me on, you won?t take me on, if you take me on I will undo your apprenticeship?. Mr Tiley then left the area.

10.    When he mounted HAILWIN, Mr Callaway told Miss Gibbons what the Defendant had said to him and was told by her to ignore what he had said and to ride the horse in the manner she wanted.

11.    Mr Callaway reported that, on dismounting after the race, the Defendant was holding his horse in the next stall. Mr Tiley was seen to be pointing his finger at Mr Callaway and heard to direct words at him to the effect of ?If I wasn?t holding this horse I would fucking well smash you?. Mr Callaway said that he was concerned by this threat.

12.    When spoken to by NZTR officials, the Defendant acknowledged that he had approached Miss Gibbons and discussed with her the riding tactics for her horse and suggested to her that it not take on his horse but wait for the last run and win the race as his horse was a race short. The Defendant claimed that such discussions were not out of order and were a regular occurrence.

14.    The Defendant further acknowledged that he had approached Mr Callaway, told him he had been talking with Miss Gibbons and repeated to him the suggestion he had made to Miss Gibbons concerning riding tactics. He denied making the statement about the undoing of Mr Callaway's apprenticeship and claimed that Mr Callaway had fabricated that.

15.    The Defendant acknowledged that he used the words complained of in the second charge directed at Mr Callaway. He stated that he was very angry at the tactics adopted by Miss Gibbons and Mr Callaway in the race but said that he should not have said what he did.

16.    The Defendant agreed that he should not have approached Mr Callaway in the Jockey's Room before the race and discussed riding tactics with him.

17.    The Defendant is a former top jockey and now holds a trainer's licence. He has not appeared on any similar charge in the past.

SUBMISSIONS OF DEFENDANT:

The Defendant frankly admitted that he spoke to Miss Gibbons before the race. He was concerned that ROYAL ENTERTAINER had not raced since 19 February 2005. In all of his eleven raceday starts, the horse had led. He said that he had seen Mr Callaway ride and could foresee a possible problem if he tried to lead. In speaking to Miss Gibbons, the Defendant believed that he was doing her a favour. He asked her if HAILWIN intended to lead and told her that both horses would ?come undone? if it did. It was no more than a ?friendly discussion?, he said.

Neither did the Defendant deny that he spoke to Mr Callaway in the Jockey's Room and said to him exactly what he had said to Miss Gibbons. He tried to give him advice that it would be silly for the two horses to go head-to-head in front. If Mr Callaway tried to head ROYAL ENTERTAINER, it would just go harder.

The Defendant strongly denied that he told Mr Callaway how he had to ride HAILWIN. He was merely trying to point out a couple of facts about ROYAL ENTERTAINER. He claimed the conversation was ?polite? and contained no threats. He was trying to use his experience to help Mr Callaway.

As for the incident after the race, Mr Tiley said that he was in the birdcage awaiting the return of his horse. Both ROYAL ENTERTAINER and HAILWIN had been ?ridden into the ground? and had no chance. He was looking for one of the Stipendiary Stewards. He saw Miss Gibbons and spoke to her. He was annoyed that ROYAL ENTERTAINER had been run into the ground. He asked her why she had had HAILWIN ridden that way. He claimed that, in reply, she said ?I don?t give a fuck about my horse ? just as long as I stuffed yours up?.

The Defendant stated that, when Mr Callaway walked past him after unsaddling, he suggested to Mr Callaway that, if he had not been holding his horse, he would bang his and Miss Gibbons' heads together. He strongly denied that he swore.

Mr Tiley informed the Committee that he had ridden overseas for 12 years. He won two premierships in Singapore. He rode for 4 years in Hong Kong as a Club and a freelance jockey. His discussion with Mr Callaway was purely on a ?jockey-to-jockey? basis.

SUBMISSIONS ON PENALTY:

Mr McKenzie submitted that Mr Tiley's actions in talking to Mr Callaway cannot be condoned. All riders of each horse take their riding instructions from the trainer, owner or person appointed as their agent to undertake the task of giving such instructions. It is certainly not the role for the connections of one horse to attempt to persuade another rider how to ride his or her horse.

Mr McKenzie said that it was accepted that Mr Tiley did not have any 'sinister intent? in what he was trying to do but, rather, was trying to suggest what he believed was the best way for two front runners to compete and not impede each other's chances by taking each other on in the early stages of the race. He referred to the perception by the public, punters and administrators that an attempt to dictate the riding tactics of another horse may well be seen as an attempt to manipulate the outcome of the race.

However, notwithstanding Mr Tiley's honest belief, his approaching the rider of another horse was completely inappropriate, hence the bringing of the first charge.

In respect of the second charge, Mr McKenzie submitted that Mr Tiley's behaviour was in direct retaliation to what Miss Gibbons had told her rider and the fact that the rider had obeyed what she had told him to do. In the result, both horses had failed to run up to expectations. By his own admission, the Defendant was very frustrated at what had taken place and, in his mind, the result of the race was a direct result of the tactics adopted by Mr Callaway. Mr Tiley said that he would not have physically touched Mr Callaway.

Mr McKenzie submitted that the reaction of the Defendant and the words spoken by him to Mr Callaway in the unsaddling stalls after the race were ?completely unacceptable?. Such language and threat are unacceptable and are, by definition, a breach of the misconduct Rule.

Mr McKenzie submitted that Mr Tiley was entitled to credit for pleading guilty to the two charges. He acknowledged that he let himself down. He described Mr Tiley as a ?past champion jockey?, both in New Zealand and internationally, and as such has a comprehensive understanding of race riding tactics. Mr Tiley has no record of improper riding and this supports his contention that what he was trying to do was in everybody's best interests. Nevertheless, his actions were not acceptable.

Finally, Mr McKenzie submitted that Mr Tiley's career as a trainer has been relatively short but he has 'stamped his mark? as a very competent trainer, having trained the Derby winner in his first season.

Mr McKenzie submitted that a penalty by way of fines was appropriate. The first was the more serious charge because of the perception of what Mr Tiley did. The second charge was more the result of a retaliatory response by him.

Mr McKenzie recommended a fine of $1,250 on the first charge and $750.00 on the second charge.

Mr Tiley's only submission in respect of penalty was that there had been no attempt on his part to try to manipulate the result. His actions were foolish and it will not happen again, he said.

DECISION ON PENALTY AND COSTS:

Following a deliberation at the conclusion of the hearing, the Committee delivered the following oral decision:

?We have considered the Summary of Facts and penalty submissions presented by Mr McKenzie   and the oral and written submissions of Mr Tiley.

As I stated at the conclusion of the hearing, all that this Committee intends to do today is announce the penalty on each of the two charges and the order for costs.

The Committee's full reasons for arriving at penalty will be given in a full written decision which will be made available in due course to both parties.

On the first charge contained in the Schedule of Charges, Mr Tiley is fined the sum of $1,250. On the second charge contained in the Schedule of Charges, Mr Tiley is fined the sum of $500.

In addition, Mr Tiley is ordered to pay costs of $250 to New Zealand Thoroughbred Racing and $250 to the Judicial Control Authority.?

sumissionsforpenalty:

reasonsforpenalty:

penalty:

hearing_type: Old Hearing

Rules:

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: