Timaru HRC – 2 May 2010 – R 2

hearingid: 30d3660130832fde0d3ae22ef2876267

informantnumber:

horsename:

hearing_racingtype: harness-racing

startdate: 02/05/2010

newcharge:

plea:

penaltyrequired:

decisiondate: no date provided

hearing_title: Timaru HRC - 2 May 2010 - R 2

charge:

facts:

appealdecision:

isappeal:

submissionsfordecision:

reasonsfordecision:

Decision:

RACEDAY JUDICIAL COMMITTEE DECISION

Informant:  Mr N M Ydgren – Stipendiary Steward

Defendant:  Miss S J Ottley – Junior Horseman (assisted by Mr C J De Filippi)

Information No:  68763

Meeting:  Timaru Harness Racing Club

Date:  2 May 2010

Venue:  Phar Lap Raceway

Race:  2 - Norfolk Motors Mobile Pace

Rule No:  869(2)(a)

Judicial Committee:  J M Phelan, Chairman – K G Hales, Committee Member 

Plea:  Not admitted

Charge:

Following the running of Race 2, the Norfolk Motors Mobile Pace, an information was filed by Stipendiary Steward Mr N. M. Ydgren, against Miss S. J. Ottley, the driver of “Swamp Dweller” (12), alleging that she had committed a breach of Rule 869(2)(a).  

Miss Ottley is a Junior Horseman, and she was assisted at this hearing by Open Horseman Mr C. J. De Filippi. 

The charge reads as follows.

“I the above named informant allege that the above named Defendant committed a breach of Rule 869(2)(a) in that Ms Ottley used her whip in what Stewards deem an excessive manner in the run home whilst driving Swamp Dweller.  Miss Ottley has used her whip on 19 occasions.”

Rule 869(2)(a) reads as follows.

“(2) No horseman shall during any race:-

(a)     use his whip in an unnecessary, excessive

or improper manner.”

Facts:

Miss Ottley had indicated on the information that she did not admit this breach of the Rules and she confirmed this at the hearing. Miss Ottley and Mr De Filippi also agreed that they understood the nature of the charge and the Rule it was brought under.  

Mr Ydgren gave evidence and used video coverage to show that Miss Ottley had used her whip on 19 occasions in the home straight, and that this use was continuous.  Mr Ydgren read the “Use of Whip” guidelines.

During the hearing neither Miss Ottley nor Mr De Filippi disputed that Miss Ottley had used her whip 19 times.  In answer to a question from Mr Hales Miss Ottley said that she had used alternative actions during the run home, and pointed out these occasions on the video replays.

Submissions:

On behalf of Miss Ottley Mr De Filippi said that she was justified in using her whip in the way that she did, because if she had not she would not have won the race by a nose.  He also said that it was Miss Ottley’s responsibility to win that race, which she could not have done had she used her whip less.

In response to this evidence Mr Ydgren made submissions that there was no justification for excessive use of the whip, and he read the following excerpt from the Enright decision. 

“All horses are meant to compete in the race under the same conditions and Rules.  If a horse has an inherent flaw in its personality or makeup so that it needs to be ridden hard with the whip, sobeit.   But it still must only be ridden within the provisions of the Rules of Racing.  Likewise it is not an excuse for a breach of the Rules for one to say it was necessary to ride in that particular way in order to win a race.  If the horse race cannot be won within the application of the Rules of Racing which govern the manner in which the race is to be run, then sobeit and it cannot win.  The same rules apply to all competitors and if there is some inherent deficiency or makeup in the character or ability of a horse that requires it to be treated in a way that is outside the Rules then that is not permitted.”

Mr Ydgren also said that this was a clear case of excessive use of the whip.

Reasons:

After hearing the evidence we adjourned to consider our decision.  The

“Use of the Whip” guidelines have been in place for a considerable time, and Miss Ottley and Mr De Filippi both agreed that they were conversant with these guidelines.

These guidelines, so far as they are relevant to the present case, provide as follows.

“Excessive use of the whip simply means “too much” and relates to the number of times and/or the force with which the whip is used.

            Applies whether striking the horse, harness or sulky.

A horse does not need to be marked for an excessive charge to be preferred.

………..

Subject to the provisions of Rule 869(2) no horseman shall use the whip

continuously at any time during a race and there must be distinct pauses between the whip being used or the use of the whip shall be interrupted by alternative acceptable actions.

These Actions include:-

-   Running the rein(s) over the horse’s rump

-   Touching or holding the whip on the top of the horse’s tail or rump

-   Running the whip through the horse’s tail”

We were satisfied that Miss Ottley used her whip on 19 occasions, and that there were no distinct pauses between the strikes with her whip.  Her assertion that she did use alternative acceptable actions was contrary to the video coverage, and we reject her evidence on this point.

There were submissions by Mr De Filippi and Miss Ottley that this use of the whip was justified as it enabled Miss Ottley to win the race, and had she used her whip less, she would not have won.  This is a fallacious argument, and we accept that the Enright decision is the correct interpretation in relation to excessive whip use.

The Enright decision is an appeals case [M. J. Enright v. New Zealand Thoroughbred Racing (16 July 1996)] which deals with excuses for excessive use of the whip.  A jockey (M. J. Enright) was the rider of “Fighter Boy”, and in his defence he said that he needed to use his whip as often as he did in order to win the race.

This is a case which we use as a guideline because it was an appeals decision and a QC was the chairman, so it was quite an important case and there are similarities between the rules of excessive use of the whip by a jockey and a harness racing driver.  In fact Harness Racing Rules says “too much” and so does this particular decision.

Decision:

We were satisfied, after reviewing all of the evidence, that this charge had been proved.

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

“Having seen the video coverage, and having heard the evidence, we are satisfied that Miss Ottley has been charged with excessive use of the whip under Rule 869(2)(a) – it was alleged that Miss Ottley used her whip on 19 occasions in the home straight.

Mr Ydgren read the “Use of Whip” guidelines and said that the whip use in this case was in clear breach of those guidelines, and the Rule.

Mr De Filippi and Miss Ottley did not dispute the 19 strikes.  Mr De Filippi said that the race was won by a nose, and that had Miss Ottley used her whip less, she would not have won the race.

Mr Ydgren then read an excerpt from the Matthew Enright decision, which states that it was not a valid excuse to say the race would not have been won if the whip was used less.  We will refer to the Enright case and the whip guidelines more fully in our written decision.

We are satisfied, after reviewing all the evidence, that Miss Ottley has used her whip excessively, and that the charge has been proved.”

Submissions on Penalty:

Mr Ydgren advised that Miss Ottley had no previous relevant convictions. He also made submissions that an appropriate fine in this case was $200-00.

Miss Ottley said that she would prefer a fine to a suspension, but had no other submissions to make.

Reasons:

We were satisfied that a fine of $200-00 was in line with previous fines in similar cases.

Penalty:

Accordingly Miss Ottley was fined the sum of $200-00.

J. M. Phelan                             K. G. Hales

CHAIR                                     Committee Member

68763

sumissionsforpenalty:

reasonsforpenalty:

penalty:

hearing_type: Old Hearing

Rules: 869(2)(a)

Informant:

JockeysandTrainer:

Otherperson:

PersonPresent:

Respondent:

StipendSteward:

raceid: 620ce3b4da06185dacc2936359c0f386

race_expapproval:

racecancelled: 0

race_noreport: 0

race_emailed1: 0

race_emailed2: 0

race_title: R 2

submittochair:

race_expappcomment:

race_km:

race_otherexp:

race_chair:

race_pm1:

race_pm2:

meetid: 28037be081d370bb038bc99236ee6a90

meet_expapproval:

meet_noreport: 0

waitingforpublication: 0

meet_emailed1: 0

meet_emailed2: 0

meetdate: 02/05/2010

meet_title: Timaru HRC - 2 May 2010

meet_expappcomment:

meet_km:

meet_otherexp:

tracklocation: timaru-hrc

meet_racingtype: harness-racing

meet_chair: tom

meet_pm1: tom

meet_pm2: tom

name: Timaru HRC