Greymouth TC – 16 March 2007 – Race 7
ID: JCA19566
Hearing Type (Code):
harness-racing
Meet Title:
Greymouth TC - 16 March 2007
Race Date:
2007/03/16
Race Number:
Race 7
Decision:
Following the running of race seven on the programme, an Information was lodged against driver Mr M P Jones, alleging a breach of Rule 869(2)(a), in that he used his whip excessively
Following the running of race seven on the programme, an Information was lodged against driver Mr M P Jones, alleging a breach of Rule 869(2)(a), in that he used his whip excessively in the run home when driving Our Mabel. Mr Jones denied the breach
----Presenting his case, Stipendiary Steward, Mr Ydgren, referred to the video of the race, which showed Mr Jones (Our Mabel) using the whip 23-24 times in the straight. Mr Ydgren said Mr Jones had previously been made aware of the whip requirements and he conceded that he may not have struck the horse every time - the rule does not distinguish between the horse, the gear or the sulky - but he said in this case it was the stewards' view that it was, none-the-less, excessive.
----Mr Jones refuted the 23-24 times but acknowledged he did use the whip 19 times and he referred to his action for the first 50-60metres turning into the straight which showed he appeared to be using the whip but, by bringing his hand back, he was pausing between strokes. He admitted using the whip continuously 17 or 19 times in the last 120metres, referring to the video to show this but he did not consider this excessive.
----Mr Ydgren, in rebuttal, explained that in the view of the stewards 19 times in the short straight at Greymouth is excessive. He said Mr Jones has admitted using the whip 19 times but in his view it was in fact, more than that, not necessarily all on the horse, but against the sulky or shaft; he said the whip use was clearly over 19 times.
----Mr Jones pointed out that it was not the continual use over the last 120metres that he was arguing but the lead up to that, on turning into the straight, when his stroke, in pulling his arm back - not hitting the shaft - has been counted as using the whip.
----With no further submissions, the hearing was adjourned until after the following race.
--..2
--Decision:
----In this case, driver M P Jones appears on a breach of Rule 869(2)(a) in that he used excessively in the run home whilst driving Our Mabel.
----Stipendiary Steward, Mr Ydgren, pointed out the driving breach by way of the video and he said he counted an estimated 23 to 24 times that Mr Jones used his whip in the straight, which the stewards consider excessive.
----Mr Jones disputed that and commented on his manner of use of the whip which may have given a misleading interpretation on the number of times the whip was used.
----Taking that into account, and whilst he explained his position adequately, and his action may create some doubt, the use of the whip must still be within the provisions of the Rules which, in this case, simply means ?not excessive? and I am satisfied that 19 or 20 times, or thereabouts - and we have had several viewings of the film - in a short distance in the straight, without a break, is not accepted as within the provision of the Rules.
----Mr Jones may have got the best out of the horse but I am satisfied, after hearing the evidence and viewing the video, that, in doing so, there was a breach of the Rules. The charge is proven, and I will hear submissions on penalty.
----Penalty:
----Mr Ydgren explained that Mr Jones had not been charged in the past 12 months under this Rule but had been warned on one occasion. He recommended a (moderate) fine in keeping with other such breaches.
----Mr Jones referred to the warning he had previously received and said that that did not relate to excessive use. He said that some credit could be given for the large number of drives he has and reminded the committee that the excessive use related only to last part of the race, not from the 200 or 400metre mark. He also suggested the penalty should take into account his driving record and the number of drives he has compared with someone who only has a few drives and might receive the same penalty.
----In determining penalty, Mr Ydgren referred to a warning Mr Jones had received. I must say that, generally, I have found that warnings are an ?in-house? matter for the Stipendiary Stewards, and few Judicial Committees, in my experience, take cognizance of them. I will therefore consider this as I would a first offence of this nature. I will also take into account the number of drives Mr Jones has but, given that experience, it could be that he should be more aware than some of those others to whom he referred.
----Whilst I consider it is at the lesser end of the scale, Mr Jones will be well aware of the oft-used phrase, ?if it looks bad, it is bad? and, for the sake of consistency in dealing with such matters, I am satisfied in this case a fine of $200 is appropriate.
------
PH Welch
--Chairman
JCA Decision Fields (raw)
Dmitry: This section contains all JCA fields migrated from the raw data.
Data from these fields should be mapped appropriately to display amongst the standard fields above; please make note of any values below that are missing in the above standard fields but should be there.
hearingid: 3ee1833e6557e0e8de636011d913a359
informantnumber:
horsename:
hearing_racingtype: harness-racing
startdate: 16/03/2007
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: no date provided
hearing_title: Greymouth TC - 16 March 2007 - Race 7
charge:
facts:
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
reasonsfordecision:
Decision:
Following the running of race seven on the programme, an Information was lodged against driver Mr M P Jones, alleging a breach of Rule 869(2)(a), in that he used his whip excessively
Following the running of race seven on the programme, an Information was lodged against driver Mr M P Jones, alleging a breach of Rule 869(2)(a), in that he used his whip excessively in the run home when driving Our Mabel. Mr Jones denied the breach
----Presenting his case, Stipendiary Steward, Mr Ydgren, referred to the video of the race, which showed Mr Jones (Our Mabel) using the whip 23-24 times in the straight. Mr Ydgren said Mr Jones had previously been made aware of the whip requirements and he conceded that he may not have struck the horse every time - the rule does not distinguish between the horse, the gear or the sulky - but he said in this case it was the stewards' view that it was, none-the-less, excessive.
----Mr Jones refuted the 23-24 times but acknowledged he did use the whip 19 times and he referred to his action for the first 50-60metres turning into the straight which showed he appeared to be using the whip but, by bringing his hand back, he was pausing between strokes. He admitted using the whip continuously 17 or 19 times in the last 120metres, referring to the video to show this but he did not consider this excessive.
----Mr Ydgren, in rebuttal, explained that in the view of the stewards 19 times in the short straight at Greymouth is excessive. He said Mr Jones has admitted using the whip 19 times but in his view it was in fact, more than that, not necessarily all on the horse, but against the sulky or shaft; he said the whip use was clearly over 19 times.
----Mr Jones pointed out that it was not the continual use over the last 120metres that he was arguing but the lead up to that, on turning into the straight, when his stroke, in pulling his arm back - not hitting the shaft - has been counted as using the whip.
----With no further submissions, the hearing was adjourned until after the following race.
--..2
--Decision
:----In this case, driver M P Jones appears on a breach of Rule 869(2)(a) in that he used excessively in the run home whilst driving Our Mabel.
----Stipendiary Steward, Mr Ydgren, pointed out the driving breach by way of the video and he said he counted an estimated 23 to 24 times that Mr Jones used his whip in the straight, which the stewards consider excessive.
----Mr Jones disputed that and commented on his manner of use of the whip which may have given a misleading interpretation on the number of times the whip was used.
----Taking that into account, and whilst he explained his position adequately, and his action may create some doubt, the use of the whip must still be within the provisions of the Rules which, in this case, simply means ?not excessive? and I am satisfied that 19 or 20 times, or thereabouts - and we have had several viewings of the film - in a short distance in the straight, without a break, is not accepted as within the provision of the Rules.
----Mr Jones may have got the best out of the horse but I am satisfied, after hearing the evidence and viewing the video, that, in doing so, there was a breach of the Rules. The charge is proven, and I will hear submissions on penalty.
----Penalty:
----Mr Ydgren explained that Mr Jones had not been charged in the past 12 months under this Rule but had been warned on one occasion. He recommended a (moderate) fine in keeping with other such breaches.
----Mr Jones referred to the warning he had previously received and said that that did not relate to excessive use. He said that some credit could be given for the large number of drives he has and reminded the committee that the excessive use related only to last part of the race, not from the 200 or 400metre mark. He also suggested the penalty should take into account his driving record and the number of drives he has compared with someone who only has a few drives and might receive the same penalty.
----In determining penalty, Mr Ydgren referred to a warning Mr Jones had received. I must say that, generally, I have found that warnings are an ?in-house? matter for the Stipendiary Stewards, and few Judicial Committees, in my experience, take cognizance of them. I will therefore consider this as I would a first offence of this nature. I will also take into account the number of drives Mr Jones has but, given that experience, it could be that he should be more aware than some of those others to whom he referred.
----Whilst I consider it is at the lesser end of the scale, Mr Jones will be well aware of the oft-used phrase, ?if it looks bad, it is bad? and, for the sake of consistency in dealing with such matters, I am satisfied in this case a fine of $200 is appropriate.
------
PH Welch
--Chairman
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Old Hearing
Rules: 869.2.a
Informant:
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: 8e9bac27cc9a1e168421102bf4e190cc
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: Race 7
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: 5f6f5037e1bda11c2ee04d484913358b
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 16/03/2007
meet_title: Greymouth TC - 16 March 2007
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: greymouth-tc
meet_racingtype: harness-racing
meet_chair:
meet_pm1:
meet_pm2:
name: Greymouth TC