Kumeu TC – 14 October 2005 –
ID: JCA19606
Hearing Type (Code):
harness-racing
Decision: --
This was an adjourned enquiry in respect to an Information lodged by Stipendary Steward Mr J Muirhead at the Manukau Trotting Club meeting at Alexandra Park Raceway on 30th September2005 against Mr A Pyers the driver of No More Reign alleging a breach of the above rules in that horseman Mr Pyers moved from the running line outwards forcing Vivaldi (T Cowan) and T.K. Sabre (P Ferguson) to race wider on the track with 1200 meters to run. It was alleged that this was a breach of the rules commonly known as the "push out rules".
--| -- RULES NO: 869(4), 869(6)(c) and 869(6)(c) ----This was an adjourned enquiry in respect to an Information lodged by Stipendary Steward Mr J Muirhead at the Manukau Trotting Club meeting at Alexandra Park Raceway on 30th September2005 against Mr A Pyers the driver of No More Reign alleging a breach of the above rules in that horseman Mr Pyers moved from the running line outwards forcing Vivaldi (T Cowan) and T.K. Sabre (P Ferguson) to race wider on the track with 1200 meters to run. It was alleged that this was a breach of the rules commonly known as the "push out rules". ----Mr Pyers did not admit a breach of the rules and wished to be present at the hearing of the Information and the JCA Committee at the Manukau Trotting Club's meeting adjourned this matter to be heard prior to the first race at the Kumeu District Trotting Club's meeting on Friday 14th October 2005. ----Mr Muirhead was asked by this Committee to read the relevant rules and Mr Pyers was then asked if he understood those rules. He indicated that he did understand them. ----Mr Muirhead then demonstated the incident on video film. Mr Pyers had been driving his horse on the running line and outside him was Alpine Dream driven by Phillip Butcher. With approximately 1200 meters to run Mr Butcher moved his horse three wide to advance around the field. Mr Cowan then started to move his horse Vivaldi into the space left by Mr Butcher and on the outside of Mr Pyers. Mr Ferguson driving T.K. Sabre had moved into a position three wide outside Mr Cowan's horse. Stipendary Steward Mr J Muirhead demonstrated by use of the different video films of the incident that firstly Mr Cowan had moved alongside Mr Pyers horse to the extent that the head and front legs of Mr Cowan's horse were at least alongside, if not in front of, the sulky wheel of Mr Pyers' horse and accordingly alongside Mr Pyers himself. Mr Muirhead demonstrated the outward movement of Mr Pyers which forced Mr Cowan to not only move out wider but also forced him to take hold of his horse. The outward movement of Mr Cowan's horse also resulted in Mr Ferguson being pushed further out onto the track. In Mr Muirhead's view the video evidence was very clear in relation to the positioning of the horses and as far as he was concerned this was a clear breach of the "push out" rules by Mr Pyers. ----We are fortunate at Alexandra Park in that we are provided with video evidence from three different angles. --Mr Pyers was then given the opportunity to cross examine Mr Muirhead and he was initially more interested in making a statement rather than asking questions. Mr Pyers tried to suggest that there was space available to him in the area vacated by Mr Butcher and that he did not move out very far and that no part of Mr Cowan's horse was alongside Mr Pyers' horse or sulky. Mr Muirhead did not agree with this. ----Mr Muirhead then called Mr T Cowan to give evidence. Mr Cowan stated that he was improving from behind Mr Phillip Butcher into the gap left by him and that he, Mr Cowan, did not intend moving three wide but he wanted to remain two wide and move up behind the horse in the two wide line in front of him. Mr Cowan stated that the legs of his horse were up alongside and even past the sulky wheel of Mr Pyers' horse and that Mr Pyers simply moved out and pushed Mr Cowan's horse wider on the track. Mr Cowan was quite definite in his evidence in that Mr Pyers had forced Mr Cowan wider on the track and this also resulted in Mr Ferguson being forced wider on the track as well. Mr Ferguson had prior to this incident moved up three wide alongside Mr Cowan's horse. Mr Pyers was given the opportunity to cross examine Mr Cowan and did so. Mr Cowan remained firm in his evidence and as far as he was concerned Mr Pyers moved out when he was not entitled to do so and this caused problems for not only Mr Cowan's horse but also Mr Ferguson's horse. ----Mr Pyers was then given his opportunity to present evidence and the video films of the incident were made available to him to explain his position. Mr Pyers made a number of general statements about the incident and although acknowledging some outward movement did not believe that he had moved very far and tried to downplay the incident. Mr Pyers tried to show that there was a space outside him after Mr Butcher had moved and that all he was doing was moving into that space and that Mr Cowan was not alongside him and shouldn?t have been attempting to move into this space anyway. However Mr Pyers did state that he was not sure where the legs of Mr Cowan's horse were. Mr Pyers would not acknowledge that he had breached the "push out rule" or any rule and did not acknowledge that his outward movement had caused any inconvenience to Mr Cowan's and Mr Ferguson's horses or any other horses in the race for that matter. Mr Pyers suggested that Mr Cowan had an opportunity to move three wide and then ultimately get back in the two wide line albeit further up in the field. Mr Pyers suggested that this was not a very serious incident at all and was certainly not caused by him. ----Mr Pyers then advised this Committee that he had two witnesses to call, Mr Ferguson and Mr Lee. ----Mr Ferguson was called first by Mr Pyers to give evidence. It may well not have been in Mr Pyers interest to call Mr Ferguson because Mr Pyers wanted Mr Ferguson to give evidence of the incident on race night and also to give evidence on the video films as an expert because Mr Ferguson is a senior professional horseman. The latter evidence was not helpful to Mr Pyers. ----Mr Ferguson stated that he could not see the incident properly on race night because he was three wide outside Mr Cowan's horse. Mr Ferguson did however have to move wider on the track when Mr Cowan's horse moved out wider. Mr Ferguson's words were that "whichever horse moved first caused the problem". Mr Ferguson then viewed the video films of the incident at the request of Mr Pyers and he believed that Mr Cowan's horse was up alongside Mr Pyers' sulky and that Mr Pyers should not have moved out. In answer to a question he acknowledged that even if the nose of Mr Cowan's horse was up on the sulky wheel of Mr Pyers' horse then Mr Pyers could not come out. Mr Ferguson stated that it was lucky that Mr Pyers didn?t come out further because Mr Cowan was the "meat in the sandwich" and if Mr Pyers had moved further then there would have been a much more serious incident and Mr Cowan would have been in even more difficulty. Mr Ferguson thought that Mr Cowan had shown good driving skills by being careful and easing his horse so that the incident was not worse than it turned out to be. Mr Ferguson was quite clear from viewing the video film that Mr Pyers was not entitled to move out from the running line and that his movement caused the problem and as far as Mr Ferguson was concerned it was a clear breach of the "push out rule". ----At the conclusion of the Mr Ferguson's evidence Mr Pyers chose not to call Mr Lee and stated that "things don?t look very good for me". ------ Decision and Reasons ----We are satisfied that after viewing the video films and listening to the evidence that Mr Pyers has breached Rules 869(4), 869(6)(b), and 869(6)(c). We do not accept Mr Pyers view of the incident and it is our view that Mr Pyers does not really understand fully the implications of the movement in the race by him. We prefer the evidence given by the informant and particularly the forthright evidence from Mr Cowan and also the evidence from Mr Ferguson. There is in our view a clear breach of the above rules by Mr Pyers. ----Penalty ----We invited submissions from Mr Muirhead and Mr Pyers as to penalty. Mr Muirhead produced to us Mr Pyers driving record and Mr Pyers was given an opportunity to check that record and acknowledge that it was correct. Mr Pyers does not drive very frequently but he does have several licence suspensions on his record. Mr Muirhead expressed some concern the Mr Pyers did not understand the reality of the situation concerning the incident that is the subject of this information. Mr Muirhead recommended either a suspension of Mr Pyers licence for three race meetings together with a fine of $250.00 or a fine of $500.00. ----Mr Pyers in his submissions continued to downplay the incident and again did not acknowledge that he had caused any problem and felt that the penalties suggested by Mr Muirhead were too much. ----In imposing penalty this committee took into account the following matters: ----
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- Having taken all of those matters into account the committee has decided to suspend Mr Pyers Horseman's Licence up to and until the conclusion of racing on the 30th October 2005 being effectively four driving days together with a fine of $250.00 ----
|
| -- |
Decision Date: 14/10/2005
Publish Date: 14/10/2005
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: 46c1fe5c8d3b5fe1d3780351e19728cd
informantnumber:
horsename:
hearing_racingtype: harness-racing
startdate: 14/10/2005
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: no date provided
hearing_title: Kumeu TC - 14 October 2005 -
charge:
facts:
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
reasonsfordecision:
Decision:
--This was an adjourned enquiry in respect to an Information lodged by Stipendary Steward Mr J Muirhead at the Manukau Trotting Club meeting at Alexandra Park Raceway on 30th September2005 against Mr A Pyers the driver of No More Reign alleging a breach of the above rules in that horseman Mr Pyers moved from the running line outwards forcing Vivaldi (T Cowan) and T.K. Sabre (P Ferguson) to race wider on the track with 1200 meters to run. It was alleged that this was a breach of the rules commonly known as the "push out rules".
--| -- RULES NO: 869(4), 869(6)(c) and 869(6)(c)----This was an adjourned enquiry in respect to an Information lodged by Stipendary Steward Mr J Muirhead at the Manukau Trotting Club meeting at Alexandra Park Raceway on 30th September2005 against Mr A Pyers the driver of No More Reign alleging a breach of the above rules in that horseman Mr Pyers moved from the running line outwards forcing Vivaldi (T Cowan) and T.K. Sabre (P Ferguson) to race wider on the track with 1200 meters to run. It was alleged that this was a breach of the rules commonly known as the "push out rules". ----Mr Pyers did not admit a breach of the rules and wished to be present at the hearing of the Information and the JCA Committee at the Manukau Trotting Club's meeting adjourned this matter to be heard prior to the first race at the Kumeu District Trotting Club's meeting on Friday 14th October 2005. ----Mr Muirhead was asked by this Committee to read the relevant rules and Mr Pyers was then asked if he understood those rules. He indicated that he did understand them. ----Mr Muirhead then demonstated the incident on video film. Mr Pyers had been driving his horse on the running line and outside him was Alpine Dream driven by Phillip Butcher. With approximately 1200 meters to run Mr Butcher moved his horse three wide to advance around the field. Mr Cowan then started to move his horse Vivaldi into the space left by Mr Butcher and on the outside of Mr Pyers. Mr Ferguson driving T.K. Sabre had moved into a position three wide outside Mr Cowan's horse. Stipendary Steward Mr J Muirhead demonstrated by use of the different video films of the incident that firstly Mr Cowan had moved alongside Mr Pyers horse to the extent that the head and front legs of Mr Cowan's horse were at least alongside, if not in front of, the sulky wheel of Mr Pyers' horse and accordingly alongside Mr Pyers himself. Mr Muirhead demonstrated the outward movement of Mr Pyers which forced Mr Cowan to not only move out wider but also forced him to take hold of his horse. The outward movement of Mr Cowan's horse also resulted in Mr Ferguson being pushed further out onto the track. In Mr Muirhead's view the video evidence was very clear in relation to the positioning of the horses and as far as he was concerned this was a clear breach of the "push out" rules by Mr Pyers. ----We are fortunate at Alexandra Park in that we are provided with video evidence from three different angles. --Mr Pyers was then given the opportunity to cross examine Mr Muirhead and he was initially more interested in making a statement rather than asking questions. Mr Pyers tried to suggest that there was space available to him in the area vacated by Mr Butcher and that he did not move out very far and that no part of Mr Cowan's horse was alongside Mr Pyers' horse or sulky. Mr Muirhead did not agree with this. ----Mr Muirhead then called Mr T Cowan to give evidence. Mr Cowan stated that he was improving from behind Mr Phillip Butcher into the gap left by him and that he, Mr Cowan, did not intend moving three wide but he wanted to remain two wide and move up behind the horse in the two wide line in front of him. Mr Cowan stated that the legs of his horse were up alongside and even past the sulky wheel of Mr Pyers' horse and that Mr Pyers simply moved out and pushed Mr Cowan's horse wider on the track. Mr Cowan was quite definite in his evidence in that Mr Pyers had forced Mr Cowan wider on the track and this also resulted in Mr Ferguson being forced wider on the track as well. Mr Ferguson had prior to this incident moved up three wide alongside Mr Cowan's horse. Mr Pyers was given the opportunity to cross examine Mr Cowan and did so. Mr Cowan remained firm in his evidence and as far as he was concerned Mr Pyers moved out when he was not entitled to do so and this caused problems for not only Mr Cowan's horse but also Mr Ferguson's horse. ----Mr Pyers was then given his opportunity to present evidence and the video films of the incident were made available to him to explain his position. Mr Pyers made a number of general statements about the incident and although acknowledging some outward movement did not believe that he had moved very far and tried to downplay the incident. Mr Pyers tried to show that there was a space outside him after Mr Butcher had moved and that all he was doing was moving into that space and that Mr Cowan was not alongside him and shouldn?t have been attempting to move into this space anyway. However Mr Pyers did state that he was not sure where the legs of Mr Cowan's horse were. Mr Pyers would not acknowledge that he had breached the "push out rule" or any rule and did not acknowledge that his outward movement had caused any inconvenience to Mr Cowan's and Mr Ferguson's horses or any other horses in the race for that matter. Mr Pyers suggested that Mr Cowan had an opportunity to move three wide and then ultimately get back in the two wide line albeit further up in the field. Mr Pyers suggested that this was not a very serious incident at all and was certainly not caused by him. ----Mr Pyers then advised this Committee that he had two witnesses to call, Mr Ferguson and Mr Lee. ----Mr Ferguson was called first by Mr Pyers to give evidence. It may well not have been in Mr Pyers interest to call Mr Ferguson because Mr Pyers wanted Mr Ferguson to give evidence of the incident on race night and also to give evidence on the video films as an expert because Mr Ferguson is a senior professional horseman. The latter evidence was not helpful to Mr Pyers. ----Mr Ferguson stated that he could not see the incident properly on race night because he was three wide outside Mr Cowan's horse. Mr Ferguson did however have to move wider on the track when Mr Cowan's horse moved out wider. Mr Ferguson's words were that "whichever horse moved first caused the problem". Mr Ferguson then viewed the video films of the incident at the request of Mr Pyers and he believed that Mr Cowan's horse was up alongside Mr Pyers' sulky and that Mr Pyers should not have moved out. In answer to a question he acknowledged that even if the nose of Mr Cowan's horse was up on the sulky wheel of Mr Pyers' horse then Mr Pyers could not come out. Mr Ferguson stated that it was lucky that Mr Pyers didn?t come out further because Mr Cowan was the "meat in the sandwich" and if Mr Pyers had moved further then there would have been a much more serious incident and Mr Cowan would have been in even more difficulty. Mr Ferguson thought that Mr Cowan had shown good driving skills by being careful and easing his horse so that the incident was not worse than it turned out to be. Mr Ferguson was quite clear from viewing the video film that Mr Pyers was not entitled to move out from the running line and that his movement caused the problem and as far as Mr Ferguson was concerned it was a clear breach of the "push out rule". ----At the conclusion of the Mr Ferguson's evidence Mr Pyers chose not to call Mr Lee and stated that "things don?t look very good for me". ------ Decision and Reasons ----We are satisfied that after viewing the video films and listening to the evidence that Mr Pyers has breached Rules 869(4), 869(6)(b), and 869(6)(c). We do not accept Mr Pyers view of the incident and it is our view that Mr Pyers does not really understand fully the implications of the movement in the race by him. We prefer the evidence given by the informant and particularly the forthright evidence from Mr Cowan and also the evidence from Mr Ferguson. There is in our view a clear breach of the above rules by Mr Pyers. ----Penalty ----We invited submissions from Mr Muirhead and Mr Pyers as to penalty. Mr Muirhead produced to us Mr Pyers driving record and Mr Pyers was given an opportunity to check that record and acknowledge that it was correct. Mr Pyers does not drive very frequently but he does have several licence suspensions on his record. Mr Muirhead expressed some concern the Mr Pyers did not understand the reality of the situation concerning the incident that is the subject of this information. Mr Muirhead recommended either a suspension of Mr Pyers licence for three race meetings together with a fine of $250.00 or a fine of $500.00. ----Mr Pyers in his submissions continued to downplay the incident and again did not acknowledge that he had caused any problem and felt that the penalties suggested by Mr Muirhead were too much. ----In imposing penalty this committee took into account the following matters: ----
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- Having taken all of those matters into account the committee has decided to suspend Mr Pyers Horseman's Licence up to and until the conclusion of racing on the 30th October 2005 being effectively four driving days together with a fine of $250.00 ----
|
| -- |
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: