NZ Metro TC – 25 April 2008 – Race 10

hearingid: 6e392355601451dbdf05530554f7e267

informantnumber:

horsename:

hearing_racingtype: harness-racing

startdate: 25/04/2008

newcharge:

plea:

penaltyrequired:

decisiondate: no date provided

hearing_title: NZ Metro TC - 25 April 2008 - Race 10

charge:

facts:

appealdecision:

isappeal:

submissionsfordecision:

reasonsfordecision:

Decision:

Following the running of Race 10, Chateau Blanc Suites Apartment Hotel Mobile Pace, an information was filed by Chief Stipendiary Steward, Mr N R Escott, against Licensed Open Driver, Mr R D Holmes, alleging that Mr Holmes “drove carelessly when his horse BALLYMAHON struck the sulky wheel of WOKEUPTHISMORNING causing his horse to stumble and HOME VENDOR to break”.

Mr Holmes was present at the hearing of the information and did not admit the breach.

Mr N M Ydgren, Stipendiary Steward, showed video replays of the Race with approximately 1400-1500 metres to run.  Mr Ydgren pointed out Mr Holmes following WOKEUPTHISMORNING (K S Hadfield) in the one-out line approaching the turn into the home straight with approximately 1400 metres to race.  He pointed out the front leg of BALLYMAHON make contact with the sulky of WOKEUPTHISMORNING as a result of which BALLYMAHON stumbled and went back on HOME PRODUCT (J T Keast) causing that runner to break and lose ground.  Mr Ydgren stated that the tyre of WOKEUPTHISMORNING had punctured and had wrapped around the sulky stay, severely disadvantaging it.  Mr Ydgren observed that Mr Holmes did not appear to be having a difficult drive on BALLYMAHON and this was confirmed by the video.

Mr Holmes said that he had raced the horse in a “snaffle” bit because of its tendency to race keenly.  When the 3-wide line had come round, the mare had got her head up above Mr Hadfield’s helmet, which carried her legs further forward.  He did not deny that contact had been made with the sulky of WOKEUPTHISMORNING.  The mare had always been known for her keenness and was to be retired, he said.  With the horses moving round 3-wide, the mare was getting “keener and keener” and was virtually uncontrollable. This was an unavoidable situation, Mr Holmes submitted.

Mr Escott submitted that there was little or no evidence to support Mr Holmes’ statement that he was having trouble driving the mare. He was responsible for the chances of the other two runners being affected. When the horse’s head came up, Mr Holmes took remedial action too late, because he was getting too close to the horse in front.

Following a brief deliberation, the Committee delivered the following oral decision:

“With approximately 1400 metres to race in Race 10, Mr Holmes on BALLYMAHON was following WOKEUPTHISMORNING driven by K S Hadfield in the one-out line. At that point, and it was accepted by Mr Holmes, his horse’s leg struck the sulky of WOKEUPTHISMORNING causing his horse to break with consequent interference to HOME VENDOR, driven by J T Keast, which was following BALLYMAHON. The tyre of WOKEUPTHISMORNING was dislodged from the wheel, inconveniencing that horse for the remainder of the Race.

Mr Holmes’ defence was that his horse had been giving him a difficult drive, racing keenly, and that it had got its head up and had contacted the sulky wheel of the horse in front, WOKEUPTHISMORNING.

However, it was the Stipendiary Stewards’ evidence that it was not apparent from the video replays that Mr Holmes was having any difficulty with his drive. I agree with that.

Mr Holmes has an obligation to drive in a manner ensuring that his horse does not contact the wheel of the runner in front, as happened on this occasion. There are instances where such incidents can be attributed to the wayward tendencies of the horse and there is little the driver can do to avoid the incident. I do not accept that this was one of those instances.

I find that, in allowing BALLYMAHON to contact the wheel of the runner in front, the runner it was trailing, Mr Holmes’ driving fell short of the standard of a reasonable, competent driver and therefore he drove carelessly. Accordingly, I find the charge of careless driving to be proved”.

Mr Escott referred the Committee to the fact that Mr Holmes had been found guilty of careless driving at Banks Peninsula on 22 February 2008 and was fined $200. On that basis, and on the basis that the chances of two other runners had been affected, Mr Escott recommended a fine of $300.

Mr Holmes declined to make any submissions in relation to penalty except to question that he should be penalised on this occasion for the fine for careless driving at the Banks Peninsula meeting. The Committee explained to Mr Holmes the reason why such previous matters were taken into account in deciding penalty.

Taking into account the submissions of the parties and Mr Holmes’ driving record, Mr Holmes was fined the sum of $250.       

R G McKenzie

sumissionsforpenalty:

reasonsforpenalty:

penalty:

hearing_type: Old Hearing

Rules:

Informant:

JockeysandTrainer:

Otherperson:

PersonPresent:

Respondent:

StipendSteward:

raceid: 8316c41b1fc80cedf76862fe600e5a94

race_expapproval:

racecancelled: 0

race_noreport: 0

race_emailed1: 0

race_emailed2: 0

race_title: Race 10

submittochair:

race_expappcomment:

race_km:

race_otherexp:

race_chair:

race_pm1:

race_pm2:

meetid: 709ff03386368196c6e071e6dca424d0

meet_expapproval:

meet_noreport: 0

waitingforpublication: 0

meet_emailed1: 0

meet_emailed2: 0

meetdate: 25/04/2008

meet_title: NZ Metro TC - 25 April 2008

meet_expappcomment:

meet_km:

meet_otherexp:

tracklocation: nz-metro-tc

meet_racingtype: harness-racing

meet_chair:

meet_pm1:

meet_pm2:

name: NZ Metro TC