Manukau TC – 21 September 2007 –

hearingid: b592454a48d0f1e1b470ba47a7e6bd5a

informantnumber:

horsename:

hearing_racingtype: harness-racing

startdate: 21/09/2007

newcharge:

plea:

penaltyrequired:

decisiondate: no date provided

hearing_title: Manukau TC - 21 September 2007 -

charge:

facts:

appealdecision:

isappeal:

submissionsfordecision:

reasonsfordecision:

Decision:

Following Race 9 Stipendiary Steward Mr JM Muirhead instigated a protest into the second placing of THE ADMAN (driver G Smith) alleging interference to HARRY KAY (Driver IJ Brownlee) and READY FOR BATTLE

DECISION & REASONS

Following Race 9 Stipendiary Steward Mr JM Muirhead instigated a protest into the second placing of THE ADMAN (driver G Smith) alleging interference to HARRY KAY (Driver IJ Brownlee) and READY FOR BATTLE (driver G Wolfenden) with resultant interference to several other horses in the race. HARRY KAY finished fifth and READY FOR BATTLE finished tenth.

Mr Muirhead sought either relegation of THE ADMAN to behind READY FOR BATTLE or disqualification of THE ADMAN from the race.

Mr G Smith, the driver, and Mr CD Good (the owner) were present to represent THE ADMAN.

The protest was based on the provisions of Rule 869 and particularly paragraphs 4 and 8 of that Rule.

Evidence was given by Mr Muirhead and he stated that he witnessed the incident from the Stipendiary Steward's position opposite the winning post. He said that THE ADMAN driven by Mr Smith drew four and as the horses approached the bend, Mr Smith moved his horse inwards. Mr Muirhead said he could hear the other drivers yelling to Mr Smith. Mr Wolfenden's horse was pushed in on the inside of HARRY KAY and over the pylons and had run into a break and that caused interference to several following horses. Mr Muirhead demonstrated the incident by use of the video film and there were several different views of the incident taken from different angles. Mr Muirhead stated that the film was very powerful evidence.

Mr Smith was asked for his comments on Mr Muirhead's evidence and he stated that he did not realise that Mr Wolfenden's horse was down on the inside.

Mr Muirhead then called Mr Brownlee to give evidence. Mr Brownlee stated that he was the driver of HARRY KAY and going into the first bend he said there was not enough room for all three horses and he was under pressure from the outside. He said that he called out to Mr Smith but there was insufficient room and Mr Smith's sulky came into contact with the legs of Mr Brownlee's horse and he in turn came into contact with Mr Wolfenden's horse. Mr. Brownlee said that he was trying to keep off Mr Wolfenden's horse, but there was simply insufficient room and the pressure came from Mr Smith.

Mr Muirhead then called Mr G Wolfenden, the driver of READY FOR BATTLE. He said that he was on the running line and the horse on the outside of him, which was HARRY KAY, got squeezed up onto his horse. He said that he pulled out and there was contact but that as a result of the interference, his horse went over the pylons and broke.

Mr Good suggested that because there was tightening, Mr Wolfenden should have taken hold of his horse. Mr Wolfenden's response was "why should he take hold". He believed that he was entitled to maintain his line.

Mr Smith then gave his evidence. He acknowledges that there was a fraction of contact. Those were his words. Mr Smith said that although he did hear Mr Brownlee call out and he did try to take evasive action, he did not hear Mr Wolfenden. He also again stated that he did not realise that Mr Wolfenden's horse was down on the inside. Mr. Smith acknowledged that there had been some tightening, but he thought that he was possibly sufficiently clear of HARRY KAY.

It was suggested again that perhaps Mr Wolfenden should have eased his horse back and that he should have taken evasive action. Mr Muirhead then stated that Messrs. Wolfenden and Brownlee are senior horsemen and they were maintaining their positions.

I viewed the films on a number of occasions and took particular note of the positions of the various horses and the inward movement of THE ADMAN. It is very clear to me that THE ADMAN caused the interference complained of.

Having regard to the evidence as presented to me and the submissions made, I find that THE ADMAN did move in and caused interference to both HARRY KAY and READY FOR BATTLE and resultant interference to several other horses in the race.

I, accordingly, relegate THE ADMAN from second place to BEHIND READY FOR BATTLE.

The protest is, accordingly, upheld and the amended placings are now 5,9,3,2,6 and 10.

B J Scott

Chairman

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: