Cambridge – Te Awamutu HRC – 30 September 2010 – R 2

hearingid: eba55d95b4706a2059513271d50f25fa

informantnumber:

horsename:

hearing_racingtype: harness-racing

startdate: 30/09/2010

newcharge:

plea:

penaltyrequired:

decisiondate: no date provided

hearing_title: Cambridge - Te Awamutu HRC - 30 September 2010 - R 2

charge:

facts:

appealdecision:

isappeal:

submissionsfordecision:

reasonsfordecision:

Decision:

RACEDAY JUDICIAL COMMITTEE DECISION

Informant:  Mr TW Taumanu

Defendant:  Mr GA Martin

Information No:  68687

Meeting:  Cambridge-Te Awamutu Harness Racing Club

Date:  30 September 2010

Venue:  Cambridge Raceway, Cambridge

Race:  2

Rule No:  Passing Lane Regulation Nos: 4 & 8 and Rule 869(4)

Judicial Committee:  BJ Scott Chairman, - N McCutcheon Committee Member

Plea:  Admitted                       

CHARGE:

Horseman Mr GA Martin was charged that upon entering the home straight he failed to maintain as straight a course as possible parallel to the running line and allow the trailing horse full access to the inside lane.        

FACTS:

Passing Lane Regulation No: 4 provides:

            “In the last lap of any race the leading horse on the running line shall, upon entering the home straight, maintain a straight a course as possible parallel to the running line and allow the trailing horses full access to the expanded inside lane.”

Passing Lane Regulation No: 8 provides:

            “Failure to comply with Clauses 4 and/or 5 and/or 6 and/or 7 hereof shall be deemed to be a breach of Rule 869(4) of the NZ Rules of Harness Racing in respect of which Rule   1003 and 869(8) apply”

Rule 896(4) provides:

            “No horseman shall during any race do anything which interferes or is likely to interfere with his own horse and/or any other horse or it’s progress”.

The Rules were read to Mr Martin and he acknowledged that he understood them.

Mr Taumanu gave evidence and said that he watched the race and saw Mr Martin leading in the latter part of the race with his horse Benromach.  He said that when Mr Martin turned into the home straight that he allowed his horse to run into the passing lane and did not do anything about it.  He said that as far as he was concerned the horse was not giving Mr Martin any problems at all and Mr Martin was not making any effort to maintain a straight line after turning for home.

Mr Taumanu then showed the films of the race and he particularly used the head on film and showed the continual inwards movement from Benromach all the way down the straight and that movement was into the passing lane.  He pointed to the fact that Benromach was not giving Mr Martin any trouble at all and also he pointed out that Mr Martin did not appear to be taking any steps to try to correct his horse’s line.

Mr Taumanu said that the trailing horse was not keeping up with Benromach and so there was no interference caused to it but Mr Taumanu said that that was not the point because the point of the Rule is that drivers turning for home are to drive their horses in a straight line and they are not entitled to run down into the passing lane.

Mr Martin said that his horse hand been warned for skipping recently and that part of it’s gear was now a Murphy Blind on the outside.  He said that this had worked at Alexander Park but because he was now racing the other way round at Cambridge that the horse had hung away from the Murphy Blind and had continued on into the passing lane.  Mr Martin also said that his horse is a line trotter rather than a square trotter and that because of this he felt that he could not try and straighten his horse because he might then break it up. He said that he did look around when he was in the straight and saw that he wasn’t interfering with any other horse but that it was his horse that was running in and he could do very little about it.  He said he was doing his best by the horse.

Mr Taumanu said that he did not accept Mr Martin’s evidence at all and he said that the horse was not giving Mr Martin any problems whatsoever and that Mr Martin had to comply with the Rules.

DECISION:

The charge having been admitted is accordingly proven.

PENALTY SUBMISSIONS:

Mr Taumanu said that although on this occasion there was no interference to any other horse that it was an admitted breach of the Rules and that the Stipendiary Stewards were looking for a fine in the range of $200.00 to $300.00.

Mr Martin for his part said that a fine of that size was rubbish.

PENALTY REASONS:

The Committee took into account the evidence given by both parties.  The evidence presented by Mr Taumanu is quite clear.  Mr Martin has admitted the charge although in his evidence he is endeavouring to blame his horse.

The inwards movement by Mr Martin did not inconvenience any other horse however he has admitted a breach of the Rules.  The Committee finds that this matter is at the lower end of the scale of seriousness and taking all matters into account believes that a fine of $200.00 is appropriate. 

PENALTY:

The Committee therefore fines Mr Martin $200.00.

sumissionsforpenalty:

reasonsforpenalty:

penalty:

hearing_type: Old Hearing

Rules: Passing lane regualtions NOs: 4 & 8 and Rule 869(4)

Informant:

JockeysandTrainer:

Otherperson:

PersonPresent:

Respondent:

StipendSteward:

raceid: a5227cf6ca1df926f1470b9ac300b6e9

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: d2656e270310b3f71e302028de2ff5be

meet_expapproval:

meet_noreport: 0

waitingforpublication: 0

meet_emailed1: 0

meet_emailed2: 0

meetdate: 30/09/2010

meet_title: Cambridge - Te Awamutu HRC - 30 September 2010

meet_expappcomment:

meet_km:

meet_otherexp:

tracklocation: cambridge-te-awamutu-hrc

meet_racingtype: harness-racing

meet_chair: tom

meet_pm1: tom

meet_pm2: tom

name: Cambridge - Te Awamutu HRC