Forbury Park TC – 5 November 2009 – Race 6
ID: JCA23181
Hearing Type (Code):
harness-racing
Meet Title:
Forbury Park TC - 5 November 2009
Race Date:
2009/11/05
Race Number:
Race 6
Decision:
Mr Knowles alleged that Mr Shand, the driver of REACHER in race 6, was in breach of rule 868(3) in that he failed to drive the horse out to the finish of the race when he had a reasonable chance of finishing in first place. Mr Shand denied the charge.
--
Mr Knowles alleged that Mr Shand, the driver of REACHER in race 6, was in breach of rule 868(3) in that he failed to drive the horse out to the finish of the race when he had a reasonable chance of finishing in first place. Mr Shand denied the charge.
--Mr Knowles had Mr Allison, stipendiary steward, demonstrate the incident on the side-on and head-on videos. Mr Allison stated that some 20 to 25 metres from the winning post Mr Shand put his whip away and ceased driving his horse out, including failing to shake the reins at the horse.
--Mr Knowles stated that over a distance of some 150 metres REACHER had made up some 3 lengths on MCKELLAR, driven by Mr Dunn. The margin between 1st and 2nd was a nose.
--Mr Shand explained REACHER was a very difficult horse to drive, especially on the bends where he could throw himself down. He said he had been injured because of this tendency of the horse when working the horse at home on several occasions. He said he believed he got the best from the horse that another strike with the whip would have made no difference because REACHER would not have had time to react to the strike before the winning post. He said he wanted to keep pressure on the horse’s mouth with the bend being so close to the winning post. Mr Shand demonstrated that Mr Dunn’s last strike with the whip was only just after his, but we observe Mr Dunn kept urging his horse to the finish. We could not see any such actions from Mr Shand. Mr Shand also said he would have hit REACHER again had he had a horse immediately on his inside for protection. He added he thought he had won the race.
--We are satisfied that Mr Shand did stop driving REACHER some 20 to 25 metres from the winning post. We accept there was no intent from Mr Shand not to win the race but that is not the point, he is required to get the best out of his horse until the finish of the race. This he did not do. We believe even just one more strike with the whip or a shaking of the reins at REACHER would have sufficed and would have kept Mr Shand within the Rules. We accept REACHER is a difficult horse to drive. This is a matter in mitigation of penalty but is not a defence to this charge. We thus find the charge proved.
----
PENALTY
--Mr Shand has been found to be in breach of R 868(3) in failing to drive REACHER out when it had a chance of finishing first. Mr Knowles has asked for a suspension of 4 weeks. We regard the breach as serious and to warrant a penalty in this range. The issues of the integrity of racing and, in particular, the interests of those who had placed investments on REACHER to win the race have to be given due weight.
--We identify 2 mitigating factors: first, that REACHER is a difficult horse to drive and Mr Shand was conscious of the difficulties he would face in steering around the bend immediately after the winning post; and secondly, Mr Shand’s excellent record of no breaches of any Rules this season. Mr Shand only drives his own horses and 2 are racing fit at present. He has said he would not put another driver on REACHER because of its wayward tendencies. So that horse will miss racing at a crucial time of the season.
--Mr Knowles informed the Committee that a breach by Mr B in very similar circumstances, earlier this season, resulted in a 4 day suspension and a fine of $500. We take notice of the fact that Mr B usually has 4 to 5 drives, at least, per meeting. His personal circumstances are thus very different to those of Mr Shand. Balancing all these matters, we suspend Mr Shand from driving from the end of racing today up to and including 2 December. We calculate this to be 8 meetings. This suspension is 4 weeks, but reflects the fact that Mr Shand usually only has 2 drives per meeting.
--Geoff Hall John Eagles
CHAIR Committee Member
67429
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: ff4df468b7391d7ca87e05d198d669fb
informantnumber:
horsename:
hearing_racingtype: harness-racing
startdate: 05/11/2009
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: no date provided
hearing_title: Forbury Park TC - 5 November 2009 - Race 6
charge:
facts:
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
reasonsfordecision:
Decision:
Mr Knowles alleged that Mr Shand, the driver of REACHER in race 6, was in breach of rule 868(3) in that he failed to drive the horse out to the finish of the race when he had a reasonable chance of finishing in first place. Mr Shand denied the charge.
--
Mr Knowles alleged that Mr Shand, the driver of REACHER in race 6, was in breach of rule 868(3) in that he failed to drive the horse out to the finish of the race when he had a reasonable chance of finishing in first place. Mr Shand denied the charge.
--Mr Knowles had Mr Allison, stipendiary steward, demonstrate the incident on the side-on and head-on videos. Mr Allison stated that some 20 to 25 metres from the winning post Mr Shand put his whip away and ceased driving his horse out, including failing to shake the reins at the horse.
--Mr Knowles stated that over a distance of some 150 metres REACHER had made up some 3 lengths on MCKELLAR, driven by Mr Dunn. The margin between 1st and 2nd was a nose.
--Mr Shand explained REACHER was a very difficult horse to drive, especially on the bends where he could throw himself down. He said he had been injured because of this tendency of the horse when working the horse at home on several occasions. He said he believed he got the best from the horse that another strike with the whip would have made no difference because REACHER would not have had time to react to the strike before the winning post. He said he wanted to keep pressure on the horse’s mouth with the bend being so close to the winning post. Mr Shand demonstrated that Mr Dunn’s last strike with the whip was only just after his, but we observe Mr Dunn kept urging his horse to the finish. We could not see any such actions from Mr Shand. Mr Shand also said he would have hit REACHER again had he had a horse immediately on his inside for protection. He added he thought he had won the race.
--We are satisfied that Mr Shand did stop driving REACHER some 20 to 25 metres from the winning post. We accept there was no intent from Mr Shand not to win the race but that is not the point, he is required to get the best out of his horse until the finish of the race. This he did not do. We believe even just one more strike with the whip or a shaking of the reins at REACHER would have sufficed and would have kept Mr Shand within the Rules. We accept REACHER is a difficult horse to drive. This is a matter in mitigation of penalty but is not a defence to this charge. We thus find the charge proved.
----
PENALTY
--Mr Shand has been found to be in breach of R 868(3) in failing to drive REACHER out when it had a chance of finishing first. Mr Knowles has asked for a suspension of 4 weeks. We regard the breach as serious and to warrant a penalty in this range. The issues of the integrity of racing and, in particular, the interests of those who had placed investments on REACHER to win the race have to be given due weight.
--We identify 2 mitigating factors: first, that REACHER is a difficult horse to drive and Mr Shand was conscious of the difficulties he would face in steering around the bend immediately after the winning post; and secondly, Mr Shand’s excellent record of no breaches of any Rules this season. Mr Shand only drives his own horses and 2 are racing fit at present. He has said he would not put another driver on REACHER because of its wayward tendencies. So that horse will miss racing at a crucial time of the season.
--Mr Knowles informed the Committee that a breach by Mr B in very similar circumstances, earlier this season, resulted in a 4 day suspension and a fine of $500. We take notice of the fact that Mr B usually has 4 to 5 drives, at least, per meeting. His personal circumstances are thus very different to those of Mr Shand. Balancing all these matters, we suspend Mr Shand from driving from the end of racing today up to and including 2 December. We calculate this to be 8 meetings. This suspension is 4 weeks, but reflects the fact that Mr Shand usually only has 2 drives per meeting.
--Geoff Hall John Eagles
CHAIR Committee Member
67429
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Old Hearing
Rules: 868.3
Informant:
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: 266e0e970ef53a32f522ebafff3f1be8
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: Race 6
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: 529812baf66695d58ac378a77a273648
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 05/11/2009
meet_title: Forbury Park TC - 5 November 2009
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: forbury-park-tc
meet_racingtype: harness-racing
meet_chair:
meet_pm1:
meet_pm2:
name: Forbury Park TC