Ashburton TC – 18 May 2010 – R 1

hearingid: 8bcdb91778bc6e53a2b48c85f19ec08a

informantnumber:

horsename:

hearing_racingtype: harness-racing

startdate: 18/05/2010

newcharge:

plea:

penaltyrequired:

decisiondate: no date provided

hearing_title: Ashburton TC - 18 May 2010 - R 1

charge:

facts:

appealdecision:

isappeal:

submissionsfordecision:

reasonsfordecision:

Decision:

RACEDAY JUDICIAL COMMITTEE DECISION

Informant:  N G McIntyre, Stipendiary Steward

Defendant:  D G Moore, Licensed Open Horseman

Information No:  68847

Meeting:  Ashburton Trotting Club

Date:  1 8 May 2010

Venue:  Addington Raceway, Christchurch

Race:  1

Rule No:  868 (3)

Judicial Committee:  R G McKenzie, Chairman – J Millar, Committee Member

Plea:  Not Admitted

THE CHARGE:

Following the running of Race 1, Search “Driver Plate” on Trademe Trot, an information was filed by Stipendiary Steward, Mr N G McIntyre, against Licensed Open Horseman, Mr D G Moore, alleging a breach of Rule 868 (3) in that Mr Moore, as the driver of CAPITOL DRIVE in the Race, “failed to drive this horse out over the concluding stages”.

Mr Moore was present at the hearing of the information and he indicated that he did not admit the breach.

Rule 868 provides as follows:

(3)     Every horseman shall drive his horse out to the end of the race if he has any reasonable chance of running first, second, third, fourth, fifth or sixth.

SUBMISSIONS:

Mr McIntyre stated that, shortly after the start of the 2600 metres standing start race, Mr Moore took CAPITOL DRIVE to the lead and remained there. Mr McIntyre showed a video replay of the final 600 metres of the Race. He described Mr Moore’s actions over the concluding stages as “flicking”. He submitted that it was the obligation of a horseman under the Rule to show some actions to drive the horse on – a demonstrable or real attempt or a discernible or obvious movement so that he can be seen to be driving his horse out. He believed Mr Moore’s actions on this occasion were “minimal”.

Mr Moore had looked both ways in the run home and did “flick” the horse, Mr McIntyre said. It had finished in 2^nd placing, beaten by a half length.

Mr Moore stated that, from about the 600 metres, the horse was on the bit but then “dropped” the bit. Turning for home, he had attempted to “put a couple of lengths” on the field, which was apparent from the video, he submitted. The horse was “doing its best”. At about the 150 metres, he looked around to see if he was going to “run in the money” – the horse was not travelling that well, he said, and could not have “mustered” any more, no matter how hard he hit him. The horse had not had a race for 2½ months and had had no trials or workouts. The horse had “come to the end of it” – he had done the best he could. The winner, WAX AND WANE (C D Thornley) had won by a half length going away and its driver had not moved either. That horse was travelling too good, Mr Moore said. He did not want to “knock the horse around” when he knew it was only going to run 2^nd. He had the 3^rd horse covered, he said (the Committee noted that the margin between 2^nd and 3^rd was 3¼ lengths).

REASON(S):

The Committee listened to the evidence and submissions of both parties and carefully viewed the video replays.

The Committee agreed with Mr McIntyre as to the requirements of the Rule and that Mr Moore had taken minimal actions by way of driving his horse, CAPITOL DRIVE, out over the concluding stages of the Race.

Whilst the Committee agreed with Mr McIntyre in those respects, the Rule also requires that we look at and satisfy ourselves that Mr Moore had a “reasonable chance” of, in this case, running first. In doing so, the Committee had regard to Mr Moore’s evidence that, shortly after turning for home, he tried to put a break on the field. At that point, he could be seen to strike the horse on a couple of occasions with the whip and urge it along.

Mr Moore told the Committee that he believed that the horse was “doing its best” and that it could not have “mustered” more of an effort. He explained that the horse was having its first start for 2½ months and that it had not been to any trials or workouts since it last raced.

The Committee also had regard to Mr Moore’s submission that the eventual winner, WAX AND WANE, was travelling very well when it went up alongside of and headed CAPITOL DRIVE and that it was going away at the line. This submission was supported by the video evidence and was an important factor in the Committee’s decision. The margin of a half length between 1^st and 2^nd at the finish was also significant, as was the margin between 2^nd and 3^rd of 3¼ lengths.

It was the Committee’s view that, while Mr Moore did not show any obvious vigour over the final stages, the Committee accepted that, for the reasons given, that it was unlikely that his minimal efforts over the final stages cost the horse the chance of winning the race.

DECISION:

The Committee was not satisfied that, on a balance of probabilities, that the charge had been proved and it was dismissed.

R G McKenzie                J Miller

CHAIR                          Committee Member

68847

sumissionsforpenalty:

reasonsforpenalty:

penalty:

hearing_type: Old Hearing

Rules: 868 (3)

Informant:

JockeysandTrainer:

Otherperson:

PersonPresent:

Respondent:

StipendSteward:

raceid: 61bb03a30992d89c0d09b1b90d22bfe0

race_expapproval:

racecancelled: 0

race_noreport: 0

race_emailed1: 0

race_emailed2: 0

race_title: R 1

submittochair:

race_expappcomment:

race_km:

race_otherexp:

race_chair:

race_pm1:

race_pm2:

meetid: 01202668fd4e51f30d7188e990574d83

meet_expapproval:

meet_noreport: 0

waitingforpublication: 0

meet_emailed1: 0

meet_emailed2: 0

meetdate: 18/05/2010

meet_title: Ashburton TC - 18 May 2010

meet_expappcomment:

meet_km:

meet_otherexp:

tracklocation: ashburton-tc

meet_racingtype: harness-racing

meet_chair: tom

meet_pm1: tom

meet_pm2: tom

name: Ashburton TC