Auckland RC – 28 October 2006 – Race 4
ID: JCA21042
Code:
Thoroughbred
Hearing Type (Code):
thoroughbred-racing
Meet Title:
Auckland RC - 28 October 2006
Race Date:
2006/10/28
Race Number:
Race 4
Decision: --
This information alleged a breach of Rule 871(1)(d) for careless riding by jockey, M. B. Wenn in that she shifted inwards after the start on ROYAL KAZAK when not sufficiently clear of STRADIFY
--
DECISION & REASONS:
--This information alleged a breach of Rule 871(1)(d) for careless riding by jockey, M. B. Wenn in that she shifted inwards after the start on ROYAL KAZAK when not sufficiently clear of STRADIFY (A. Peard) who was dictated inwards making contact with OAKTREE (T. Russell) who was forced on to OOZLE (D. Hain) who struck the running rail. The breach was not admitted.
----Jockey A. Peard confirmed he rode STRADIFY which was racing three wide off the running rail shortly after the start. He said he had jumped well and saw Michelle come from his outside and he in turn was forced onto the horse inside him making contact. He agreed she was barely a length ahead of him and he was unable to change ground to his outside without clipping heels.
----Jockey T. Russell confirmed he rode OAKTREE racing inside Mr. Peard and received "quite a good bump". Mr Hain was on his inside and he tried to give him room by moving out prior to the incident because he could see what was about to happen. He was, however, unable to prevent him receiving a severe bump.
----Apprentice Jockey D. Hain confirmed he rode OOZLE and was inside Mr Russell when he became tightened and made contact with the running rail turning the hind- quarters of his horse into the rail. He did not call because he did not have a chance to do so.
----Assistant Stipendiary Steward T. Treweek demonstrated the incident on video. After identifying the runners he pointed out the movement in by them. He noted that Ms. Wenn was on the extreme outside coming in initially three or four horse-widths. Mr. Peard was then directly behind and had not been hindered prior to that stage. Coming forward from there the video showed Mr. Peard turning his horse's head away as Ms. Wenn continued her inward movement and Mr. Peard had to take hold and the resulting pressure to those inside him. Turning to the side on videos he illustrated that it was clear that Ms. Wenn was not the required distance clear of Mr. Peard when the incident took place.
----Ms. Wenn confirmed that the videos showed that some interference had occurred but she felt it was unfair to say that she was at fault when all she was doing was to follow Lisa Allpress across and at any other time nothing would have happened. Although she had looked in she had not seen Mr. Peard improving and felt he should have been able to do something to avoid the incident. It was not therefore entirely her fault she believed and with his horse over racing he had contributed to the resulting tightening as well.
----Summing up Mr. Coles asked the committee to take note of the evidence of Mr. Treweek, which, he suggested, set out the incident clearly. He submitted it was irrelevant for Ms. Wenn to say that she was unaware of the movement inside her by Mr. Peard. He had started from number six and was quite entitled to his clear run ahead. Ms. Wenn had moved across from an outside position, which she is also entitled to do, as long as she is the required distance clear. In this case the videos clearly showed she was not and therefore, he submitted the breach had been established.
----The Committee took into consideration all these matters and it is satisfied on the evidence heard from the riders and on the videos shown and interpreted by Mr. Treweek that the breach has been established. It is noted that Ms. Wenn, while admitting that interference has occurred, believed that over-racing by Mr. Peard's mount was a contributing factor and she should not be entirely blamed for the resulting tightening. While she may not have been aware of Mr. Peard's mount improving it was always entitled to do so and the breach arises because of her movement across from an outside position when not the required distance clear of Mr. Peard. In finding the breach established the committee is unable to find in these circumstances as a contributing factor any action by Mr. Peard.
----Mr. Coles confirmed that Ms. Wenn had last been suspended three days for careless riding at Auckland on 30 September 2006 and prior to that had a good record for over ten months. On the other hand it had been a significant check, could easily have been worse and called, he felt, for a four day suspension.
----The Committee after considering these matters agrees that a period of suspension is appropriate. What is of concern to the committee is that it was fortunate nothing worse occurred, it could easily have been otherwise. There were several horses interfered with and one coming into contact with the running rail. This takes it into a higher category of careless riding. On the other hand giving what credit can be given for a previous good record the committee believes the appropriate period of suspension must be four days and orders accordingly. The suspension will therefore take effect from the conclusion of racing on 1st November 2006 up to and including the 8th November 2006 and the meetings affected are those at Otaki, Te Awamutu, Ellerslie and Paeroa.
------
EF Doherty CHAIRMAN
--G Downey
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: 93d6a968bcd5d1170dee512e683c4315
informantnumber:
horsename:
hearing_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
startdate: 28/10/2006
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: no date provided
hearing_title: Auckland RC - 28 October 2006 - Race 4
charge:
facts:
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
reasonsfordecision:
Decision:
--This information alleged a breach of Rule 871(1)(d) for careless riding by jockey, M. B. Wenn in that she shifted inwards after the start on ROYAL KAZAK when not sufficiently clear of STRADIFY
--
DECISION & REASONS:
--This information alleged a breach of Rule 871(1)(d) for careless riding by jockey, M. B. Wenn in that she shifted inwards after the start on ROYAL KAZAK when not sufficiently clear of STRADIFY (A. Peard) who was dictated inwards making contact with OAKTREE (T. Russell) who was forced on to OOZLE (D. Hain) who struck the running rail. The breach was not admitted.
----Jockey A. Peard confirmed he rode STRADIFY which was racing three wide off the running rail shortly after the start. He said he had jumped well and saw Michelle come from his outside and he in turn was forced onto the horse inside him making contact. He agreed she was barely a length ahead of him and he was unable to change ground to his outside without clipping heels.
----Jockey T. Russell confirmed he rode OAKTREE racing inside Mr. Peard and received "quite a good bump". Mr Hain was on his inside and he tried to give him room by moving out prior to the incident because he could see what was about to happen. He was, however, unable to prevent him receiving a severe bump.
----Apprentice Jockey D. Hain confirmed he rode OOZLE and was inside Mr Russell when he became tightened and made contact with the running rail turning the hind- quarters of his horse into the rail. He did not call because he did not have a chance to do so.
----Assistant Stipendiary Steward T. Treweek demonstrated the incident on video. After identifying the runners he pointed out the movement in by them. He noted that Ms. Wenn was on the extreme outside coming in initially three or four horse-widths. Mr. Peard was then directly behind and had not been hindered prior to that stage. Coming forward from there the video showed Mr. Peard turning his horse's head away as Ms. Wenn continued her inward movement and Mr. Peard had to take hold and the resulting pressure to those inside him. Turning to the side on videos he illustrated that it was clear that Ms. Wenn was not the required distance clear of Mr. Peard when the incident took place.
----Ms. Wenn confirmed that the videos showed that some interference had occurred but she felt it was unfair to say that she was at fault when all she was doing was to follow Lisa Allpress across and at any other time nothing would have happened. Although she had looked in she had not seen Mr. Peard improving and felt he should have been able to do something to avoid the incident. It was not therefore entirely her fault she believed and with his horse over racing he had contributed to the resulting tightening as well.
----Summing up Mr. Coles asked the committee to take note of the evidence of Mr. Treweek, which, he suggested, set out the incident clearly. He submitted it was irrelevant for Ms. Wenn to say that she was unaware of the movement inside her by Mr. Peard. He had started from number six and was quite entitled to his clear run ahead. Ms. Wenn had moved across from an outside position, which she is also entitled to do, as long as she is the required distance clear. In this case the videos clearly showed she was not and therefore, he submitted the breach had been established.
----The Committee took into consideration all these matters and it is satisfied on the evidence heard from the riders and on the videos shown and interpreted by Mr. Treweek that the breach has been established. It is noted that Ms. Wenn, while admitting that interference has occurred, believed that over-racing by Mr. Peard's mount was a contributing factor and she should not be entirely blamed for the resulting tightening. While she may not have been aware of Mr. Peard's mount improving it was always entitled to do so and the breach arises because of her movement across from an outside position when not the required distance clear of Mr. Peard. In finding the breach established the committee is unable to find in these circumstances as a contributing factor any action by Mr. Peard.
----Mr. Coles confirmed that Ms. Wenn had last been suspended three days for careless riding at Auckland on 30 September 2006 and prior to that had a good record for over ten months. On the other hand it had been a significant check, could easily have been worse and called, he felt, for a four day suspension.
----The Committee after considering these matters agrees that a period of suspension is appropriate. What is of concern to the committee is that it was fortunate nothing worse occurred, it could easily have been otherwise. There were several horses interfered with and one coming into contact with the running rail. This takes it into a higher category of careless riding. On the other hand giving what credit can be given for a previous good record the committee believes the appropriate period of suspension must be four days and orders accordingly. The suspension will therefore take effect from the conclusion of racing on 1st November 2006 up to and including the 8th November 2006 and the meetings affected are those at Otaki, Te Awamutu, Ellerslie and Paeroa.
------
EF Doherty CHAIRMAN
--G Downey
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Old Hearing
Rules: 871.1.d
Informant:
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: e249d8f3fd0f41c8419c35a258e77fe9
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: Race 4
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: 435110997ea7560a4a93201b87d39dee
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 28/10/2006
meet_title: Auckland RC - 28 October 2006
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: auckland-rc
meet_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
meet_chair:
meet_pm1:
meet_pm2:
name: Auckland RC