Auckland TC 11 October 2013 – R 7 (request for ruling)

hearingid: a12ffe83acc8e71dc76098fc4f4300cc

informantnumber:

horsename:

hearing_racingtype:

startdate: no date provided

newcharge:

plea:

penaltyrequired:

decisiondate: 09/10/2013

hearing_title: Auckland TC 11 October 2013 - R 7 (request for ruling)

charge:

facts:

This Request for a Ruling arises from an incident at the start of race number 7, the Dunstan Trotters (Heat 2) Trot 1700m. Mr Muirhead submitted to the Judicial Committee (“the Committee”) that as the field were scoring up behind the mobile for the start of the race, GLENFERRIE PRIDE (barrier 1) broke and galloped causing interference to horses on the second line. He said the mobile gate then slowed and some frontline horses made contact with the gate arm resulting in several horses including JESSICA, ITSNOWORNEVER, EQUULEI and CONTINENTAL AUTO being impeded or going into a break.

Mr Muirhead advised the Committee that the Starter, Mr Phelan activated the red light and siren indicating a false start, and shortly thereafter activated the green light. He said that this caused some confusion. JESSICA and CONTINENTAL AUTO were pulled up and the remainder of the field eventually continued on.

Immediately after the race and before dividends were authorised Stewards sought a ruling pursuant to Rules 1102(2)(a) (ii) and (iii), namely to determine:

1. That race 7 be postponed, abandoned or cancelled due to the Starter declaring a false start; and

2. Whether the race is null in void and/or if the race should be re-run.

appealdecision:

isappeal:

submissionsfordecision:

The Committee invited all persons in attendance at the hearing with the opportunity to make submissions to ensure that their views were valued and taken into consideration as part of the overall decision making process.

Mr Muirhead submitted that he was observing the start of the race in his capacity as Chairman of Stewards and he noticed the field spread out very quickly as they left the mobile barrier. He said that he noticed that there was some confusion when the red light was activated. Shortly after the green light came on and by this time two horses had pulled up and another was taking no part in race. The remainder of the field eventually carried on. This caused him to contact the Starter, Mr PHELAN via portable radio to ascertain if there would be a re-start.

Mr Muirhead submitted that in his view Mr Phelan should have immediately called a false start because the horse drawn number 1 had gone into a break and caused interference by impeding horses on the second line.

Mr Phelan submitted that he heard the radio message from Mr Muirhead and he acknowledged that he activated the red light and siren when he saw the horse drawn number 1 go into a break. He submitted that for some reason he didn’t call for a re-start and immediately activated the green light.

Open Horseman Mr Macfarlane drove the provisional winner of the race, horse number 6 BE SEEIN YA. He submitted that he did not see the red light, but acknowledged that he ‘probably’ heard the siren.

Open Horseman Mr Argue drove horse number 2 JESSICA which was pulled up and took no part in the race. Mr Argue submitted that he thought it was a false start. He said that his horse ran into the back of the mobile arm and broke.

Open Horseman Mr Mitchell submitted that he saw the red light and thought it was a false start. He said that he pulled his horse up and it took no part in the race.

Open Horseman Mr Herlihy submitted that he was concentrating on his own horse which had gone into a break from barrier number 1 and he was unable to add anything further to the debate.

The Committee asked Mr I Bridge, the Club Veterinary Surgeon to examine the horses and report back on their fitness to take part in a re-run. Mr Bridge reported back to the Committee that he had checked the horses as far as it was possible under the circumstances and within a tight timeframe. He noted that two horses had already left the course and one other, SAPPHIRE CASTLETON was not fit enough to race again. In terms of the others he told the Committee that in his opinion “we can’t send the horses out again. I think we are opening ourselves up to a welfare issue”.

At this point the Committee received further advice from raceday control that because the betting pools could not be carried over it would be impractical to re-run the race after the final event, race 11. The Committee was advised that if a re-run was contemplated it would need to be run immediately. Mr Smith confirmed to the Committee that TAB control have indicated that the race could not be run ‘out of order’ and it would need to be run as the next race’ to enable betting pool money to be carried over.

On that basis Mr Bridge confirmed to the Committee that it would not be in the horses' best interests to partake in a re-run without having a sufficient break. 

reasonsfordecision:

The Committee gave very careful consideration to the various submissions made by all interested parties. The Committee was also mindful of the fact that this race was the final leg of a terminating $100,000 pick-six, and this was factored into the decision making equation.

The Committee also noted that two of the horses had left the course and connections of five of the runners were in favour of a re-run. This included three of the runners that took no part in the original race. The Committee felt that they would have been ‘fresh’ and may well have had a fitness advantage over the other runners.

The relevant rules enable this Committee to make specific rulings in terms of the outcome of the race. They include:

Rule 1102(2)(ii) provides:

“The functions of a Judicial Committee shall be to determine any question as to whether that day of racing or any part thereof shall be postponed, abandoned or cancelled.”

Rule 1102(2)(iii) provides:

“Declare a race null and void and if it thinks expedient order that such a race be run again”.

Although it is not a function of this Committee to conduct an examination as to why the problems occurred at the start of the race, we note that the Starter does have obligations pursuant to rule 857 (3)(f) which provides that:

“RECALL NOTICE: In the case of a recall a red flashing light shall be activated by the starter and a recall sounded”. Reasons for a recall include that there is interference.

Ultimately a key determinant for the Committee in making a ruling on this matter is the welfare and wellbeing of the horses. In that regard the Committee is persuaded by the compelling advice provided by the Club Veterinary Surgeon that an immediate re-run of the race could adversely affect the horses. The Committee's view is that the welfare of the horses is paramount.

Decision:

Having weighed up all of the available information within the existing timeframe we rule that:

1. Race 7 is abandoned;
2. The race is declared null and void; and
3. It is not expedient that the race be re-run.

sumissionsforpenalty:

reasonsforpenalty:

penalty:

hearing_type: Request Ruling

Rules: 1102(2)(a)(ii) and (iii)

Informant:

JockeysandTrainer:

Otherperson:

PersonPresent: Mr F Phelan (Starter), Open Horsemen - Mr A Herlihy, Mr T Mitchell, Mr T MacFarlane, Mr S Argue, Mr I Bridge (Veterinary Surgeon), Mr K Smith (Registrar and Club Racing Manager), Mr J Muirhead and Ms P Kinsey (Assistant Stipendiary Steward)

Respondent:

StipendSteward: Mr J Muirhead

raceid: 962d4f101192a317a3f85bc62d4ecc79

race_expapproval:

racecancelled: 0

race_noreport: 0

race_emailed1: 0

race_emailed2: 0

race_title: R7

submittochair:

race_expappcomment:

race_km:

race_otherexp:

race_chair:

race_pm1:

race_pm2:

meetid: fc7499c9ed1b63a590348a9d7ed2f222

meet_expapproval:

meet_noreport: 0

waitingforpublication: 0

meet_emailed1: 0

meet_emailed2: 0

meetdate: 11/10/2013

meet_title: Auckland TC - 11 October 2013

meet_expappcomment:

meet_km:

meet_otherexp:

tracklocation: auckland-tc

meet_racingtype: harness-racing

meet_chair: GJones

meet_pm1: AGodsalve

meet_pm2: none

name: Auckland TC