Cambridge – Te Awamutu HRC 24 March 2011 – R9

 An Information was lodged by Stipendiary Steward Mr JM Muirhead alleging that Mr RJ Brosnan committed a breach of Rule 869(3)(b) and the Easing Down Regulations in that he failed to concede his position driving Shardon’s Operator when racing inside Perfect Package (Driver H Cullen) racing into the first bend resulting in his own horse breaking from its gait and losing its chance.

Rule 869(3)(b) states: - No Horseman in any race shall drive carelessly.”

The Easing Down Regulations provide as follows:

“Subject to Rule 869(3) Careless Driving 869(4) Causing Interference, Horsemen shall be permitted to make moves with safety provided they are in a position to do so by having a “clear advantage” over the horse they are about to move inwards and the horse is clear of other horses on its inside so that it can be moved in and that the manoeuvre is conducted in a gradual and acceptable manner.

Any Horseman who fails to concede when not in a position to maintain his/her place, maybe charged under Rule 869(3) Careless Driving.”

Mr Brosnan was present and did not admit the charge.
 

The Rule and the Easing Down Regulations were read to Mr Brosnan.

Mr Muirhead gave evidence by using the Video films of the incident and he showed where Shardon’s Operator was racing on the inside of Perfect Package racing into the first bend. He also showed Mr Cullen on Perfect Package easing Mr Brosnan’s horse down towards the running line and he told this Committee that Mr Brosnan failed to concede his position and as a result caused his own horse to break.

Mr Muirhead also by using the film demonstrated that there were no horses on the inside of Mr Brosnan’s horse. Mr Muirhead said that there was contact between Mr Cullen’s horse and Mr Brosnan’s horse and as a result of that contact Mr Brosnan’s horse broke.

Mr Brosnan by way of cross examination said that he was following Mr Young’s horse and said to Mr Muirhead that he believed that he was entitled to stay where he was and he asked Mr Muirhead what else could he have done. Mr Muirhead said that he should have moved in and conceded his position as provided in the Regulations because Mr Cullen had an advantage on him.

Mr Cullen then gave evidence and said that he drove Perfect Package and he said that he thought he had an advantage on Mr Brosnan and he was easing him down because he thought he was entitled to do so. He said that he had a good neck advantage on Mr Brosnan and he saw that there was nothing on the inside of him and that he came down in a normal manoeuvre and he said contact was made with the legs of Mr Brosnan’s horse and it broke.

Mr Brosnan under cross examination asked Mr Cullen if he looked back to see if there was any horse coming up on the inside of Mr Brosnan’s horse and Mr Cullen said that he didn’t have to, that all he was required to do was to ensure that he had an advantage over Mr Brosnan’s horse and also to ensure that there was not a horse on the inside of Mr Brosnan. He also confirmed to Mr Brosnan that contact had been made with his horse.

Mr Brosnan then gave evidence and said that he was following Mr Young and that he did not believe that he had to move. He did acknowledge that Mr Cullen did have an advantage on him and he also acknowledged that there was no horse on the inside of him but as far as Mr Brosnan was concerned he was entitled to maintain his line.
 

The Committee looked at the films several times from the different angles and also assessed the evidence presented to it. As far as the Committee is concerned the Rule is clear, the Regulations are very clear and the film is clear and it showed that Mr Cullen did have an advantage over Mr Brosnan, that there were no horses on the inside of Mr Brosnan, that the movement inwards by Mr Cullen was a gradual and normal movement and that Mr Brosnan had failed to concede as is provided in the Regulations.

Mr Muirhead said that the JCA Guidelines provide for a fine of $400 and/or two weeks suspension. He pointed out that Mr Brosnan had pleaded not guilty and he said that it was disappointing that Mr Brosnan does not accept the provisions as set out in the Regulations. Mr Muirhead did however say that Mr Brosnan had a good clear record.

Mr Brosnan for his part said that the suggested penalty was totally over the top.

The Committee is satisfied that the charge is proven and that Mr Brosnan should have conceded his position. He has however only caused interference to his own horse and no other horse in the race. In the Committee’s view this was not a major incident and the Committee also takes into account Mr Brosnan’s very good driving record. The Committee believes that a fine of $300 is appropriate.