Canterbury JC – 17 November 2007 – Race 7
ID: JCA22893
Code:
Thoroughbred
Hearing Type (Code):
thoroughbred-racing
Meet Title:
Canterbury JC - 17 November 2007
Race Date:
2007/11/17
Race Number:
Race 7
Decision: --
Following the running of Race 7, Christchurch Casino 144th New Zealand Cup (Group II), an information was filed by Chief Stipendiary Steward, Mr C J George, against Licensed Jockey, Mr N G Harris, alleging that Mr Harris, as the rider of EVERSWINDELL in the Race, rode carelessly in that he "allowed his mount to shift ground outwards when not clear near the 300 metres
--
Following the running of Race 7, Christchurch Casino 144th New Zealand Cup (Group II), an information was filed by Chief Stipendiary Steward, Mr C J George, against Licensed Jockey, Mr N G Harris, alleging that Mr Harris, as the rider of EVERSWINDELL in the Race, rode carelessly in that he "allowed his mount to shift ground outwards when not clear near the 300 metres causing HOBES (D R Bothamley) to check and hampering STABINTHEDARK (S C Spratt)".
----Mr Harris was present at the hearing of the information and did not admit the breach.
----Mr George showed video replays of the final stages of the Race. He alleged that, near the 300 metres, Mr Harris endeavoured to shift to the outside of FIRST WIND and did so when not clear of HOBES, whose rider had to check, and hampered STABINTHEDARK. Mr George said that FIRST WIND (C W Tremayne) did shift out slightly but stated he did not believe that was a "major contribution" to the incident. It was Mr Harris’ intention to shift to the outside of FIRST WIND to obtain clear running and, at no stage, could he do so without causing interference to HOBES, Mr George alleged. Mr Harris obtained clear running by taking the rightful line of HOBES and went on to win the Race. Mr Harris had got into trouble by getting up on the heels of FIRST WIND and then passed the trouble to Mr Bothamley on his outside. Mr Harris should have come back himself, Mr George stated.
----Mr George stated that the significant factors were, firstly, that there was not sufficient room for Mr Harris to come to the outside of FIRST WIND, secondly, he was never clear of HOBES, and thirdly, had he not done what he did, he would not have got the run for his mount and its chances would have been affected.
----Mr Harris showed on the video replay that he had "come off" FIRST WIND and that horse then moved out. He accepted that he was then "in trouble". He was "thrown" into the horse outside, HOBES, by FIRST WIND.
----Mr Harris called Mr Bothamley, rider of HOBES, to give evidence on his behalf. Mr Bothamley stated that there was sufficient room for Mr Harris. FIRST WIND had "rolled out". Mr Harris had passed him "at a rate of knots" and had been unable to check and his best chance was to go through the gap. He had called to Mr Harris as it was happening. Mr Harris had no choice but to go forward, he said.
----Mr George showed the video replays to Mr Bothamley. Mr Bothamley said he believed that there was room for Mr Harris, who was riding competitively. If FIRST WIND had kept its line, he would have been "buffeted over a little bit" but, Mr Bothamley said, his mount was not going well enough to hold its position. In answer to a question by Mr George, Mr Bothamley stated that when he "took ownership of the run" outside FIRST WIND, Mr Harris was up outside his mount. Mr Harris had to check his mount when FIRST WIND rolled out and pushed him onto HOBES.
----Mr Harris submitted that the outwards movement by FIRST WIND had started a "chain reaction". He had his mount’s shoulders in the gap and was travelling so well.
----Mr George then stated that Mr Harris had improved and put his mount outside the heels of FIRST WIND at the same time as that horse started to roll out. FIRST WIND had moved out only "half or three-quarters of a horse". It was Mr Harris’ obligation to take hold of his mount and not to push forward into a position where there was insufficient room. Mr Harris stated that, in his opinion, FIRST WIND had moved out at least two horse-widths.
----The Committee considered the evidence of both parties and carefully viewed the video replays of the incident. The Committee found that Mr Harris had been travelling well in behind FIRST WIND and was looking for racing room, with approximately 300 metres to run. At that point, Mr Harris angled out EVERSWINDELL for a run outside FIRST WIND. Mr Harris stated that FIRST WIND then commenced to shift ground outwards and had forced his mount out onto HOBES. Mr Bothamley, in his evidence, said that he believed that there was room for Mr Harris but, when FIRST WIND rolled out, Mr Harris had to check his mount which was pushed out onto HOBES.
----Mr George alleged that Mr Harris had always intended to look for a run outside FIRST WIND but that he was not able to do so without causing interference to HOBES. He said that Mr Harris should have taken hold of his mount when FIRST WIND commenced to shift out instead of pushing forward into a position where there was insufficient room.
----Based on this evidence and its viewing of the video replays, the Committee was of the view that Mr Harris, while riding competitively at a critical stage of the Race, had angled his mount out into a gap, on the outside of FIRST WIND, that both he and Mr Bothamley said was there and that, as he did so, FIRST WIND shifted ground outwards at least two horse-widths and tightened Mr Harris’ mount onto Mr Bothamley’s mount. The video evidence appeared to confirm this. While the original gap for Mr Harris was tight, Mr Harris had his mount in the gap and, the Committee believes that, but for the outward movement of FIRST WIND, which was significant, he would have been able to take the gap with safety and without any significant interference to Mr Bothamley’s mount. In other words, the principal contributing factor to the tightening to HOBES and STABINTHEDARK was the outward movement of FIRST WIND and not the actions of Mr Harris.
----In the light of that finding, the Committee was not satisfied that Mr Harris had ridden carelessly and, accordingly, the charge of careless riding was dismissed.
----R G McKenzie
----CHAIRMAN
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: eeda9c7fd4129a655324e4ae65ac32ee
informantnumber:
horsename:
hearing_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
startdate: 17/11/2007
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: no date provided
hearing_title: Canterbury JC - 17 November 2007 - Race 7
charge:
facts:
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
reasonsfordecision:
Decision:
--Following the running of Race 7, Christchurch Casino 144th New Zealand Cup (Group II), an information was filed by Chief Stipendiary Steward, Mr C J George, against Licensed Jockey, Mr N G Harris, alleging that Mr Harris, as the rider of EVERSWINDELL in the Race, rode carelessly in that he "allowed his mount to shift ground outwards when not clear near the 300 metres
--
Following the running of Race 7, Christchurch Casino 144th New Zealand Cup (Group II), an information was filed by Chief Stipendiary Steward, Mr C J George, against Licensed Jockey, Mr N G Harris, alleging that Mr Harris, as the rider of EVERSWINDELL in the Race, rode carelessly in that he "allowed his mount to shift ground outwards when not clear near the 300 metres causing HOBES (D R Bothamley) to check and hampering STABINTHEDARK (S C Spratt)".
----Mr Harris was present at the hearing of the information and did not admit the breach.
----Mr George showed video replays of the final stages of the Race. He alleged that, near the 300 metres, Mr Harris endeavoured to shift to the outside of FIRST WIND and did so when not clear of HOBES, whose rider had to check, and hampered STABINTHEDARK. Mr George said that FIRST WIND (C W Tremayne) did shift out slightly but stated he did not believe that was a "major contribution" to the incident. It was Mr Harris’ intention to shift to the outside of FIRST WIND to obtain clear running and, at no stage, could he do so without causing interference to HOBES, Mr George alleged. Mr Harris obtained clear running by taking the rightful line of HOBES and went on to win the Race. Mr Harris had got into trouble by getting up on the heels of FIRST WIND and then passed the trouble to Mr Bothamley on his outside. Mr Harris should have come back himself, Mr George stated.
----Mr George stated that the significant factors were, firstly, that there was not sufficient room for Mr Harris to come to the outside of FIRST WIND, secondly, he was never clear of HOBES, and thirdly, had he not done what he did, he would not have got the run for his mount and its chances would have been affected.
----Mr Harris showed on the video replay that he had "come off" FIRST WIND and that horse then moved out. He accepted that he was then "in trouble". He was "thrown" into the horse outside, HOBES, by FIRST WIND.
----Mr Harris called Mr Bothamley, rider of HOBES, to give evidence on his behalf. Mr Bothamley stated that there was sufficient room for Mr Harris. FIRST WIND had "rolled out". Mr Harris had passed him "at a rate of knots" and had been unable to check and his best chance was to go through the gap. He had called to Mr Harris as it was happening. Mr Harris had no choice but to go forward, he said.
----Mr George showed the video replays to Mr Bothamley. Mr Bothamley said he believed that there was room for Mr Harris, who was riding competitively. If FIRST WIND had kept its line, he would have been "buffeted over a little bit" but, Mr Bothamley said, his mount was not going well enough to hold its position. In answer to a question by Mr George, Mr Bothamley stated that when he "took ownership of the run" outside FIRST WIND, Mr Harris was up outside his mount. Mr Harris had to check his mount when FIRST WIND rolled out and pushed him onto HOBES.
----Mr Harris submitted that the outwards movement by FIRST WIND had started a "chain reaction". He had his mount’s shoulders in the gap and was travelling so well.
----Mr George then stated that Mr Harris had improved and put his mount outside the heels of FIRST WIND at the same time as that horse started to roll out. FIRST WIND had moved out only "half or three-quarters of a horse". It was Mr Harris’ obligation to take hold of his mount and not to push forward into a position where there was insufficient room. Mr Harris stated that, in his opinion, FIRST WIND had moved out at least two horse-widths.
----The Committee considered the evidence of both parties and carefully viewed the video replays of the incident. The Committee found that Mr Harris had been travelling well in behind FIRST WIND and was looking for racing room, with approximately 300 metres to run. At that point, Mr Harris angled out EVERSWINDELL for a run outside FIRST WIND. Mr Harris stated that FIRST WIND then commenced to shift ground outwards and had forced his mount out onto HOBES. Mr Bothamley, in his evidence, said that he believed that there was room for Mr Harris but, when FIRST WIND rolled out, Mr Harris had to check his mount which was pushed out onto HOBES.
----Mr George alleged that Mr Harris had always intended to look for a run outside FIRST WIND but that he was not able to do so without causing interference to HOBES. He said that Mr Harris should have taken hold of his mount when FIRST WIND commenced to shift out instead of pushing forward into a position where there was insufficient room.
----Based on this evidence and its viewing of the video replays, the Committee was of the view that Mr Harris, while riding competitively at a critical stage of the Race, had angled his mount out into a gap, on the outside of FIRST WIND, that both he and Mr Bothamley said was there and that, as he did so, FIRST WIND shifted ground outwards at least two horse-widths and tightened Mr Harris’ mount onto Mr Bothamley’s mount. The video evidence appeared to confirm this. While the original gap for Mr Harris was tight, Mr Harris had his mount in the gap and, the Committee believes that, but for the outward movement of FIRST WIND, which was significant, he would have been able to take the gap with safety and without any significant interference to Mr Bothamley’s mount. In other words, the principal contributing factor to the tightening to HOBES and STABINTHEDARK was the outward movement of FIRST WIND and not the actions of Mr Harris.
----In the light of that finding, the Committee was not satisfied that Mr Harris had ridden carelessly and, accordingly, the charge of careless riding was dismissed.
----R G McKenzie
----CHAIRMAN
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Old Hearing
Rules:
Informant:
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: ddb3f102839e09c0cc8e29af5147ab5c
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: Race 7
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: 613e22b78a31d42357fa3e147a8396c7
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 17/11/2007
meet_title: Canterbury JC - 17 November 2007
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: canterbury-jc
meet_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
meet_chair:
meet_pm1:
meet_pm2:
name: Canterbury JC