Canterbury JC – 27 February 2010 – Race 9
ID: JCA18480
Code:
Thoroughbred
Hearing Type (Code):
thoroughbred-racing
Meet Title:
Canterbury JC - 27 February 2010
Race Date:
2010/02/27
Race Number:
Race 9
Decision:
CANTERBURY JOCKEY CLUB
--27TH FEBRUARY 2010
--RACE 9
--Information 0782 alleging a breach of the Rules of Racing, Rule 638(1)(d) in that J Misbah (Apprentice Jockey) permitted his mount “ROYAL FLIGHT” to shift in near the 900m mark when not the required distance clear of “KETAMADA”, which was tightened and checked.
--Informant: Mr M Davidson, Stipendiary Steward
Defendant: J Misbah, (Apprentice Jockey) accompanied by PS Richards, Licensed Trainer
THE FACTS
--As a result of an incident near the 900m mark in Race 9, Apprentice Jockey J Misbah was charged pursuant to Rule 638(1)(d). It was alleged that he permitted his mount “ROYAL FLIGHT” to shift in near the 900m when not the required distance clear of “KETAMADA” which was tightened and checked.
--
CANTERBURY JOCKEY CLUB
--27TH FEBRUARY 2010
--RACE 9
--Information 0782 alleging a breach of the Rules of Racing, Rule 638(1)(d) in that J Misbah (Apprentice Jockey) permitted his mount “ROYAL FLIGHT” to shift in near the 900m mark when not the required distance clear of “KETAMADA”, which was tightened and checked.
--Informant: Mr M Davidson, Stipendiary Steward
Defendant: J Misbah, (Apprentice Jockey) accompanied by PS Richards, Licensed Trainer
THE FACTS
--As a result of an incident near the 900m mark in Race 9, Apprentice Jockey J Misbah was charged pursuant to Rule 638(1)(d). It was alleged that he permitted his mount “ROYAL FLIGHT” to shift in near the 900m when not the required distance clear of “KETAMADA” which was tightened and checked.
--The charge was not admitted.
--Mr Davidson called Licensed Jockey Ms A Mundy to give evidence. She told the hearing that she was travelling in the 1/1 position, but running two wide. She received pressure from the outside from Mr Misbah’s mount. She said that she called out for the pressure to be relieved. The next thing was that Mr Misbah moved in, in front of her and took her line for about three strides or so.
--In cross-examination, she was asked by Mr Richards on Mr Misbah’s behalf as to whether or not she was holding her position. Ms Mundy responded by saying that “Yes, I was, but I ran out of room” as a result of Mr Misbah’s actions. She said that before being checked she was going well, but was pushed out of the gap.
--She agreed that no contact was made and that there was just pressure being applied to her.
--The video film was then shown. Ms Mundy explained her evidence and showed how, at one point, the front feet of her horses seemed to be going in between the rear feet of Mr Misbah’s mount. In fact, she said that had her horse put its head down, it probably would have touched the rump of Mr Misbah’s horse.
--Mr Misbah then gave evidence. He said that his horse “changed legs” and that at the time that he shifted inwards, that he moved back out when Ms Mundy called out to him. He said that he moved back out to the three wide position. He said that her horse was travelling keenly.
--Mr Richards, with the assistance of the video film, maintained that Ms Mundy, in fact, had caused the incident and further maintained that there was a duty on Ms Mundy to simply hold her position. Mr Richards implied that had Ms Mundy held her position then the incident would not have happened.
--In summarising the prosecution, Mr Davidson maintained that Ms Mundy was entitled to her line and that Mr Misbah’s actions placed her in difficulty. He said that there was an obligation on Mr Misbah to stay clear.
--We delivered the following oral decision.
--DECISION
--“Ms Mundy was on a line that she was entitled to. She told the hearing that she was put under pressure by Mr Misbah when she was racing in a two wide position and when Mr Misbah was in a three wide position. Any contact was minimal, but she said that she was calling out for the pressure to be relieved. Mr Misbah then went across in front of her when not his own length and another length clear, in breach of the fundamental Rule of Racing.”
--We prefer the evidence of Ms Mundy and reject that of Mr Misbah. The video evidence confirmed Ms Mundy’s oral evidence.
--We find the charge proved.”
--PENALTY DECISION
--Mr Davidson advised the hearing that Mr Misbah is a busy South Island jockey. He said that he had received two suspensions of three days each in November 2009. He believed that the degree of carelessness was from low to mid-range.
--He recommended a suspension of between three to four days.
--Mr Misbah did not have any particular submission to make on the issue of penalty.
--We agree that Mr Misbah’s carelessness was in the low to mid range. A suspension is the appropriate penalty in this case.
--We acknowledge that Mr Misbah is a busy South Island rider. His record is not that bad, having regard to the fact that he has only received two suspensions in the 2009/2010 riding season.
--A suspension of three South Island days will be imposed, which will mean that Mr Misbah will be suspended from race riding from the conclusion of racing on Saturday 27 February 2010 up to (and including) the conclusion of racing on Thursday 11 March 2010. This will mean that Mr Misbah will be unable to ride at meetings at Omakau, Otago and the Canterbury Jockey Club.
--KG Hales R G McKenzie
CHAIR Committee Member
0782
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: 0d791db2f3c1137d90a46ffe3d84aeeb
informantnumber:
horsename:
hearing_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
startdate: 27/02/2010
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: no date provided
hearing_title: Canterbury JC - 27 February 2010 - Race 9
charge:
facts:
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
reasonsfordecision:
Decision:
CANTERBURY JOCKEY CLUB
--27TH FEBRUARY 2010
--RACE 9
--Information 0782 alleging a breach of the Rules of Racing, Rule 638(1)(d) in that J Misbah (Apprentice Jockey) permitted his mount “ROYAL FLIGHT” to shift in near the 900m mark when not the required distance clear of “KETAMADA”, which was tightened and checked.
--Informant: Mr M Davidson, Stipendiary Steward
Defendant: J Misbah, (Apprentice Jockey) accompanied by PS Richards, Licensed Trainer
THE FACTS
--As a result of an incident near the 900m mark in Race 9, Apprentice Jockey J Misbah was charged pursuant to Rule 638(1)(d). It was alleged that he permitted his mount “ROYAL FLIGHT” to shift in near the 900m when not the required distance clear of “KETAMADA” which was tightened and checked.
--
CANTERBURY JOCKEY CLUB
--27TH FEBRUARY 2010
--RACE 9
--Information 0782 alleging a breach of the Rules of Racing, Rule 638(1)(d) in that J Misbah (Apprentice Jockey) permitted his mount “ROYAL FLIGHT” to shift in near the 900m mark when not the required distance clear of “KETAMADA”, which was tightened and checked.
--Informant: Mr M Davidson, Stipendiary Steward
Defendant: J Misbah, (Apprentice Jockey) accompanied by PS Richards, Licensed Trainer
THE FACTS
--As a result of an incident near the 900m mark in Race 9, Apprentice Jockey J Misbah was charged pursuant to Rule 638(1)(d). It was alleged that he permitted his mount “ROYAL FLIGHT” to shift in near the 900m when not the required distance clear of “KETAMADA” which was tightened and checked.
--The charge was not admitted.
--Mr Davidson called Licensed Jockey Ms A Mundy to give evidence. She told the hearing that she was travelling in the 1/1 position, but running two wide. She received pressure from the outside from Mr Misbah’s mount. She said that she called out for the pressure to be relieved. The next thing was that Mr Misbah moved in, in front of her and took her line for about three strides or so.
--In cross-examination, she was asked by Mr Richards on Mr Misbah’s behalf as to whether or not she was holding her position. Ms Mundy responded by saying that “Yes, I was, but I ran out of room” as a result of Mr Misbah’s actions. She said that before being checked she was going well, but was pushed out of the gap.
--She agreed that no contact was made and that there was just pressure being applied to her.
--The video film was then shown. Ms Mundy explained her evidence and showed how, at one point, the front feet of her horses seemed to be going in between the rear feet of Mr Misbah’s mount. In fact, she said that had her horse put its head down, it probably would have touched the rump of Mr Misbah’s horse.
--Mr Misbah then gave evidence. He said that his horse “changed legs” and that at the time that he shifted inwards, that he moved back out when Ms Mundy called out to him. He said that he moved back out to the three wide position. He said that her horse was travelling keenly.
--Mr Richards, with the assistance of the video film, maintained that Ms Mundy, in fact, had caused the incident and further maintained that there was a duty on Ms Mundy to simply hold her position. Mr Richards implied that had Ms Mundy held her position then the incident would not have happened.
--In summarising the prosecution, Mr Davidson maintained that Ms Mundy was entitled to her line and that Mr Misbah’s actions placed her in difficulty. He said that there was an obligation on Mr Misbah to stay clear.
--We delivered the following oral decision.
--DECISION
--“Ms Mundy was on a line that she was entitled to. She told the hearing that she was put under pressure by Mr Misbah when she was racing in a two wide position and when Mr Misbah was in a three wide position. Any contact was minimal, but she said that she was calling out for the pressure to be relieved. Mr Misbah then went across in front of her when not his own length and another length clear, in breach of the fundamental Rule of Racing.”
--We prefer the evidence of Ms Mundy and reject that of Mr Misbah. The video evidence confirmed Ms Mundy’s oral evidence.
--We find the charge proved.”
--PENALTY DECISION
--Mr Davidson advised the hearing that Mr Misbah is a busy South Island jockey. He said that he had received two suspensions of three days each in November 2009. He believed that the degree of carelessness was from low to mid-range.
--He recommended a suspension of between three to four days.
--Mr Misbah did not have any particular submission to make on the issue of penalty.
--We agree that Mr Misbah’s carelessness was in the low to mid range. A suspension is the appropriate penalty in this case.
--We acknowledge that Mr Misbah is a busy South Island rider. His record is not that bad, having regard to the fact that he has only received two suspensions in the 2009/2010 riding season.
--A suspension of three South Island days will be imposed, which will mean that Mr Misbah will be suspended from race riding from the conclusion of racing on Saturday 27 February 2010 up to (and including) the conclusion of racing on Thursday 11 March 2010. This will mean that Mr Misbah will be unable to ride at meetings at Omakau, Otago and the Canterbury Jockey Club.
--KG Hales R G McKenzie
CHAIR Committee Member
0782
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Old Hearing
Rules: 638.1.d
Informant:
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: dc58d7eaa8ada11a933ca573a56a68a5
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: Race 9
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: 6cc52c4f3cd906bee4c7a3125a8c86ce
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 27/02/2010
meet_title: Canterbury JC - 27 February 2010
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: canterbury-jc
meet_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
meet_chair:
meet_pm1:
meet_pm2:
name: Canterbury JC