hearingid: 4f2f7459b5fc150a55f5377306f110f8

informantnumber:

horsename:

hearing_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing

startdate: 11/11/2006

newcharge:

plea:

penaltyrequired:

decisiondate: no date provided

hearing_title: Canterbury Racing - 11 November 2006 -

charge:

facts:

appealdecision:

isappeal:

submissionsfordecision:

reasonsfordecision:

Decision:

Following the running of the New Zealand Bloodstock 1000 Guineas race at the Canterbury Jockey Club on Saturday 11 November 2006, Mr M Hills was charged with careless riding pursuant to Rule 871(1)(d) of the Rules of Racing. 

Following the running of the New Zealand Bloodstock 1000 Guineas race at the Canterbury Jockey Club on Saturday 11 November 2006, Mr M Hills was charged with careless riding pursuant to Rule 871(1)(d) of the Rules of Racing. 

Mr Hills pleaded guilty and thus the charge is deemed to be proved. 

Mr C George, Stipendiary Steward, requested Mr S Ching, Stipendiary Steward, to demonstrate the incident which gave rise to the charge using the video coverage.  We viewed the video coverage from the 600m camera, and also from the side-on camera.  Mr Hills allowed his mount to shift outwards when not sufficiently clear and as a consequence, dictated the line of ?A Tad Black? ridden by J Bates which, in turn, took that runner across the line of ?Halobelle? ridden by J Laking, which then had to be checked by its rider.  ?Halobelle? was checked quite severely as a result of the incident. 

Mr Hills declined the opportunity to comment on the video coverage. 

We move now to the penalty decision.

PENALTY DECISION

Mr George submitted that this was careless riding at the higher end of the scale.  Mr Hills riding involved a significant shift outwards, and Mr Laking was left with no alternative but to check his mount.  Mr Hills had no response to Mr George's submission. 

We agree that the degree of carelessness of Mr Hills' riding was at the higher end of the scale.  By moving outwards when not sufficiently clear in the manner that he did, Mr Hills compromised not only the chances of two other horses in the race, but also the safety of those riders. 

PENALTY

A suspension is the only penalty that therefore can be imposed.  In setting the period of suspension, we have had regard not only to the seriousness of the carelessness of Mr Hills' riding, but also to the fact that this was a Group 1 race for a stake of $275,000.  This is something we are able to consider in terms of Rule 1122(2) of the Rules of Racing.  We note that Mr Hills has also been suspended on two previous occasions in this calendar year. 

We have given Mr Hills such credit as we reasonably can for his prompt admission of guilty.  We therefore suspend Mr Hills from race riding from the conclusion of racing on Wednesday 15 November 2006 until Sunday 26 November 2006.  We calculate this as being a seven day suspension for Mr Hills, having regard to the opportunities that he would otherwise have had to ride in that period.

...........................................

KG Hales

Chairman

sumissionsforpenalty:

reasonsforpenalty:

penalty:

hearing_type: Old Hearing

Rules: 871.1.d, 1122.2

Informant:

JockeysandTrainer:

Otherperson:

PersonPresent:

Respondent:

StipendSteward:

raceid:

race_expapproval:

racecancelled:

race_noreport:

race_emailed1:

race_emailed2:

race_title:

submittochair:

race_expappcomment:

race_km:

race_otherexp:

race_chair:

race_pm1:

race_pm2:

meetid:

meet_expapproval:

meet_noreport:

waitingforpublication:

meet_emailed1:

meet_emailed2:

meetdate: no date provided

meet_title:

meet_expappcomment:

meet_km:

meet_otherexp:

tracklocation:

meet_racingtype:

meet_chair:

meet_pm1:

meet_pm2:

name: