Cheviot HRC – 8 March 2009 – Race 5
ID: JCA21329
Hearing Type (Code):
harness-racing
Meet Title:
Cheviot HRC - 8 March 2009
Race Date:
2009/03/08
Race Number:
Race 5
Decision:
Following the running of Race 5, NZ Community Trust Pace, an information was filed by Chief Stipendiary Steward, Mr N R Escott, against Licensed Open Driver, Mr G D Smith, alleging a breach of Rule 869 (3) (b) in that Mr Smith “drove carelessly when shifting his horse inwards after 200 metres causing JAYZ MACHINE (S R McNally) to strike several pylons”. Mr Smith was the driver of ANVIL DOBSON in the Race.
DECISION AND REASONS:
--Following the running of Race 5, NZ Community Trust Pace, an information was filed by Chief Stipendiary Steward, Mr N R Escott, against Licensed Open Driver, Mr G D Smith, alleging a breach of Rule 869 (3) (b) in that Mr Smith “drove carelessly when shifting his horse inwards after 200 metres causing JAYZ MACHINE (S R McNally) to strike several pylons”. Mr Smith was the driver of ANVIL DOBSON in the Race.
----
Mr Smith was present at the hearing of the information and did not admit the breach.
----
Rule 869 provides as follows:
--(3) No horseman in any race shall drive:
--(b) carelessly.
----
Mrs K R Williams, Stipendiary Steward, showed video replays of the first 400-500 metres of the Race, a 2600 metres standing start event. She pointed out JAYZ MACHINE which had drawn 1 on the front line and ANVIL DOBSON, driven by G S Smith, which had drawn 9 on the front line.
----
Mrs Williams said that, racing into the first bend, Mr Smith moved down when he was not clear of Mr McNally forcing Mr McNally over a number of pylons. She pointed out that Mr McNally was, and was clearly entitled to be, on the inside of Mr Smith who was “chasing up”. Mr McNally hit a number of pylons. Mr Smith had the opportunity to ease out on to the back of JASPERS BLUE JEAN (K G Cameron). He did not do so and, she alleged, he drove in a careless manner in forcing Mr McNally over a number of pylons. He continued to drive his horse forward when he ought to have been restraining it and getting onto Mr Cameron’s back. At no stage was there a full gap for him to shift down into until Mr McNally restrained.
----
Mr Smith said that when he initially came across to get the trail there was sufficient room. The angle of the camera did not show it but there was “clear room”, he alleged. He believed that he had got onto the leader’s back. At that point, his horse had “gone a bit rough” enabling Mr McNally to get up in the passing lane, he submitted. If his horse had not gone rough, none of this would have happened, he said. Mr Cameron was on his outside and he was unable to come back out. Mr Smith acknowledged that he may not have known his horse well enough and may have pushed it a bit hard to get it into the trail, which may have caused it to go rough.
----
Following a brief deliberation, the Committee delivered the following interim oral decision:
--“The Committee finds that, on passing the winning post for the first time, Mr Smith who had crossed from barrier 9, was in 3rd place with Mr McNally on his inside. Mr Smith was clearly attempting to cross to the markers to trail the leader and, in fact, he admitted this during the course of the hearing. We believe that he persisted in doing so despite the presence of Mr McNally on his inside. He ultimately crossed to the markers but only after persisting in competing with Mr McNally for the trailing position. It is clear that Mr Smith attempted to cross to the markers when he was not sufficiently clear of Mr McNally. Mr Smith told us that his horse went roughly for a couple of strides and he said that, but for this, he would have been able to cross unobstructed to the markers. The Committee does not dismiss this submission but it believes that Mr Smith still had the option of pulling out and getting onto the back of Mr Cameron which would have avoided the difficulties that Mr McNally got into. The Committee finds that in not taking the option of easing out onto Mr Cameron’s back but, rather, persisting in attempting to cross to the markers when not able to do so with safety Mr Smith was guilty of an error of judgement and drove carelessly and, therefore, we find the charge to be proved”.
----
The Committee did not accept the evidence of Mr Smith to the effect the he was established on the back of the leader, LIVING PROOF, and that it was only by virtue of his horse going roughly for a few strides that enabled Mr McNally to get up on his inside by using the passing lane. The Committee was satisfied that Mr Smith was not clear of Mr McNally at the material time.
----
Mr Escott informed the Committee that, at a premier meeting on 12.12.08, Mr Smith had been fined $450 for careless driving. He recommended a fine of between $300 and $350.
----
Mr Smith expressed the view that the recommended fine was too high and he referred to the fine of $200 imposed on Mr McNally for careless driving arising out of the same incident.
----
The Committee believed that the penalty to be imposed on Mr Smith needed to be greater than that imposed on Mr McNally. This was on the basis that Mr Smith was the primary instigator of what happened. In addition to that, the Committee also had to take into account the previous breach of the Rule in December 2008.
----
Having regard to those matters, the Committee fined Mr Smith the sum of $300.
----
R G McKenzie
CHAIRMANJCA 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: 942763f59d72ba46284ff458e8ab8b5a
informantnumber:
horsename:
hearing_racingtype: harness-racing
startdate: 08/03/2009
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: no date provided
hearing_title: Cheviot HRC - 8 March 2009 - Race 5
charge:
facts:
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
reasonsfordecision:
Decision:
Following the running of Race 5, NZ Community Trust Pace, an information was filed by Chief Stipendiary Steward, Mr N R Escott, against Licensed Open Driver, Mr G D Smith, alleging a breach of Rule 869 (3) (b) in that Mr Smith “drove carelessly when shifting his horse inwards after 200 metres causing JAYZ MACHINE (S R McNally) to strike several pylons”. Mr Smith was the driver of ANVIL DOBSON in the Race.
DECISION AND REASONS:
--Following the running of Race 5, NZ Community Trust Pace, an information was filed by Chief Stipendiary Steward, Mr N R Escott, against Licensed Open Driver, Mr G D Smith, alleging a breach of Rule 869 (3) (b) in that Mr Smith “drove carelessly when shifting his horse inwards after 200 metres causing JAYZ MACHINE (S R McNally) to strike several pylons”. Mr Smith was the driver of ANVIL DOBSON in the Race.
----
Mr Smith was present at the hearing of the information and did not admit the breach.
----
Rule 869 provides as follows:
--(3) No horseman in any race shall drive:
--(b) carelessly.
----
Mrs K R Williams, Stipendiary Steward, showed video replays of the first 400-500 metres of the Race, a 2600 metres standing start event. She pointed out JAYZ MACHINE which had drawn 1 on the front line and ANVIL DOBSON, driven by G S Smith, which had drawn 9 on the front line.
----
Mrs Williams said that, racing into the first bend, Mr Smith moved down when he was not clear of Mr McNally forcing Mr McNally over a number of pylons. She pointed out that Mr McNally was, and was clearly entitled to be, on the inside of Mr Smith who was “chasing up”. Mr McNally hit a number of pylons. Mr Smith had the opportunity to ease out on to the back of JASPERS BLUE JEAN (K G Cameron). He did not do so and, she alleged, he drove in a careless manner in forcing Mr McNally over a number of pylons. He continued to drive his horse forward when he ought to have been restraining it and getting onto Mr Cameron’s back. At no stage was there a full gap for him to shift down into until Mr McNally restrained.
----
Mr Smith said that when he initially came across to get the trail there was sufficient room. The angle of the camera did not show it but there was “clear room”, he alleged. He believed that he had got onto the leader’s back. At that point, his horse had “gone a bit rough” enabling Mr McNally to get up in the passing lane, he submitted. If his horse had not gone rough, none of this would have happened, he said. Mr Cameron was on his outside and he was unable to come back out. Mr Smith acknowledged that he may not have known his horse well enough and may have pushed it a bit hard to get it into the trail, which may have caused it to go rough.
----
Following a brief deliberation, the Committee delivered the following interim oral decision:
--“The Committee finds that, on passing the winning post for the first time, Mr Smith who had crossed from barrier 9, was in 3rd place with Mr McNally on his inside. Mr Smith was clearly attempting to cross to the markers to trail the leader and, in fact, he admitted this during the course of the hearing. We believe that he persisted in doing so despite the presence of Mr McNally on his inside. He ultimately crossed to the markers but only after persisting in competing with Mr McNally for the trailing position. It is clear that Mr Smith attempted to cross to the markers when he was not sufficiently clear of Mr McNally. Mr Smith told us that his horse went roughly for a couple of strides and he said that, but for this, he would have been able to cross unobstructed to the markers. The Committee does not dismiss this submission but it believes that Mr Smith still had the option of pulling out and getting onto the back of Mr Cameron which would have avoided the difficulties that Mr McNally got into. The Committee finds that in not taking the option of easing out onto Mr Cameron’s back but, rather, persisting in attempting to cross to the markers when not able to do so with safety Mr Smith was guilty of an error of judgement and drove carelessly and, therefore, we find the charge to be proved”.
----
The Committee did not accept the evidence of Mr Smith to the effect the he was established on the back of the leader, LIVING PROOF, and that it was only by virtue of his horse going roughly for a few strides that enabled Mr McNally to get up on his inside by using the passing lane. The Committee was satisfied that Mr Smith was not clear of Mr McNally at the material time.
----
Mr Escott informed the Committee that, at a premier meeting on 12.12.08, Mr Smith had been fined $450 for careless driving. He recommended a fine of between $300 and $350.
----
Mr Smith expressed the view that the recommended fine was too high and he referred to the fine of $200 imposed on Mr McNally for careless driving arising out of the same incident.
----
The Committee believed that the penalty to be imposed on Mr Smith needed to be greater than that imposed on Mr McNally. This was on the basis that Mr Smith was the primary instigator of what happened. In addition to that, the Committee also had to take into account the previous breach of the Rule in December 2008.
----
Having regard to those matters, the Committee fined Mr Smith the sum of $300.
----
R G McKenzie
CHAIRMANsumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Old Hearing
Rules: 869.3.b
Informant:
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: a0062b3ddc61dba89d0431877070d4dc
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: Race 5
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: 3647c55a5976991dbc96fd9cfdbb7d09
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 08/03/2009
meet_title: Cheviot HRC - 8 March 2009
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: cheviot-hrc
meet_racingtype: harness-racing
meet_chair:
meet_pm1:
meet_pm2:
name: Cheviot HRC