Egmont RC 28 May 2017 – R 1 – Chair, Mr T Bird
ID: JCA11453
Code:
Thoroughbred
Meet Title:
Egmont RC - 28 May 2017
Meet Chair:
TBird
Meet Committee Member 1:
PWilliams
Race Date:
2017/05/28
Race Number:
R 1
Decision:
The Committee finds the charge of careless riding preferred against Mr Walsh proved.
Penalty:
Following discussions with Mr Walsh as to his upcoming riding engagements, it was determined that Mr Walsh be suspended from the close of racing on 28 May 2017 up to and including racing on June 4, 2017 (2 riding days) - the days being Matamata 31 May and Otago 4 June 2017.
Facts:
Following the running of Race 1 (Hypnotize Steeplechase), Information No A8765 was lodged with the Judicial Committee. It was alleged by Mr Balcombe that G Walsh (JUST ISHI) shifted inwards after the start dictating COLONIA (S Karnicnik) inwards and into the line of NOAH JON (E Farr) which clipped that runners heels and blundered.
Rule 638(1) (d) reads:
A rider shall not ride a horse in a manner which the Judicial Committee considers to be careless.
Mr Walsh confirmed that he did not admit the breach and said that he understood the Rule and the charge that had been preferred against him.
Submissions for Decision:
Mr Goodwin used the head on film to identify the three horses involved in the incident as the horses moved forward at the flag start point near the 400m post on the course proper - JUST ISHI (G Walsh) having drawn 3 being three horses out, with COLONIA, having drawn 2, being two horses out and NOAH JON having drawn one being nearest the rail.
Mr Goodwin alleged that Mr Walsh angled his mount inwards soon after the start and in the approach to the first fence when not the sufficient distance clear. He said the movement put inward pressure on COLONIA which in turn forced that runner across the heels of Ms Farr’s mount racing to it’s inside causing that horse to blunder. Mr Goodwin also played the other available views of the incident.
Mr Goodwin called Ms Farr as a witness to give her account of the incident. She said in the approach to the first fence the gap she had “disappeared” as a result to inward pressure being applied from her outside. Ms Farr said “had been squashed” approaching the fence and called for room but it never eventuated and as a result her horse severely blundered
In answer to questioning from Mr Goodwin, Ms Farr said her mount was about half a length behind COLONIA when she clipped heels having been denied her rightful line of running.
Mr Walsh had no questions of Ms Farr and advised that he did not intend to call any witnesses.
In answer to the Steward’s submission, Mr Walsh pointed to the flag start on the bend into the home straight and the newly introduced wings to the fence, claiming they were major contributing factors in the incident. Mr Walsh said he rode in a straight line from his position of three horses out at the start towards the first fence. He added he and other jumps riders had an issue with the erection of the inside wing claiming it caused an issue for horses drawing inside barrier positions in the approach to the obstacle as it took up half a horse width. He did not believe he had come across and squeezed up COLONIA prior to jumping the fence emphasising that he thought he had gone in a straight line to it. Mr Walsh said with Ms Farr’s mount starting from the inside and himself wider out this created a funnel effect in the run to the fence when rounding a bend. He said that in a flag start situation the horse drawn on the inside dictates the position of the other runners at the start and on this occasion Ms Farr had gone down too close to the running rail which eventually led to her being checked.
In summation, Mr Goodwin said he believed that the start of the race was a fair one and Ms Farr was entitled to be where she was in the early running. He said that Mr Walsh allowed his mount to move in and in doing so dictated COLONIA inwards which resulted in Ms Farr’s mount being denied a fair run into the first fence. He said that she had no option other than take hold of her mount because of the inward movement of Mr Walsh onto COLONIA. Mr Goodwin said there was some slight outward movement by Mr Walsh before arriving at the first fence but he believed Mr Walsh has not done enough to relive the pressure. He said he had come from a position of possibly five or six horses off the rail to be one off and that had caused Ms Farr’s mount to be severely checked. He said it was clear in his mind that Mr Walsh’s actions clearly showed he had ridden carelessly
Mr Walsh had no questions of Mr Goodwin.
Reasons for Decision:
The Committee has carefully considered the very clear evidence of Ms Farr and the submissions of Mr Goodwin and Mr Walsh. In addition we have reviewed the available films of the incident with the head on and rear views being particularly helpful. We agree with comments made by Mr Walsh and Ms Farr that starting the race on a bend and having the first fence immediately after the bend has contributed to the incident occurring. Whilst in a flag start situation the position of all horses as the flag drops is in part determined by the position of the inside horse we do not believe on this occasion Ms Farr has created the situation she found herself in.
Mr Walsh, as a very experienced and senior jumps rider, should have known that, because of the race starting on the top bend and the first fence being positioned at the top of the straight, he should not have ridden in a straight line to the first fence but rather allowed his mount to move out slightly so that those on his inside did not end up, as they did, being squeezed up. In riding in the straight line as he did in those first 20-30 or so metres it was inevitable that the horses to his inside would end up running out of room which is what happened with both Mr Karnicnik and Ms Farr being clearly denied their rightful line of running as they approached the first fence.
Submissions for Penalty:
Mr Goodwin said that Mr Walsh’s record was good and that had not been charged with careless riding for just on 12 months. He believed a term of suspension was appropriate and that it be for a period of 2 riding days.
Mr Walsh confirmed that he had not been suspended since the Matamata meeting last year (12 months ago less 3 days) and did not seek a deferment of any suspension.
Reasons for Penalty:
The Committee views the level of carelessness displayed by Mr Walsh to be close to the mid range given Mr Karnicnik’s horse was impacted when dictated inwards onto Ms Farr’s horse which was checked and severely blundered forcing Ms Farr momentarily out of the saddle. The JCA Penalty Guide does not state a starting point for a breach of the careless riding Rule for Jumps and Highweight riders so in recognition of their limited opportunities the Committee had adopted a starting point of 3 riding days.
We have then increased that by 1 day to recognise the fact that two horses were impacted by Mr Walsh’s actions, 1 of them quite severely.
In mitigation we have taken into account Mr Walsh’s record under this Rule which we consider to be clear given his last breach was only 3 days shy of 12 months ago. We have also taken into consideration matters raised during the hearing about the start point of the race, the position of the first fence and the impact of the positioning of the inside wing of the fence which did in part contribute to the incident. In consideration of all those factors we reduce the penalty from 4 days to 2 days.
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: 1fed5fa682b5c4c474cf0af2865f31de
informantnumber: A8765
horsename:
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge: Careless Riding
plea: denied
penaltyrequired: 1
decisiondate: 31/05/2017
hearing_title: Egmont RC 28 May 2017 - R 1 - Chair, Mr T Bird
charge:
facts:
Following the running of Race 1 (Hypnotize Steeplechase), Information No A8765 was lodged with the Judicial Committee. It was alleged by Mr Balcombe that G Walsh (JUST ISHI) shifted inwards after the start dictating COLONIA (S Karnicnik) inwards and into the line of NOAH JON (E Farr) which clipped that runners heels and blundered.
Rule 638(1) (d) reads:
A rider shall not ride a horse in a manner which the Judicial Committee considers to be careless.
Mr Walsh confirmed that he did not admit the breach and said that he understood the Rule and the charge that had been preferred against him.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
Mr Goodwin used the head on film to identify the three horses involved in the incident as the horses moved forward at the flag start point near the 400m post on the course proper - JUST ISHI (G Walsh) having drawn 3 being three horses out, with COLONIA, having drawn 2, being two horses out and NOAH JON having drawn one being nearest the rail.
Mr Goodwin alleged that Mr Walsh angled his mount inwards soon after the start and in the approach to the first fence when not the sufficient distance clear. He said the movement put inward pressure on COLONIA which in turn forced that runner across the heels of Ms Farr’s mount racing to it’s inside causing that horse to blunder. Mr Goodwin also played the other available views of the incident.
Mr Goodwin called Ms Farr as a witness to give her account of the incident. She said in the approach to the first fence the gap she had “disappeared” as a result to inward pressure being applied from her outside. Ms Farr said “had been squashed” approaching the fence and called for room but it never eventuated and as a result her horse severely blundered
In answer to questioning from Mr Goodwin, Ms Farr said her mount was about half a length behind COLONIA when she clipped heels having been denied her rightful line of running.
Mr Walsh had no questions of Ms Farr and advised that he did not intend to call any witnesses.
In answer to the Steward’s submission, Mr Walsh pointed to the flag start on the bend into the home straight and the newly introduced wings to the fence, claiming they were major contributing factors in the incident. Mr Walsh said he rode in a straight line from his position of three horses out at the start towards the first fence. He added he and other jumps riders had an issue with the erection of the inside wing claiming it caused an issue for horses drawing inside barrier positions in the approach to the obstacle as it took up half a horse width. He did not believe he had come across and squeezed up COLONIA prior to jumping the fence emphasising that he thought he had gone in a straight line to it. Mr Walsh said with Ms Farr’s mount starting from the inside and himself wider out this created a funnel effect in the run to the fence when rounding a bend. He said that in a flag start situation the horse drawn on the inside dictates the position of the other runners at the start and on this occasion Ms Farr had gone down too close to the running rail which eventually led to her being checked.
In summation, Mr Goodwin said he believed that the start of the race was a fair one and Ms Farr was entitled to be where she was in the early running. He said that Mr Walsh allowed his mount to move in and in doing so dictated COLONIA inwards which resulted in Ms Farr’s mount being denied a fair run into the first fence. He said that she had no option other than take hold of her mount because of the inward movement of Mr Walsh onto COLONIA. Mr Goodwin said there was some slight outward movement by Mr Walsh before arriving at the first fence but he believed Mr Walsh has not done enough to relive the pressure. He said he had come from a position of possibly five or six horses off the rail to be one off and that had caused Ms Farr’s mount to be severely checked. He said it was clear in his mind that Mr Walsh’s actions clearly showed he had ridden carelessly
Mr Walsh had no questions of Mr Goodwin.
reasonsfordecision:
The Committee has carefully considered the very clear evidence of Ms Farr and the submissions of Mr Goodwin and Mr Walsh. In addition we have reviewed the available films of the incident with the head on and rear views being particularly helpful. We agree with comments made by Mr Walsh and Ms Farr that starting the race on a bend and having the first fence immediately after the bend has contributed to the incident occurring. Whilst in a flag start situation the position of all horses as the flag drops is in part determined by the position of the inside horse we do not believe on this occasion Ms Farr has created the situation she found herself in.
Mr Walsh, as a very experienced and senior jumps rider, should have known that, because of the race starting on the top bend and the first fence being positioned at the top of the straight, he should not have ridden in a straight line to the first fence but rather allowed his mount to move out slightly so that those on his inside did not end up, as they did, being squeezed up. In riding in the straight line as he did in those first 20-30 or so metres it was inevitable that the horses to his inside would end up running out of room which is what happened with both Mr Karnicnik and Ms Farr being clearly denied their rightful line of running as they approached the first fence.
Decision:
The Committee finds the charge of careless riding preferred against Mr Walsh proved.
sumissionsforpenalty:
Mr Goodwin said that Mr Walsh’s record was good and that had not been charged with careless riding for just on 12 months. He believed a term of suspension was appropriate and that it be for a period of 2 riding days.
Mr Walsh confirmed that he had not been suspended since the Matamata meeting last year (12 months ago less 3 days) and did not seek a deferment of any suspension.
reasonsforpenalty:
The Committee views the level of carelessness displayed by Mr Walsh to be close to the mid range given Mr Karnicnik’s horse was impacted when dictated inwards onto Ms Farr’s horse which was checked and severely blundered forcing Ms Farr momentarily out of the saddle. The JCA Penalty Guide does not state a starting point for a breach of the careless riding Rule for Jumps and Highweight riders so in recognition of their limited opportunities the Committee had adopted a starting point of 3 riding days.
We have then increased that by 1 day to recognise the fact that two horses were impacted by Mr Walsh’s actions, 1 of them quite severely.
In mitigation we have taken into account Mr Walsh’s record under this Rule which we consider to be clear given his last breach was only 3 days shy of 12 months ago. We have also taken into consideration matters raised during the hearing about the start point of the race, the position of the first fence and the impact of the positioning of the inside wing of the fence which did in part contribute to the incident. In consideration of all those factors we reduce the penalty from 4 days to 2 days.
penalty:
Following discussions with Mr Walsh as to his upcoming riding engagements, it was determined that Mr Walsh be suspended from the close of racing on 28 May 2017 up to and including racing on June 4, 2017 (2 riding days) - the days being Matamata 31 May and Otago 4 June 2017.
hearing_type: Hearing
Rules: 638(1)(d)
Informant:
JockeysandTrainer: Mr G Walsh - Licensed Jockey - Rider of JUST ISHI
Otherperson: Ms E Farr - Apprentice Jockey - Rider of NOAH JON
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: 018dbc4ea916c3b8f0f868e528f2b494
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: R 1
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: e49c745d8fe36a5afbf71a39909f36e2
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 28/05/2017
meet_title: Egmont RC - 28 May 2017
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: egmont-rc
meet_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
meet_chair: TBird
meet_pm1: PWilliams
meet_pm2: none
name: Egmont RC