Gore HRC 26 August 2012 – R 3 (instigating a protest)
ID: JCA11546
Meet Title:
Gore HRC - 26 August 2012
Meet Chair:
RMcKenzie
Meet Committee Member 1:
NSkelt
Race Date:
2012/08/26
Race Number:
R3
Decision:
The protest was upheld and HEY HARDY, placed 4th by the judge, was disqualified from the race.
Consequent upon the disqualification, the amended placings for the race are as follows:
1st 8 Fiery Lustre
2nd 3 Farmer Dons
3rd 6 Jaccka Mertz
4th 11 Bid Spotter
5th 4 Data Base
Facts:
Following the running of Race 3, Roof Safe Gutter Solutionz Ltd Pace Standing Start, an information instigating a protest was filed by Stipendiary Steward, Mr C J Allison, against Licensed Junior Horseman, Mr A F J Sanderson, alleging that Mr Sanderson, as the driver of HEY HARDY, placed 4th by the judge, “shifted ground outwards near the 2000 metres mark forcing GOLDEN COMPASS (A M Armour) wider on the track.” GOLDEN COMPASS finished in last placing.
Mr Sanderson was present at the hearing of the information and he indicated that he was representing the connections of HEY HARDY at the hearing of the protest. Mr Sanderson was assisted at the hearing by Licensed Open Horseman, Mr B J Morris.
Rule 869 provides as follows:
(6) Subject to sub-rule (4) hereof:-
(b) a horse making a forward movement during any race shall not be forced to race wider on the track;
(c) a horse during a race shall not move ground outwards once the nose of the wider runner coming forward is in line with or past its sulky wheel and until the wider runner going forward is fully past.
Submissions for Decision:
Mr Allison said that the Stewards were not alleging that the chances of Mr Armour had been affected but rather that Mr Sanderson had gained an advantage by shifting ground when not entitled to. This enabled him to the lead and then trail for the remainder of the race, when he should have been 3-back, Mr Allison said.
Mr Allison showed video replays of the incident, approximately 200 metres after the start of the 2200 metres standing start event. He pointed out Mr Sanderson, which had drawn 2 on the front row, in the trailing position behind FARMER DONS (A D Milne) with Mr Armour, driving GOLDEN COMPASS, immediately outside him. Mr Allison submitted that Mr Sanderson was not entitled to move out and to do so was a breach of the pushout Rule. By moving out, he had pushed Mr Armour wider on the track to obtain a run that enabled him to progress to the lead and then trail the eventual winner, FIERY LUSTRE.
Mr Allison then showed a video replay of the remaining stages of the race. He pointed out that Mr Sanderson was racing in the trail and not 3-back, where he should have been had he not forced a run. HEY HARDY weakened to finish in 4th placing.
Mr Armour stated that he had drawn 2 on the second row behind HEY HARDY and had followed that horse out. He said that Mr Sanderson had got down onto the marker line and that he had followed him through. Mr Armour said that he had intended going forward but Mr Sanderson had pushed him out. After he was pushed out, he was not in a position to go forward, he said.
Mr Sanderson referred to the video replays and alleged that the leader had “run about”. He alleged that he was outside the leader’s cart and that he was entitled to “jostle” with Mr Armour for the gap. That gap was available for himself and Mr Armour and he had beaten Mr Armour to it. The video replay made the incident look worse because the leader had run out, Mr Sanderson said.
Mr Morris submitted that the leader was in the passing lane and that Mr Sanderson was doing no more than hold his ground.
Mr Allison submitted that it was Mr Sanderson’s actions that were in question and not the actions of the leading horse.
Reasons for Decision:
The Committee was clearly satisfied that Mr Sanderson, driving HEY HARDY, had moved ground outwards while the nose of the wider runner, GOLDEN COMPASS, driven by Mr Armour, which was making a forward movement, was clearly in line with or past its sulky wheel. In fact, GOLDEN COMPASS was on even terms with or even slightly ahead of HEY HARDY at the point where Mr Sanderson moved out. The Committee was further satisfied that this was a clear breach of the pushout Rule and, therefore, brought into play the provisions of Rule 869 (8).
Mr Allison alleged that Mr Sanderson gained an advantage by his actions, which were in breach of the pushout Rule. The Committee agreed. With his aggressive driving in breach of the Rule, Mr Sanderson had clearly gained for his horse, HEY HARDY, an advantage by enabling it to obtain a favourable run on the back of the favourite and eventual winner, FIERY LUSTRE. The Committee was satisfied that, but for that advantage obtained by a breach of Rule 869 (6), HEY HARDY would, almost certainly, have been positioned less favourably – 3-back on the markers instead of in the trail immediately behind the leader. This advantage enabled the horse to finish in a weakening 4th placing, which was otherwise unlikely, in the Committee’s view, having regard to the manner in which HEY HARDY finished off the race.
In all of the circumstances, the Committee was of the view that HEY HARDY should be disqualified from the race pursuant to Rule 1003 (2) (a).
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: 236c4f43b3c5b573702e1b0af5f9b98e
informantnumber: A1312
horsename: HEY HARDY
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: 26/07/2012
hearing_title: Gore HRC 26 August 2012 - R 3 (instigating a protest)
charge:
facts:
Following the running of Race 3, Roof Safe Gutter Solutionz Ltd Pace Standing Start, an information instigating a protest was filed by Stipendiary Steward, Mr C J Allison, against Licensed Junior Horseman, Mr A F J Sanderson, alleging that Mr Sanderson, as the driver of HEY HARDY, placed 4th by the judge, “shifted ground outwards near the 2000 metres mark forcing GOLDEN COMPASS (A M Armour) wider on the track.” GOLDEN COMPASS finished in last placing.
Mr Sanderson was present at the hearing of the information and he indicated that he was representing the connections of HEY HARDY at the hearing of the protest. Mr Sanderson was assisted at the hearing by Licensed Open Horseman, Mr B J Morris.
Rule 869 provides as follows:
(6) Subject to sub-rule (4) hereof:-
(b) a horse making a forward movement during any race shall not be forced to race wider on the track;
(c) a horse during a race shall not move ground outwards once the nose of the wider runner coming forward is in line with or past its sulky wheel and until the wider runner going forward is fully past.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
Mr Allison said that the Stewards were not alleging that the chances of Mr Armour had been affected but rather that Mr Sanderson had gained an advantage by shifting ground when not entitled to. This enabled him to the lead and then trail for the remainder of the race, when he should have been 3-back, Mr Allison said.
Mr Allison showed video replays of the incident, approximately 200 metres after the start of the 2200 metres standing start event. He pointed out Mr Sanderson, which had drawn 2 on the front row, in the trailing position behind FARMER DONS (A D Milne) with Mr Armour, driving GOLDEN COMPASS, immediately outside him. Mr Allison submitted that Mr Sanderson was not entitled to move out and to do so was a breach of the pushout Rule. By moving out, he had pushed Mr Armour wider on the track to obtain a run that enabled him to progress to the lead and then trail the eventual winner, FIERY LUSTRE.
Mr Allison then showed a video replay of the remaining stages of the race. He pointed out that Mr Sanderson was racing in the trail and not 3-back, where he should have been had he not forced a run. HEY HARDY weakened to finish in 4th placing.
Mr Armour stated that he had drawn 2 on the second row behind HEY HARDY and had followed that horse out. He said that Mr Sanderson had got down onto the marker line and that he had followed him through. Mr Armour said that he had intended going forward but Mr Sanderson had pushed him out. After he was pushed out, he was not in a position to go forward, he said.
Mr Sanderson referred to the video replays and alleged that the leader had “run about”. He alleged that he was outside the leader’s cart and that he was entitled to “jostle” with Mr Armour for the gap. That gap was available for himself and Mr Armour and he had beaten Mr Armour to it. The video replay made the incident look worse because the leader had run out, Mr Sanderson said.
Mr Morris submitted that the leader was in the passing lane and that Mr Sanderson was doing no more than hold his ground.
Mr Allison submitted that it was Mr Sanderson’s actions that were in question and not the actions of the leading horse.
reasonsfordecision:
The Committee was clearly satisfied that Mr Sanderson, driving HEY HARDY, had moved ground outwards while the nose of the wider runner, GOLDEN COMPASS, driven by Mr Armour, which was making a forward movement, was clearly in line with or past its sulky wheel. In fact, GOLDEN COMPASS was on even terms with or even slightly ahead of HEY HARDY at the point where Mr Sanderson moved out. The Committee was further satisfied that this was a clear breach of the pushout Rule and, therefore, brought into play the provisions of Rule 869 (8).
Mr Allison alleged that Mr Sanderson gained an advantage by his actions, which were in breach of the pushout Rule. The Committee agreed. With his aggressive driving in breach of the Rule, Mr Sanderson had clearly gained for his horse, HEY HARDY, an advantage by enabling it to obtain a favourable run on the back of the favourite and eventual winner, FIERY LUSTRE. The Committee was satisfied that, but for that advantage obtained by a breach of Rule 869 (6), HEY HARDY would, almost certainly, have been positioned less favourably – 3-back on the markers instead of in the trail immediately behind the leader. This advantage enabled the horse to finish in a weakening 4th placing, which was otherwise unlikely, in the Committee’s view, having regard to the manner in which HEY HARDY finished off the race.
In all of the circumstances, the Committee was of the view that HEY HARDY should be disqualified from the race pursuant to Rule 1003 (2) (a).
Decision:
The protest was upheld and HEY HARDY, placed 4th by the judge, was disqualified from the race.
Consequent upon the disqualification, the amended placings for the race are as follows:
1st 8 Fiery Lustre
2nd 3 Farmer Dons
3rd 6 Jaccka Mertz
4th 11 Bid Spotter
5th 4 Data Base
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Protest
Rules: 869(6)(b)&(c)
Informant: CJ Allison - Stipendiary Steward
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent: AM Armour - Licensed Open Driver, BJ Morris - Licensed Open Horseman assisting Mr Sanderson
Respondent: AFJ Sanderson - Licensed Junior Driver
StipendSteward:
raceid: f25f63d9f165f1c50ba0b3d0f4360e65
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: R3
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: 730261368649fb7f6f65c41bafe02745
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 26/08/2012
meet_title: Gore HRC - 26 August 2012
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: gore-hrc
meet_racingtype: harness-racing
meet_chair: RMcKenzie
meet_pm1: NSkelt
meet_pm2: none
name: Gore HRC