Hawera HRC – 3 April 2010 – R 1
ID: JCA20178
Hearing Type (Code):
harness-racing
Meet Title:
Hawera HRC - 3 April 2010
Meet Chair:
tom
Meet Committee Member 1:
tom
Meet Committee Member 2:
tom
Race Date:
2010/04/03
Race Number:
R 1
Decision: --
RACEDAY JUDICIAL COMMITTEE DECISION
--Information No: 68517
--Meeting: Hawera Harness Racing Club
--Date: 3 April 2010
--Venue: Hawera
--Race No: 1
--Rule No: 868 (3)
--Judicial Committee: I D Smith, Chairman – P Williams and T Utikere, Committee Members
--Informant: T Taumanu – Stipendiary Steward
--Defendant: Mr S Dickson
--Present: N McIntyre – Stipendiary Steward
--Plea: Does not admit
----
Following the running of race 1 S Dickson the driver of’ Brylin Bay’ was charged under rule 868(3) in that he failed to drive his horse out over the concluding stages.
----
Rule 868 (3) states “ Every horseman shall drive his horse out to the end of the race if he has any reasonable chance of running first, second, third, fourth, fifth or sixth”.
----
Rule 868(3) was read, confirmed and understood by Mr Dickson who confirmed he did not admit the breach.
----
Mr McIntyre identified on the video for the committee Mr Dickson on Brylin Bay travelling five wide on straightening in the run to the finish. Mr Taumanu stated the stewards were concerned that Mr Dickson had shown a lack of or no vigour and had sat motionless in the cart and that at no stage did he use the whip other than a flick or make any attempt to shake the reins over the concluding stages in the run to the line. He said Brylin Bay finished in third place a neck behind the second horse and was making ground on the other horses over the concluding stages of the race. Mr Taumanu also said the horse was travelling fluently, not hopping and there was no vigour shown at all by Mr Dickson who might have been nursing the horse because today was it was having its first race day start.
----
In his defence Mr Dickson stated he felt he was doing his best for both the betting public and himself as the owner of the horse. He said the horse was a five year old and having its first start. Prior to today it had only trialled by itself and had not been put under “race pressure” and as a result he was not confident the horse would not break if it had been hit with whip. He said the horse was racing greenly down the straight and looking everywhere but as the owner/driver he was trying his best because it would have been better for him to run second rather than third so why wouldn’t he be trying to run second.
----
Mr Taumanu in summarising stated Mr Dickson should have shown some vigour at the very least by shaking the reins. He said the stewards did not expect drivers to excessively use the whip but did expect some vigour - for example the whip being flourished or the reins being shaken in a manner so the driver could be seen to be driving the horse out to the finish .The stewards were concerned for the betting public and the way the finish was perceived by those watching the race. The video clearly shows at no stage was there any vigour shown by Mr Dickson to drive his horse out to the end of the race. He sat motionless, apart from two very minor movements of his hands flicking the reins.
----
Decision
----
In reaching their decision the committee have carefully considered all the evidence presented and studied on numerous occasions the video, both side on and head on. The committee does not agree with Mr Dickson’s comments that the horse was racing greenly and looking around. The head on film shows the horse was running on a straight line and doing everything right.
----
Mr Dickson’s defence was based on his view that if he had hit the horse with the whip it would have broke. The committee’s view is that the horse may have broken but in any event vigour could have been displayed in other ways. The committee also notes the comments of Mr Taumanu who said Mr Dickson could have sought permission not to carry a whip rather than carry one and not use it. The committee find Mr Dickson failed in his obligation to drive his horse out to the end of the race and the charge is proven.
----
Penalty
----
Mr Taumanu said the charge was quite a serious one and goes to the heart of the integrity of racing. It is important the betting public and those watching for interest only have confidence that all horses are given every chance to finish in the highest place possible and that drivers make every attempt to ensure a reasonable and permissible amount of vigour is shown in the drive to the finish line. It is also important that the penalty imposed by the committee be seen as an effective deterrent to other drivers.
--Mr Dickson has a very good record with only one previous charge (not under rule 868(3)) in the previous 12 months and the stewards requested a fine of $500 or higher or a suspension of four to six weeks.
----
Mr Dickson asked the committee to consider a monetary penalty rather than a suspension.
----
The committee in reaching a decision have taken into account
--- Mr Dickson’s very good record.
- The significant lack of vigour shown over the final stages of the race.
- The effect on the betting public.
--
On this occasion the committee support a monetary penalty and in line with and consistent with recent previous charges under this rule impose a fine of $500.
----
I Smith P Williams, T Utikere
--Chair Committee Members
--68517
----
--
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: 45a01c2e6c28b0949ddfe29d87263629
informantnumber:
horsename:
hearing_racingtype: harness-racing
startdate: 03/04/2010
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: no date provided
hearing_title: Hawera HRC - 3 April 2010 - R 1
charge:
facts:
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
reasonsfordecision:
Decision:
--RACEDAY JUDICIAL COMMITTEE DECISION
--Information No: 68517
--Meeting: Hawera Harness Racing Club
--Date: 3 April 2010
--Venue: Hawera
--Race No: 1
--Rule No: 868 (3)
--Judicial Committee: I D Smith, Chairman – P Williams and T Utikere, Committee Members
--Informant: T Taumanu – Stipendiary Steward
--Defendant: Mr S Dickson
--Present: N McIntyre – Stipendiary Steward
--Plea: Does not admit
----
Following the running of race 1 S Dickson the driver of’ Brylin Bay’ was charged under rule 868(3) in that he failed to drive his horse out over the concluding stages.
----
Rule 868 (3) states “ Every horseman shall drive his horse out to the end of the race if he has any reasonable chance of running first, second, third, fourth, fifth or sixth”.
----
Rule 868(3) was read, confirmed and understood by Mr Dickson who confirmed he did not admit the breach.
----
Mr McIntyre identified on the video for the committee Mr Dickson on Brylin Bay travelling five wide on straightening in the run to the finish. Mr Taumanu stated the stewards were concerned that Mr Dickson had shown a lack of or no vigour and had sat motionless in the cart and that at no stage did he use the whip other than a flick or make any attempt to shake the reins over the concluding stages in the run to the line. He said Brylin Bay finished in third place a neck behind the second horse and was making ground on the other horses over the concluding stages of the race. Mr Taumanu also said the horse was travelling fluently, not hopping and there was no vigour shown at all by Mr Dickson who might have been nursing the horse because today was it was having its first race day start.
----
In his defence Mr Dickson stated he felt he was doing his best for both the betting public and himself as the owner of the horse. He said the horse was a five year old and having its first start. Prior to today it had only trialled by itself and had not been put under “race pressure” and as a result he was not confident the horse would not break if it had been hit with whip. He said the horse was racing greenly down the straight and looking everywhere but as the owner/driver he was trying his best because it would have been better for him to run second rather than third so why wouldn’t he be trying to run second.
----
Mr Taumanu in summarising stated Mr Dickson should have shown some vigour at the very least by shaking the reins. He said the stewards did not expect drivers to excessively use the whip but did expect some vigour - for example the whip being flourished or the reins being shaken in a manner so the driver could be seen to be driving the horse out to the finish .The stewards were concerned for the betting public and the way the finish was perceived by those watching the race. The video clearly shows at no stage was there any vigour shown by Mr Dickson to drive his horse out to the end of the race. He sat motionless, apart from two very minor movements of his hands flicking the reins.
----
Decision
----
In reaching their decision the committee have carefully considered all the evidence presented and studied on numerous occasions the video, both side on and head on. The committee does not agree with Mr Dickson’s comments that the horse was racing greenly and looking around. The head on film shows the horse was running on a straight line and doing everything right.
----
Mr Dickson’s defence was based on his view that if he had hit the horse with the whip it would have broke. The committee’s view is that the horse may have broken but in any event vigour could have been displayed in other ways. The committee also notes the comments of Mr Taumanu who said Mr Dickson could have sought permission not to carry a whip rather than carry one and not use it. The committee find Mr Dickson failed in his obligation to drive his horse out to the end of the race and the charge is proven.
----
Penalty
----
Mr Taumanu said the charge was quite a serious one and goes to the heart of the integrity of racing. It is important the betting public and those watching for interest only have confidence that all horses are given every chance to finish in the highest place possible and that drivers make every attempt to ensure a reasonable and permissible amount of vigour is shown in the drive to the finish line. It is also important that the penalty imposed by the committee be seen as an effective deterrent to other drivers.
--Mr Dickson has a very good record with only one previous charge (not under rule 868(3)) in the previous 12 months and the stewards requested a fine of $500 or higher or a suspension of four to six weeks.
----
Mr Dickson asked the committee to consider a monetary penalty rather than a suspension.
----
The committee in reaching a decision have taken into account
--- Mr Dickson’s very good record.
- The significant lack of vigour shown over the final stages of the race.
- The effect on the betting public.
--
On this occasion the committee support a monetary penalty and in line with and consistent with recent previous charges under this rule impose a fine of $500.
----
I Smith P Williams, T Utikere
--Chair Committee Members
--68517
----
--
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Old Hearing
Rules: 868 (3)
Informant:
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: da70ad1b4991ddf545629380d708e00e
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: 3a068bdfbce852a041f86e025f815f3d
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 03/04/2010
meet_title: Hawera HRC - 3 April 2010
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: hawera-hrc
meet_racingtype: harness-racing
meet_chair: tom
meet_pm1: tom
meet_pm2: tom
name: Hawera HRC