Invercargill HRC – 21 February 2010 – Race 9

hearingid: d49d8b319ddfd941170f13dcb4d767ad

informantnumber:

horsename:

hearing_racingtype: harness-racing

startdate: 21/02/2010

newcharge:

plea:

penaltyrequired:

decisiondate: no date provided

hearing_title: Invercargill HRC - 21 February 2010 - Race 9

charge:

facts:

appealdecision:

isappeal:

submissionsfordecision:

reasonsfordecision:

Decision:

RACEDAY JUDICIAL COMMITTEE DECISION

Information No. 13353 (Protest)
Meeting  Invercargill Harness Racing Club
Date 21 February 2010
Judicial Committee Chairman :  A G Dennis  Panel Member  : N D Skelt
Race 9
Rule 869 (8) (b)

Informant :   Mr P T Knowles, Stipendiary Steward
Defendant :   Mr A J Suddaby – driver of HOT RIPPLE (5)
Witnesses : Mr G Thomas – driver of BEST KNIGHT EVA, Mr Knight – trainer, AMBRO ROCK
 
Following the running of Race 9, The Centrepoint / South City Liquorland Mobile Pace, a protest was lodged by Stipendiary Steward Mr P Knowles alleging that with approximately 600 m to run, HOT RIPPLE (A J Suddaby) broke with resulting checks to ARDEN DU PLESSIS and AMBRO ROCK.

RACEDAY JUDICIAL COMMITTEE DECISION 

Information No. 13353 (Protest)
Meeting  Invercargill Harness Racing Club
Date 21 February 2010
Judicial Committee Chairman :  A G Dennis  Panel Member  : N D Skelt
Race 9
Rule 869 (8) (b)

Informant :   Mr P T Knowles, Stipendiary Steward
Defendant :   Mr A J Suddaby – driver of HOT RIPPLE (5)
Witnesses : Mr G Thomas – driver of BEST KNIGHT EVA, Mr Knight – trainer, AMBRO ROCK
 
Following the running of Race 9, The Centrepoint / South City Liquorland Mobile Pace, a protest was lodged by Stipendiary Steward Mr P Knowles alleging that with approximately 600 m to run, HOT RIPPLE (A J Suddaby) broke with resulting checks to ARDEN DU PLESSIS and AMBRO ROCK.

Information no. 13353, Rule 869 (8) (b) which reads : (8) The Judicial Committee may in addition to any other penalty which may be imposed pursuant to Rule 1003 thereof place any horse which : may have interfered with, or whose horseman may have interfered with, the progress or chance of any other horse or horses – immediately after any horse from which it may have gained an advantage or whose chances or progress may have been affected thereby.

Mr Knowles started by reading the Rule and then stated that he was seeking disqualification.  Stipendiary Steward Mr Allison then used video film to demonstrate and point out the movements of horses HOT RIPPLE (Mr Suddaby) and BEST KNIGHT EVA (Mr Thomas) that led to HOT RIPPLE breaking and badly checking both ARDEN DU PLESSIS and AMBRO ROCK.  Mr Thomas had improved rapidly in the 3 wide lane and Mr Suddaby (HOT RIPPLE) improving and moving outwards, forward of BEST KNIGHT EVA.  At this point HOT RIPPLE (Mr Suddaby) broke and effectively checked both following horses ARDEN DU PLESSIS and AMBRO ROCK out of the race.

Mr Knowles then questioned both Mr Suddaby and Mr Thomas who gave their accounts of the incident. 

Mr Suddaby claimed that he had moved outwards into the 3 wide lane, in an attempt to force Mr Thomas to go around him, thereby giving him effectively the trailing position in the 3 wide lane.  Mr Suddaby maintained that Mr Thomas’ horse was ‘lugging in’, ‘hanging in’, and ‘fighting the pole’;  that there was no pushing and that Mr Thomas had admitted that his horse was a tricky horse to drive.  Mr Suddaby maintained that if Mr Thomas had been able to maintain a straight line there would have been no problem, that it was just one of those ‘racing things’. 

Mr Thomas gave evidence that essentially supported those comments.

Mr Skelt specifically questioned both Mr Thomas and Mr Knowles regarding blame for the incident which caused HOT RIPPLE to break.  Neither person was able to apportion direct blame for the incident.

Mr Knight (AMBRO ROCK connections) said that he felt that Mr Suddaby was at fault and that Mr Thomas’ horse had not contributed by hanging inwards. 

The Committee adjourned following a brief summation by Mr Knowles.

DECISION / REASON

The Committee decided to dismiss the protest.

The Committee felt that the evidence given by both drivers was conflicting and that the film was not conclusive.  The Committee felt that there was just enough doubt as to the cause of the horse breaking to satisfy the Committee that this doubt should go in favour of Mr Suddaby, the driver of HOT RIPPLE.  Accordingly placings stand as they passed the post.

A G DENNIS        N D Skelt
Chair                      Committee Member
13353

sumissionsforpenalty:

reasonsforpenalty:

penalty:

hearing_type: Old Hearing

Rules: 869.8.b

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: