Marlborough RC 1 May 2016 – R 1 – Chair, Mr P Williams
ID: JCA13807
Code:
Thoroughbred
Meet Title:
Marlborough RC - 1 May 2016
Meet Chair:
PWilliams
Meet Committee Member 1:
GClapp
Race Date:
2016/05/01
Race Number:
R1
Decision:
Penalty:
Facts:
Following the running of race 1, the “Marlborough Express Maiden 1000m”, Information A3533 was filed by Co-Chief Stipendiary Steward Mr Neal under Rule 638(3)(b)(ii). The information stated “that Apprentice P Shaikh used his whip in an excessive manner over the final stages”. Mr Shaikh, who was assisted by his employer Licensed Trainer Mr M Pitman, signed the Information admitting the breach and at the beginning of the hearing confirmed that was correct and also that he understood the Rule under which he was charged.
Rule 638(3)(b)(ii) states “A rider shall not strike a horse with a whip in a manner or to an extent which is excessive”.
Submissions for Decision:
Mr Neal showed the side-on view of the race from the top of the home straight or approximately 300m from the finish and identified Mr Shaikh on “Portovenere” racing outside the leader. He said the reason for the Stewards deciding to charge Mr Shaikh with a breach of this Rule was that, once having drawn the whip approximately 150m from the finish, he used it continuously and did not relent in his actions until he reached the finish line. Mr Neal then played the head-on film of Mr Shaikh and confirmed that not every movement of his arm led to the horse being struck but the whip rule was one of perception and he believed the general public on course or watching on television would not view Mr Shaikh’s actions in a positive way. To a question from the Committee Mr Neal said the horse had actually been struck approximately 8/9 times in the final 150m.
In summary, Mr Neal said Mr Shaikh’s horse had came round the final bend a little wide but once he straightened it his use of the whip had been continuous and relentless over the concluding stages of the race. He reminded the Committee that the Rule includes the words “in a manner or to an extent which is excessive” and said that it was the submission of the Stewards that Mr Shaikh’s manner and use of the whip today was clearly excessive. He said all jockeys were well aware of the whip Rule and associated guidelines that require them to “break up” their use of the whip and not to continually punish their horse.
Mr Pitman reminded the Committee that Mr Shaikh had admitted the breach but in his view it was 51/49% call. He said the breach had been admitted because of the Rule including the words “in a manner”. He said he had told Mr Shaikh to hit the horse every second stride and had been assured by him that is what he did. He said it did not look good on the films but emphasized the point made by Mr Neal that not all of Mr Shaikh’s arm actions resulted in the horse being hit.
In answering a point raised by the Committee Mr Neal agreed this was not the usual breach of the excessive use of the whip Rule which has seen jockeys charged with excessive use of the whip prior to the 200m. However, it was the manner of Mr Shaikh’s use of his whip today which had led to the charge. To a further question from the Committee Mr Neal said that even though Mr Shaikh had finished second in the race it was doubtful whether in using the whip the way he did that he gained an unfair advantage over other riders. In fact he said, and Mr Pitman agreed, that had he not used the whip in the manner he did he may well have got up and won the race.
Submissions for Penalty:
Mr Neal said Mr Shaikh had not previously breached the Rule and had readily admitted the breach today. Mr Neal said he was aware the JCA’s Guidelines for a breach of this Rule is a $500 fine or 2 day suspension but other than saying some relief should be given for the mitigating factors above he did not specify what he thought the penalty should be.
Mr Pitman said he has had “Portovenere” in his stable for 18 months and it had proved a difficult horse to train. He said Mr Shaikh did all the work with the horse was an honest hard working Apprentice who came from India. He said a lot of the money he earned was sent back to India to help his family and he asked for as lenient a penalty as possible.
Reasons for Penalty:
The Committee has reviewed both the head and side-on the films of the race from the top of the straight and taken into account the submissions made. The Committee independently assesses that Mr Shaikh used his whip in a striking manner 22 times with the majority occurring in the final 150m. The Committee agrees with Mr Neal that of the 22 strikes approximately 9 were actual strikes on the horse. However, the Committee believes the arm actions of Mr Shaikh could be interpreted as very forceful and he is fortunate that less than 50% of the actions resulted in actual strikes on the horse.
The Committee notes the emphasis placed by Mr Neal on the words “in a manner or to an extent which is excessive” has led to the charge being laid and also that Mr Pitman has agreed the wording of the Rule means there was no option but to admit the breach albeit by, in his words, a very narrow margin.
The Committee notes this is Mr Shaikh’s first breach of the Rule and that he admitted the breach. However, to an outsider viewing Mr Shaikh’s actions it is understandable how they could be perceived as detrimental to the welfare of his horse.
Finally the Committee notes this is the first breach of the Rule where the emphasis has been on the manner and the extent the whip has been used over the final 150m of a flat race.
The starting point for a breach of the Rule is a fine of $500 or a 2 day suspension. The Committee believes on this occasion a fine is an appropriate penalty and after taking into account all of the aggravating and mitigating circumstances outlined above the Committee believes a fine incorporating a $200 reduction from the starting point above should be imposed.
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: 678d4e07f218638cdbe4a40bcd917771
informantnumber: A3533
horsename:
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge: Excessive use of the whip
plea: admitted
penaltyrequired: 1
decisiondate: 03/05/2016
hearing_title: Marlborough RC 1 May 2016 - R 1 - Chair, Mr P Williams
charge:
facts:
Following the running of race 1, the “Marlborough Express Maiden 1000m”, Information A3533 was filed by Co-Chief Stipendiary Steward Mr Neal under Rule 638(3)(b)(ii). The information stated “that Apprentice P Shaikh used his whip in an excessive manner over the final stages”. Mr Shaikh, who was assisted by his employer Licensed Trainer Mr M Pitman, signed the Information admitting the breach and at the beginning of the hearing confirmed that was correct and also that he understood the Rule under which he was charged.
Rule 638(3)(b)(ii) states “A rider shall not strike a horse with a whip in a manner or to an extent which is excessive”.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
Mr Neal showed the side-on view of the race from the top of the home straight or approximately 300m from the finish and identified Mr Shaikh on “Portovenere” racing outside the leader. He said the reason for the Stewards deciding to charge Mr Shaikh with a breach of this Rule was that, once having drawn the whip approximately 150m from the finish, he used it continuously and did not relent in his actions until he reached the finish line. Mr Neal then played the head-on film of Mr Shaikh and confirmed that not every movement of his arm led to the horse being struck but the whip rule was one of perception and he believed the general public on course or watching on television would not view Mr Shaikh’s actions in a positive way. To a question from the Committee Mr Neal said the horse had actually been struck approximately 8/9 times in the final 150m.
In summary, Mr Neal said Mr Shaikh’s horse had came round the final bend a little wide but once he straightened it his use of the whip had been continuous and relentless over the concluding stages of the race. He reminded the Committee that the Rule includes the words “in a manner or to an extent which is excessive” and said that it was the submission of the Stewards that Mr Shaikh’s manner and use of the whip today was clearly excessive. He said all jockeys were well aware of the whip Rule and associated guidelines that require them to “break up” their use of the whip and not to continually punish their horse.
Mr Pitman reminded the Committee that Mr Shaikh had admitted the breach but in his view it was 51/49% call. He said the breach had been admitted because of the Rule including the words “in a manner”. He said he had told Mr Shaikh to hit the horse every second stride and had been assured by him that is what he did. He said it did not look good on the films but emphasized the point made by Mr Neal that not all of Mr Shaikh’s arm actions resulted in the horse being hit.
In answering a point raised by the Committee Mr Neal agreed this was not the usual breach of the excessive use of the whip Rule which has seen jockeys charged with excessive use of the whip prior to the 200m. However, it was the manner of Mr Shaikh’s use of his whip today which had led to the charge. To a further question from the Committee Mr Neal said that even though Mr Shaikh had finished second in the race it was doubtful whether in using the whip the way he did that he gained an unfair advantage over other riders. In fact he said, and Mr Pitman agreed, that had he not used the whip in the manner he did he may well have got up and won the race.
reasonsfordecision:
Decision:
sumissionsforpenalty:
Mr Neal said Mr Shaikh had not previously breached the Rule and had readily admitted the breach today. Mr Neal said he was aware the JCA’s Guidelines for a breach of this Rule is a $500 fine or 2 day suspension but other than saying some relief should be given for the mitigating factors above he did not specify what he thought the penalty should be.
Mr Pitman said he has had “Portovenere” in his stable for 18 months and it had proved a difficult horse to train. He said Mr Shaikh did all the work with the horse was an honest hard working Apprentice who came from India. He said a lot of the money he earned was sent back to India to help his family and he asked for as lenient a penalty as possible.
reasonsforpenalty:
The Committee has reviewed both the head and side-on the films of the race from the top of the straight and taken into account the submissions made. The Committee independently assesses that Mr Shaikh used his whip in a striking manner 22 times with the majority occurring in the final 150m. The Committee agrees with Mr Neal that of the 22 strikes approximately 9 were actual strikes on the horse. However, the Committee believes the arm actions of Mr Shaikh could be interpreted as very forceful and he is fortunate that less than 50% of the actions resulted in actual strikes on the horse.
The Committee notes the emphasis placed by Mr Neal on the words “in a manner or to an extent which is excessive” has led to the charge being laid and also that Mr Pitman has agreed the wording of the Rule means there was no option but to admit the breach albeit by, in his words, a very narrow margin.
The Committee notes this is Mr Shaikh’s first breach of the Rule and that he admitted the breach. However, to an outsider viewing Mr Shaikh’s actions it is understandable how they could be perceived as detrimental to the welfare of his horse.
Finally the Committee notes this is the first breach of the Rule where the emphasis has been on the manner and the extent the whip has been used over the final 150m of a flat race.
The starting point for a breach of the Rule is a fine of $500 or a 2 day suspension. The Committee believes on this occasion a fine is an appropriate penalty and after taking into account all of the aggravating and mitigating circumstances outlined above the Committee believes a fine incorporating a $200 reduction from the starting point above should be imposed.
penalty:
hearing_type: Hearing
Rules: 638(3)(b)(ii)
Informant: Mr R Neal - Co-Chief Stipendiary Steward
JockeysandTrainer: Mr P Shaikh - Apprentice Jockey
Otherperson: Mr M Pitman - Licensed Trainer and Mr Shaikh's employer
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: 9a652e65998f2da3d22dc525e8cde612
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: R1
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: 4d5533efcbb95b3946e30734a71781d8
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 01/05/2016
meet_title: Marlborough RC - 1 May 2016
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: marlborough-rc
meet_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
meet_chair: PWilliams
meet_pm1: GClapp
meet_pm2: none
name: Marlborough RC