Methven TC – 6 September 2009 – Race 2
ID: JCA20020
Hearing Type (Code):
harness-racing
Meet Title:
Methven TC - 6 September 2009
Race Date:
2009/09/06
Race Number:
Race 2
Decision:
Following the running of Race 2, the Cashmere Club Inc Trot, an information was filed by Stipendiary Steward Mr N. G. McIntyre against Junior Horseman Mr A. E. Veint, the driver of “Betty Be Good” (5), alleging a breach of Rules 869(4), (6)(b) and (c), the “push out” rule.
Following the running of Race 2, the Cashmere Club Inc Trot, an information was filed by Stipendiary Steward Mr N. G. McIntyre against Junior Horseman Mr A. E. Veint, the driver of “Betty Be Good” (5), alleging a breach of Rules 869(4), (6)(b) and (c), the “push out” rule. The charge reads as follows.
--“I the abovenamed Informant allege that the abovenamed Defendant committed a breach of Rule 869(4), (6)(b) & (c) in that A. E. Veint (Betty Be Good) forced J. R. Dunn (Caramel Centre) to race wider on the track with approx. 1600 metres to run.”
Rule 869(4), (6)(b) and (c) relating to the “push out” rule reads as follows.
“(4) No horseman nor any horse shall during any race do anything which interferes or is likely to interfere with his own horse and/or any other horse or its progress.
--(6) Subject to sub-rule (4) hereof:-
(a)….
(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.”
Mr Veint is a Junior Horseman and he was assisted at this hearing by
Senior Open Horseman Mr N. R. McGrath. Mr Veint had indicated on the Information that he did not admit this breach of the Rules, and he confirmed this at the hearing. He also agreed that he understood the charge and the Rule it was brought under.
Mr J. R. Dunn, the driver of “Caramel Centre” (14), gave evidence that with
about 1600 metres to run he was making a forward move when Mr Veint came out in front of him and pushed him wider on the track. Mr Dunn said that the nose of his horse would have been past the sulky wheel of Mr Veint’s horse at the time of this incident.
Mr McGrath questioned Mr Dunn about this matter, and disputed that Mr Dunn’s horse’s nose was in fact past the sulky wheel. After being questioned Mr Dunn said that it was “50/50”.
Video coverage from various angles was shown. The incident occurred about 200 metres from the winning post, and none of the videos gave a clear view of the incident.
We then adjourned to consider our decision. We found that the video coverage did not give us a clear view of the positions of the two horses involved in this incident. Mr Dunn’s evidence under cross-examination that it was a 50/50 confirmed to us that it was a close call. We decided that there was some doubt as to whether there had been a breach of the “push out” rule, and that Mr Veint should have the benefit of that doubt.
--On returning to the Enquiry Room we advised the parties that a full written decision would be given later, and we gave the following oral decision.
--“Having heard the evidence and having seen the video coverage, we are satisfied that with about 1600 metres to run Mr J. Dunn’s horse appeared to have been pushed out in breach of the “push out” Rule.
--Mr Dunn said at first that the nose of his horse was past the wheel of Mr Veint’s sulky at that time. However he later said (under cross-examination) that it was a 50/50 call.
--We viewed the video coverage from all available angles on several occasions. No view gave a clear view of the positions of the two horses at the time of the incident.
--We find that there is some doubt that there was a “push out” and Mr Veint is entitled to the benefit of that doubt. The charge is dismissed.”
----
J. M. Phelan P. J. Rosanowski
CHAIR Committee Member
67523
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: 63641c7f621f602c3b9f07ac11d6448b
informantnumber:
horsename:
hearing_racingtype: harness-racing
startdate: 06/09/2009
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: no date provided
hearing_title: Methven TC - 6 September 2009 - Race 2
charge:
facts:
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
reasonsfordecision:
Decision:
Following the running of Race 2, the Cashmere Club Inc Trot, an information was filed by Stipendiary Steward Mr N. G. McIntyre against Junior Horseman Mr A. E. Veint, the driver of “Betty Be Good” (5), alleging a breach of Rules 869(4), (6)(b) and (c), the “push out” rule.
Following the running of Race 2, the Cashmere Club Inc Trot, an information was filed by Stipendiary Steward Mr N. G. McIntyre against Junior Horseman Mr A. E. Veint, the driver of “Betty Be Good” (5), alleging a breach of Rules 869(4), (6)(b) and (c), the “push out” rule. The charge reads as follows.
--“I the abovenamed Informant allege that the abovenamed Defendant committed a breach of Rule 869(4), (6)(b) & (c) in that A. E. Veint (Betty Be Good) forced J. R. Dunn (Caramel Centre) to race wider on the track with approx. 1600 metres to run.”
Rule 869(4), (6)(b) and (c) relating to the “push out” rule reads as follows.
“(4) No horseman nor any horse shall during any race do anything which interferes or is likely to interfere with his own horse and/or any other horse or its progress.
--(6) Subject to sub-rule (4) hereof:-
(a)….
(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.”
Mr Veint is a Junior Horseman and he was assisted at this hearing by
Senior Open Horseman Mr N. R. McGrath. Mr Veint had indicated on the Information that he did not admit this breach of the Rules, and he confirmed this at the hearing. He also agreed that he understood the charge and the Rule it was brought under.
Mr J. R. Dunn, the driver of “Caramel Centre” (14), gave evidence that with
about 1600 metres to run he was making a forward move when Mr Veint came out in front of him and pushed him wider on the track. Mr Dunn said that the nose of his horse would have been past the sulky wheel of Mr Veint’s horse at the time of this incident.
Mr McGrath questioned Mr Dunn about this matter, and disputed that Mr Dunn’s horse’s nose was in fact past the sulky wheel. After being questioned Mr Dunn said that it was “50/50”.
Video coverage from various angles was shown. The incident occurred about 200 metres from the winning post, and none of the videos gave a clear view of the incident.
We then adjourned to consider our decision. We found that the video coverage did not give us a clear view of the positions of the two horses involved in this incident. Mr Dunn’s evidence under cross-examination that it was a 50/50 confirmed to us that it was a close call. We decided that there was some doubt as to whether there had been a breach of the “push out” rule, and that Mr Veint should have the benefit of that doubt.
--On returning to the Enquiry Room we advised the parties that a full written decision would be given later, and we gave the following oral decision.
--“Having heard the evidence and having seen the video coverage, we are satisfied that with about 1600 metres to run Mr J. Dunn’s horse appeared to have been pushed out in breach of the “push out” Rule.
--Mr Dunn said at first that the nose of his horse was past the wheel of Mr Veint’s sulky at that time. However he later said (under cross-examination) that it was a 50/50 call.
--We viewed the video coverage from all available angles on several occasions. No view gave a clear view of the positions of the two horses at the time of the incident.
--We find that there is some doubt that there was a “push out” and Mr Veint is entitled to the benefit of that doubt. The charge is dismissed.”
----
J. M. Phelan P. J. Rosanowski
CHAIR Committee Member
67523
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Old Hearing
Rules: 869.4
Informant:
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: f80006a37703f0033b53e5663041e3c4
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: Race 2
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: 6435245684227ab91a081cb6b2919fde
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 06/09/2009
meet_title: Methven TC - 6 September 2009
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: methven-tc
meet_racingtype: harness-racing
meet_chair:
meet_pm1:
meet_pm2:
name: Methven TC