Nelson HRC – 8 January 2010 –
ID: JCA19797
Hearing Type (Code):
harness-racing
Decision:
RACEDAY JUDICIAL COMMITTEE DECISION
--Information No. 14539 - Protest
Meeting Nelson Harness Racing Club at Richmond Park, Nelson
Date Friday 8 January 2010
Judicial Committee Chairman : P H M Welch Panel Member : P Williams
Race 7
Rule 869 (8)
Informant : Mr N Ydgren, Stipendiary Steward
Appearing : Mr R W Curtin, Driver of INDEPENDENT LASS
Mr T Chmiel, Driver of OLIVERNOTHA ONE
Mr J Rogers, Driver of DJ HANOVER
Following the running of race 7, the Hoani Jack Cup Mobile Pace, a protest was lodged by the stipendiary stewards against horses no. 10, OLIVERNOTHA ONE (T Chmiel) and 6, INDEPENDENT LASS (R Curtin,) placed 1st and 3rd respectively, on the grounds of interference to horse no. 12, DJ HANOVER (J Rogers), with 900 metres remaining.
--
RACEDAY JUDICIAL COMMITTEE DECISION
Information No. 14539 - Protest
Meeting Nelson Harness Racing Club at Richmond Park, Nelson
Date Friday 8 January 2010
Judicial Committee Chairman : P H M Welch Panel Member : P Williams
Race 7
Rule 869 (8)
Informant : Mr N Ydgren, Stipendiary Steward
Appearing : Mr R W Curtin, Driver of INDEPENDENT LASS
Mr T Chmiel, Driver of OLIVERNOTHA ONE
Mr J Rogers, Driver of DJ HANOVER
Following the running of race 7, the Hoani Jack Cup Mobile Pace, a protest was lodged by the stipendiary stewards against horses no. 10, OLIVERNOTHA ONE (T Chmiel) and 6, INDEPENDENT LASS (R Curtin,) placed 1st and 3rd respectively, on the grounds of interference to horse no. 12, DJ HANOVER (J Rogers), with 900 metres remaining.
--The placings were : 10 – 2 – 6 – 13 – 4 – 16.
--At the commencement of the hearing, driver Mr Curtin confirmed he was representing the connections of INDEPENDENT LASS, and driver Mr Chmiel the connections of OLIVERNOTHA ONE.
--Introducing his evidence, Mr Ydgren explained that, with about 900 metres to run, Mr Rogers (DJ HANOVER), who was racing in the two-wide line between Mr Chmiel on the fence and Mr Curtin, shifted wider or was shifted wider on the track and goes into a break, losing his position in the race. He said that Mr Chmiel went on to win the race, and Mr Curtin was placed 3rd. He called on Mr Renault to interpret the video of the incident.
--Mr Renault pointed out the respective positions of the horses. He showed that Mr Chmiel moved off the fence, Mr Rogers was outside him and Mr Curtin, on the outside, tried to maintain his position by holding Mr Rogers in. Mr Rogers’ horse then goes into a break and he loses his rightful position.
--Mr Rogers was invited to give his account and, asked if there was pressure from the inside and/or outside, he said that, as the video showed, he was being moved outwards from the inside to a small degree, but there was pressure from the outside and he said there was contact between his horse and Mr Curtin. He said he was in a gap between them and the gap just closed and, on the track after the race, he advised Steward Mr Renault that he got squeezed up by Mr Curtin.
--Again referring to the video, he confirmed that Mr Chmiel’s movement was slow and gradual (from the inside into the two-wide line). He said he was moved out wider into the 3-wide line by Mr Chmiel, and Mr Curtin was ‘out’ but then he tried to get back in again, and the interference occurred when Mr Curtin tried to go past him.
--Mr Ydgren summarised this, and Mr Rogers agreed, as two horses going for the one position, with Mr Chmiel’s outward movement not helping.
--Mr Chmiel was asked for his interpretation. He said that, initially, he was pulled wider by the wheel of Mr Rogers and the pressure was coming from the outside from Mr Curtin who, entitled to be 3-wide, was actually about 2 ½ wide. It was his view that, with Mr Rogers in the middle, Mr Curtin should have moved wider when Mr Rogers moved into the 3-wide line.
Mr Chmiel said he was entitled to be where he was and he didn’t make contact with Mr Rogers’ horse. He said that, as seen in the video, Mr Curtin was putting pressure on the outside of Mr Rogers and, instead, he should have moved wider.
Mr Curtin, with his account, said he was always in the 3-wide line when they came out, and he kept a straight line. He said he didn’t try to squeeze them up but he just tried to keep his line, and he (Mr Rogers) came out.
To Mr Ydgren, he said he tried to keep a straight line and felt he had the advantage over Mr Rogers but, again referring to the video, Mr Ydgren said it was evident Mr Rogers held that advantage.
DECISION
--Given the close proximity to the next race, a brief summation was provided with the indication a full written decision would be available at a later time.
--This is a protest against horses no. 10, OLIVERNOTH ONE (T Chmiel), placed 1st by the judge, and no 6, INDEPENDENT LASS (R Curtin), placed 3rd by the judge, on the grounds of interference to no 12, DJ HANOVER (J Rogers), with about 900 metres of the race remaining. DJ HANOVER was placed 9th in the race.
--Rule 869 (8) reads : -
--The judicial committee may ….. place any horse which:
(a) may have gained an advantage by any conduct or interference prohibited by any preceding provision of this Rule and/or
(b) 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.
The protest is against 2 horses, and the purpose of the enquiry is to establish if interference occurred and, if so, to determine the outcome. We have viewed the films of the race and heard detailed evidence from those involved.
--In respect to the protest against horse no. 10, OLIVERNOTHA ONE, this protest is dismissed. We find that Mr Chmiel’s movement out into the two-wide line, with 900 metres to run, was a slow and gradual movement that he was entitled to make, indeed expected to make, at this stage of the race, provided it was made with safety, and we are satisfied that that was the case.
--In respect to the 2nd protest, against horse no. 6, INDEPENDENT LASS, this protest is upheld.
--We find that Mr Rogers on DJ HANOVER, racing between Mr Chmiel on his inside and Mr Curtin, broke and lost his position in the running with 900 metres to run, effectively costing him any chance in the race.
--We are satisfied from the evidence that, at this point in the race, as Mr Rogers was moved wider on the track, he was in front of Mr Curtin and had a clear and distinct advantage. He was entitled to be in this position. Mr Curtain said he thought he was in front of Mr Rogers and he had tried to keep a straight line, but we are persuaded that Mr Rogers had the advantage and Mr Curtin had tried to keep him in. In so doing – and Mr Rogers indicated there was contact between the two – DJ HANOVER went into a break, and we are satisfied that this was attributable to the pressure from his outside from Mr Curtin and INDEPENDENT LASS, which went on to finish 3rd in the race.
--The protest upheld, we exercise our discretion to relegate INDEPENDENT LASS to 9th placing, behind the affected DJ HANOVER.
--The placings are now :
--1st 10 OLIVERNOTHA ONE
2nd 2 GENIES SON
3rd 13 CHILLER
4th 4 STICKY FINGERS
5th 16 JASS
6th 11 HIT WIRED
P H Welch P Williams
Chair Committee member
14539
Decision Date: 08/01/2010
Publish Date: 08/01/2010
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: 33c805054427618c268e3181901db176
informantnumber:
horsename:
hearing_racingtype: harness-racing
startdate: 08/01/2010
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: no date provided
hearing_title: Nelson HRC - 8 January 2010 -
charge:
facts:
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
reasonsfordecision:
Decision:
RACEDAY JUDICIAL COMMITTEE DECISION
--Information No. 14539 - Protest
Meeting Nelson Harness Racing Club at Richmond Park, Nelson
Date Friday 8 January 2010
Judicial Committee Chairman : P H M Welch Panel Member : P Williams
Race 7
Rule 869 (8)
Informant : Mr N Ydgren, Stipendiary Steward
Appearing : Mr R W Curtin, Driver of INDEPENDENT LASS
Mr T Chmiel, Driver of OLIVERNOTHA ONE
Mr J Rogers, Driver of DJ HANOVER
Following the running of race 7, the Hoani Jack Cup Mobile Pace, a protest was lodged by the stipendiary stewards against horses no. 10, OLIVERNOTHA ONE (T Chmiel) and 6, INDEPENDENT LASS (R Curtin,) placed 1st and 3rd respectively, on the grounds of interference to horse no. 12, DJ HANOVER (J Rogers), with 900 metres remaining.
--
RACEDAY JUDICIAL COMMITTEE DECISION
Information No. 14539 - Protest
Meeting Nelson Harness Racing Club at Richmond Park, Nelson
Date Friday 8 January 2010
Judicial Committee Chairman : P H M Welch Panel Member : P Williams
Race 7
Rule 869 (8)
Informant : Mr N Ydgren, Stipendiary Steward
Appearing : Mr R W Curtin, Driver of INDEPENDENT LASS
Mr T Chmiel, Driver of OLIVERNOTHA ONE
Mr J Rogers, Driver of DJ HANOVER
Following the running of race 7, the Hoani Jack Cup Mobile Pace, a protest was lodged by the stipendiary stewards against horses no. 10, OLIVERNOTHA ONE (T Chmiel) and 6, INDEPENDENT LASS (R Curtin,) placed 1st and 3rd respectively, on the grounds of interference to horse no. 12, DJ HANOVER (J Rogers), with 900 metres remaining.
--The placings were : 10 – 2 – 6 – 13 – 4 – 16.
--At the commencement of the hearing, driver Mr Curtin confirmed he was representing the connections of INDEPENDENT LASS, and driver Mr Chmiel the connections of OLIVERNOTHA ONE.
--Introducing his evidence, Mr Ydgren explained that, with about 900 metres to run, Mr Rogers (DJ HANOVER), who was racing in the two-wide line between Mr Chmiel on the fence and Mr Curtin, shifted wider or was shifted wider on the track and goes into a break, losing his position in the race. He said that Mr Chmiel went on to win the race, and Mr Curtin was placed 3rd. He called on Mr Renault to interpret the video of the incident.
--Mr Renault pointed out the respective positions of the horses. He showed that Mr Chmiel moved off the fence, Mr Rogers was outside him and Mr Curtin, on the outside, tried to maintain his position by holding Mr Rogers in. Mr Rogers’ horse then goes into a break and he loses his rightful position.
--Mr Rogers was invited to give his account and, asked if there was pressure from the inside and/or outside, he said that, as the video showed, he was being moved outwards from the inside to a small degree, but there was pressure from the outside and he said there was contact between his horse and Mr Curtin. He said he was in a gap between them and the gap just closed and, on the track after the race, he advised Steward Mr Renault that he got squeezed up by Mr Curtin.
--Again referring to the video, he confirmed that Mr Chmiel’s movement was slow and gradual (from the inside into the two-wide line). He said he was moved out wider into the 3-wide line by Mr Chmiel, and Mr Curtin was ‘out’ but then he tried to get back in again, and the interference occurred when Mr Curtin tried to go past him.
--Mr Ydgren summarised this, and Mr Rogers agreed, as two horses going for the one position, with Mr Chmiel’s outward movement not helping.
--Mr Chmiel was asked for his interpretation. He said that, initially, he was pulled wider by the wheel of Mr Rogers and the pressure was coming from the outside from Mr Curtin who, entitled to be 3-wide, was actually about 2 ½ wide. It was his view that, with Mr Rogers in the middle, Mr Curtin should have moved wider when Mr Rogers moved into the 3-wide line.
Mr Chmiel said he was entitled to be where he was and he didn’t make contact with Mr Rogers’ horse. He said that, as seen in the video, Mr Curtin was putting pressure on the outside of Mr Rogers and, instead, he should have moved wider.
Mr Curtin, with his account, said he was always in the 3-wide line when they came out, and he kept a straight line. He said he didn’t try to squeeze them up but he just tried to keep his line, and he (Mr Rogers) came out.
To Mr Ydgren, he said he tried to keep a straight line and felt he had the advantage over Mr Rogers but, again referring to the video, Mr Ydgren said it was evident Mr Rogers held that advantage.
DECISION
--Given the close proximity to the next race, a brief summation was provided with the indication a full written decision would be available at a later time.
--This is a protest against horses no. 10, OLIVERNOTH ONE (T Chmiel), placed 1st by the judge, and no 6, INDEPENDENT LASS (R Curtin), placed 3rd by the judge, on the grounds of interference to no 12, DJ HANOVER (J Rogers), with about 900 metres of the race remaining. DJ HANOVER was placed 9th in the race.
--Rule 869 (8) reads : -
--The judicial committee may ….. place any horse which:
(a) may have gained an advantage by any conduct or interference prohibited by any preceding provision of this Rule and/or
(b) 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.
The protest is against 2 horses, and the purpose of the enquiry is to establish if interference occurred and, if so, to determine the outcome. We have viewed the films of the race and heard detailed evidence from those involved.
--In respect to the protest against horse no. 10, OLIVERNOTHA ONE, this protest is dismissed. We find that Mr Chmiel’s movement out into the two-wide line, with 900 metres to run, was a slow and gradual movement that he was entitled to make, indeed expected to make, at this stage of the race, provided it was made with safety, and we are satisfied that that was the case.
--In respect to the 2nd protest, against horse no. 6, INDEPENDENT LASS, this protest is upheld.
--We find that Mr Rogers on DJ HANOVER, racing between Mr Chmiel on his inside and Mr Curtin, broke and lost his position in the running with 900 metres to run, effectively costing him any chance in the race.
--We are satisfied from the evidence that, at this point in the race, as Mr Rogers was moved wider on the track, he was in front of Mr Curtin and had a clear and distinct advantage. He was entitled to be in this position. Mr Curtain said he thought he was in front of Mr Rogers and he had tried to keep a straight line, but we are persuaded that Mr Rogers had the advantage and Mr Curtin had tried to keep him in. In so doing – and Mr Rogers indicated there was contact between the two – DJ HANOVER went into a break, and we are satisfied that this was attributable to the pressure from his outside from Mr Curtin and INDEPENDENT LASS, which went on to finish 3rd in the race.
--The protest upheld, we exercise our discretion to relegate INDEPENDENT LASS to 9th placing, behind the affected DJ HANOVER.
--The placings are now :
--1st 10 OLIVERNOTHA ONE
2nd 2 GENIES SON
3rd 13 CHILLER
4th 4 STICKY FINGERS
5th 16 JASS
6th 11 HIT WIRED
P H Welch P Williams
Chair Committee member
14539
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Old Hearing
Rules: 869.8
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: