Non Raceday Inquiry – RIU v CB Ramage 20 September 2011 – decision dated 28 September 2011
ID: JCA13245
Decision:
NON RACEDAY JUDICIAL COMMITTEE DECISION
Informant: Stipendiary Steward C. J. Allison
Defendant: Mr C Ramage – Open Horseman Licence
Information No: 68885
Meeting: Forbury Park Trotting Club
Date: 12 July 2011
Race No: 7
Rule No: 868(3)
Judicial Committee: N D Skelt, Chairman – A G Dennis , Committee Member
Plea: Not Admitted
Also Present: Mr M. R. Davidson (Registrar), Racing Investigator Mr R. D. Scott (Observer)
Charge:
[1] This matter was heard at Invercargill on 20 September 2011. The Information was filed on the day of the race meeting, but as it was deemed to be serious it was adjourned to be heard as non race day matters.
[2] Following the running of Race 5, an information was filed by Stipendiary Steward Mr C. J. Allison against Open Horseman Mr C Ramage, the driver of “Pennyana” (2), alleging that he had committed a breach of Rule 868(3).
[3] The charge reads as follows.
“I the above named informant allege that the above named Defendant committed a breach of Rule 868(3) in that Mr Ramage failed to drive out Pennyana over the final 40metres.
[4] Rule 868(3) reads as follows.
“(3) Every horseman shall drive:-
His horse out to the finish of the race off he has any reasonable chance of running first, second, third, fourth, fifth or sixth.”
Evidence:
1. Stipendiary Steward Mr Allison showed the Committee several video clips of the alleged incident.
2. Mr Allison stated that Mr Ramage had driven the horse Pennyana very well up to the last 40 metres of the race.
3. Mr Allison stated that Mr Ramage tucked his whip away and showed no vigour at all and did not even ‘shake’ the reins over the last 40 metres of the race,
4. Mr Allison stated that the margin between first and second was a nose.
5. Mr Ramage stated that he had adopted the philosophy of “Pat Perilli” when driving the horse Pennyana – Hair, Skin, Muscle, Bone. Clarifying to the Committee that the horse had run a big race, and could give no more.
6. Mr Ramage stated that his horse had put in a “Roughie” half way down the straight, and that he could break or pace roughly at any point.
7. Mr Ramage continued to reinforce on many occasions to the Committee that his horse has run a huge race and was “spent”.
Decision:
The Committee was satisfied that a clear breach of the rule had occurred , Mr Ramage has clearly not driven his horse Pennyana out over the closing 40 metres of the race which is clearly supported by the video evidence. Mr Ramage has shown no vigour, and with the margins between first and second only being a nose, this fact was compelling in upholding the breach.
Submissions on penalty from Mr Allison:
1. Mr. Ramage is currently licensed with an Open Horseman’s Licence. He has been licensed in the Harness Racing industry since 1997.
2. Mr Ramage had a total of 26 drives for the 2010/11 season and 13 drives for the previous season.
3. Mr Ramage’s horse Pennyana was a well supported runner being 2/2 in the betting paying $1.80 for a place at the close of the totalisator.
4. The race was televised throughout New Zealand and Australia with betting also being conducted in Australia on the race.
5. As a holder of an Open Horseman’s Licence Mr. Ramage’s drive fell well below the required standard.
6. By failing to drive out Pennyana over the final stages Pennyana has failed by only a nose to win the race.
7. The public perception regarding the driving of a horse in this manner has a detrimental impact on the image of Harness Racing.
8. The breach of Rule 868(3) is a serious breach of the rules.
9. The JCA Guidelines recommend a starting point of a 12 drive suspension or a $600.00 fine with particular regard to the placing of the horse involved.
10. Mr. Ramage has a recent breach of this Rule 868 but subsection (2) for failing to give the same horse Pennyana the opportunity to finish in the best possible position when he failed to utilise the passing lane.
11. The Racing Integrity Unit requests a penalty which acts a deterrent for Mr. Ramage or any other licence holder to drive in this way in the future.
12. Rules 1003(1)(a),(b), and (c) contain the relevant penalty provisions for the breach of Rule 868(3).
13. The Racing Integrity Unit believes the most relevant case to this is the Mr GA S race day decision which also occurred at Forbury Park dated November 2009. On this occasion Mr. S failed to drive his horse ‘Reacher’ out over the final 20-25 metres and Reacher was also beaten into first by a nose. The committee on the day suspended Mr. S’s horseman licence for a period of four weeks.
14. Due to Mr. Ramage’s limited drives on race day and the seriousness of the charge, and the repeat breach of the rule The Racing Integrity Unit would be seeking a suspension of Mr Ramage’s Open Horsemans Licence for a period of two months for the breach of the rule on this occasion.
15. The Racing Integrity Unit did not seek costs in relation to this hearing.
Submissions on penalty from Mr Ramage:
1. Mr Ramage asked the Committee to consider the fact that he was not in a position to pay a monetary fine and was still paying off a previous fine.
2. Mr Ramage also stated that Mr Lynch whom he drove for regularly, had currently three horse’s racing regularly , but a team of up to eight horses in work and that he may lose the opportunity of driving them in the future if he was suspended.
Penalty:
Mr Ramage was suspended from the conclusion of racing on Tuesday 20th September 2011 until the conclusion of racing on November 15th 2011 (effectively 8 weeks).
In fixing penalty the Committee noted that Mr Ramage was not in a situation to pay a substantial fine. Consideration was also given to the GA S case, which was similar in nature to the margin a nose between the first two horses, and the distance the horse was not driven out 20-25 metres (Mr S), 40 metres (Mr Ramage)
N D Skelt A D Dennis
Chairman Committee Member
Appeal Decision: NO LINKED APPEAL DECISION
Decision Date: 20/09/2011
Publish Date: 20/09/2011
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: 56c1e57cdaa4ba19cd9ddaf2cb8168f5
informantnumber: 68885
horsename:
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: 20/09/2011
hearing_title: Non Raceday Inquiry - RIU v CB Ramage 20 September 2011 - decision dated 28 September 2011
charge:
facts:
appealdecision: NO LINKED APPEAL DECISION
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
reasonsfordecision:
Decision:
NON RACEDAY JUDICIAL COMMITTEE DECISION
Informant: Stipendiary Steward C. J. Allison
Defendant: Mr C Ramage – Open Horseman Licence
Information No: 68885
Meeting: Forbury Park Trotting Club
Date: 12 July 2011
Race No: 7
Rule No: 868(3)
Judicial Committee: N D Skelt, Chairman – A G Dennis , Committee Member
Plea: Not Admitted
Also Present: Mr M. R. Davidson (Registrar), Racing Investigator Mr R. D. Scott (Observer)
Charge:
[1] This matter was heard at Invercargill on 20 September 2011. The Information was filed on the day of the race meeting, but as it was deemed to be serious it was adjourned to be heard as non race day matters.
[2] Following the running of Race 5, an information was filed by Stipendiary Steward Mr C. J. Allison against Open Horseman Mr C Ramage, the driver of “Pennyana” (2), alleging that he had committed a breach of Rule 868(3).
[3] The charge reads as follows.
“I the above named informant allege that the above named Defendant committed a breach of Rule 868(3) in that Mr Ramage failed to drive out Pennyana over the final 40metres.
[4] Rule 868(3) reads as follows.
“(3) Every horseman shall drive:-
His horse out to the finish of the race off he has any reasonable chance of running first, second, third, fourth, fifth or sixth.”
Evidence:
1. Stipendiary Steward Mr Allison showed the Committee several video clips of the alleged incident.
2. Mr Allison stated that Mr Ramage had driven the horse Pennyana very well up to the last 40 metres of the race.
3. Mr Allison stated that Mr Ramage tucked his whip away and showed no vigour at all and did not even ‘shake’ the reins over the last 40 metres of the race,
4. Mr Allison stated that the margin between first and second was a nose.
5. Mr Ramage stated that he had adopted the philosophy of “Pat Perilli” when driving the horse Pennyana – Hair, Skin, Muscle, Bone. Clarifying to the Committee that the horse had run a big race, and could give no more.
6. Mr Ramage stated that his horse had put in a “Roughie” half way down the straight, and that he could break or pace roughly at any point.
7. Mr Ramage continued to reinforce on many occasions to the Committee that his horse has run a huge race and was “spent”.
Decision:
The Committee was satisfied that a clear breach of the rule had occurred , Mr Ramage has clearly not driven his horse Pennyana out over the closing 40 metres of the race which is clearly supported by the video evidence. Mr Ramage has shown no vigour, and with the margins between first and second only being a nose, this fact was compelling in upholding the breach.
Submissions on penalty from Mr Allison:
1. Mr. Ramage is currently licensed with an Open Horseman’s Licence. He has been licensed in the Harness Racing industry since 1997.
2. Mr Ramage had a total of 26 drives for the 2010/11 season and 13 drives for the previous season.
3. Mr Ramage’s horse Pennyana was a well supported runner being 2/2 in the betting paying $1.80 for a place at the close of the totalisator.
4. The race was televised throughout New Zealand and Australia with betting also being conducted in Australia on the race.
5. As a holder of an Open Horseman’s Licence Mr. Ramage’s drive fell well below the required standard.
6. By failing to drive out Pennyana over the final stages Pennyana has failed by only a nose to win the race.
7. The public perception regarding the driving of a horse in this manner has a detrimental impact on the image of Harness Racing.
8. The breach of Rule 868(3) is a serious breach of the rules.
9. The JCA Guidelines recommend a starting point of a 12 drive suspension or a $600.00 fine with particular regard to the placing of the horse involved.
10. Mr. Ramage has a recent breach of this Rule 868 but subsection (2) for failing to give the same horse Pennyana the opportunity to finish in the best possible position when he failed to utilise the passing lane.
11. The Racing Integrity Unit requests a penalty which acts a deterrent for Mr. Ramage or any other licence holder to drive in this way in the future.
12. Rules 1003(1)(a),(b), and (c) contain the relevant penalty provisions for the breach of Rule 868(3).
13. The Racing Integrity Unit believes the most relevant case to this is the Mr GA S race day decision which also occurred at Forbury Park dated November 2009. On this occasion Mr. S failed to drive his horse ‘Reacher’ out over the final 20-25 metres and Reacher was also beaten into first by a nose. The committee on the day suspended Mr. S’s horseman licence for a period of four weeks.
14. Due to Mr. Ramage’s limited drives on race day and the seriousness of the charge, and the repeat breach of the rule The Racing Integrity Unit would be seeking a suspension of Mr Ramage’s Open Horsemans Licence for a period of two months for the breach of the rule on this occasion.
15. The Racing Integrity Unit did not seek costs in relation to this hearing.
Submissions on penalty from Mr Ramage:
1. Mr Ramage asked the Committee to consider the fact that he was not in a position to pay a monetary fine and was still paying off a previous fine.
2. Mr Ramage also stated that Mr Lynch whom he drove for regularly, had currently three horse’s racing regularly , but a team of up to eight horses in work and that he may lose the opportunity of driving them in the future if he was suspended.
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
Mr Ramage was suspended from the conclusion of racing on Tuesday 20th September 2011 until the conclusion of racing on November 15th 2011 (effectively 8 weeks).
In fixing penalty the Committee noted that Mr Ramage was not in a situation to pay a substantial fine. Consideration was also given to the GA S case, which was similar in nature to the margin a nose between the first two horses, and the distance the horse was not driven out 20-25 metres (Mr S), 40 metres (Mr Ramage)
N D Skelt A D Dennis
Chairman Committee Member
hearing_type: Non-race day
Rules: 868(3)
Informant: Mr C Allison - Stipendiary Steward
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent: Mr MR Davidsion - Registrar, Mr RD Scott - Observer
Respondent: Mr C Ramage - Open Horseman
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: