NZ Metro TC 10 August 2012 – R 6 (instigating a protest)
ID: JCA10491
Meet Title:
NZ Metro TC - 10 August 2012
Meet Chair:
KHales
Meet Committee Member 1:
SChing
Race Date:
2012/08/10
Race Number:
R6
Decision:
The protest is dismissed and dividends are to be paid in accordance with the Judge's placings, namely:
Horse 4 - "Cloudy Beach" - 1st
Horse 7 - "Tommy Golightly" - 2nd
Horse 1 - "Roman Affair" - 3rd
Horse 9 - "Delightful Blue" - 4th
Horse 10 - "Comenche" - 5th
Horse 5 - "Lee Van Cleef" - 6th
Facts:
Following the running of Race 6, a protest was lodged by the Stipendiary Stewards, alleging that Horse 9 ("Delightful Blue") placed 4th by the Judge interfered with the chances of horse 8 ("Silver Pocket") placed 8th and horse 2 ("Advance Anvil") placed 7th by the Judge.
Approximately 150 metres from the finishing line, Mr May, the driver of "Delightful Blue", was looking for racing room. A gap appeared which necessitated an outward movement on his part. He moved outwards slowly and gradually, but in the process, he moved on to the line of "Silver Pocket". That horse's near front leg came into contact with the outside wheel of Mr May's sulky, and caused it to stumble and to break from its gait. Ms Lester, said that perhaps she could have moved out a little as Mr May was entitled to push her out. Further consequences were that Ms Lester was pushed out on to "Advance Anvil" driven by Ms Samantha Ottley. That horse, remarkably did not break from its gait, despite Ms Ottley's sulky becoming quite violently unbalanced for a stride.
Ms Lester said that her horse was struggling just prior to the incident and she did not believe that her chances of finishing in a better position were affected. Similarly Ms Ottley told the hearing that she did not think that she would have finished in the first 4 placings.
Mr May, contended that he was entitled to push Ms Lester's horse out, and that the whole incident was caused by a combination of factors. He said that he was moved out by "Comenche" (M Williamson) and the horse inside that. However, he did get out into the gap and conceded that he then had a clear and unobstructed run for the line. Furthermore he maintained that Ms Lester's horse "ducked out" and that he was still being moved out by the horses inside him. He maintained that he was far enough out to enable him to take Ms Lester's line of running and that she should have got out of his way. He put it down to Ms Lester's inexperience, it being her second race night drive. He said that an experienced driver would have got out of the way. He said that he was entitled to push her out.
Mr McIntyre enquired of Ms Lester as where she was going to go, bearing in mind that there was a horse on her outside ("Advance Anvil"). Ms Lester thought that there was a little bit of room.
In summary, Mr McIntyre said that the issue for the Judicial Committee to consider was whether or not the chances of "Silver Pocket" and "Advance Anvil" were affected. He conceded that Mr May did not gain an advantage in terms of his actions.
Submissions for Decision:
Mr May submitted that he was entitled to take the gap that became available to him, and the incident whereby Ms Lester's horse stumbled and nearly fell, was simply as a result of her inexperience. He said : "She has got to learn, somehow, and that this sort of thing happens in nearly every race. A more experienced horseman would have got out of the way."
Mr McIntyre's focus was on whether the chances of Ms Lester's horse and Ms Ottley's horse were affected.
Reasons for Decision:
There is no doubt that Mr May did keep moving out on to Ms Lester's running line when positioning his horse for the run home. To a certain extent he was entitled to push Ms Lester out so long as he could do so with safety. His outward movement was gradual. Mr May told the hearing that he was of the view that at the point where "Silver Pocket's" made contact with the outside wheel of his sulky, that he was in a position whereby he was entitled to the racing line that he was assuming. He felt that Ms Lester should have moved out to avoid him.
Notwithstanding Mr May's views, of greater significance is the fact that both Ms Lester and Ms Ottley said that the chances of their horses were not affected.
We then turn to consider whether the progress of "Silver Pocket" and "Advance Anvil" were interfered with. In both cases, clearly their progress was interfered with. "Silver Pocket" stumbled and nearly fell. "Advance Anvil" was affected by the incident and Ms Ottley's sulky lurched quite violently when contact was made.
However, what is also an important factor is Mr McIntyre's view that Mr May, having got into the gap that became available, that he did not then gain an advantage over the other horses involved.
Rule 869(8) gives a Judicial Committee a discretion, as the rule refers to what a Judicial Committee "may" do.
We have decided that having regard to the views of Ms Lester and Ms Ottley that their chances were not affected and Mr McIntyre's concession that "Delightful Blue" did not gain an advantage, that we should exercise our discretion in favour of the placings in which the horses crossed the line.
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: 06734fa09ee40711bbfbd462b3eb47fd
informantnumber: A5273
horsename: Delightful Blue
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: 26/07/2012
hearing_title: NZ Metro TC 10 August 2012 - R 6 (instigating a protest)
charge:
facts:
Following the running of Race 6, a protest was lodged by the Stipendiary Stewards, alleging that Horse 9 ("Delightful Blue") placed 4th by the Judge interfered with the chances of horse 8 ("Silver Pocket") placed 8th and horse 2 ("Advance Anvil") placed 7th by the Judge.
Approximately 150 metres from the finishing line, Mr May, the driver of "Delightful Blue", was looking for racing room. A gap appeared which necessitated an outward movement on his part. He moved outwards slowly and gradually, but in the process, he moved on to the line of "Silver Pocket". That horse's near front leg came into contact with the outside wheel of Mr May's sulky, and caused it to stumble and to break from its gait. Ms Lester, said that perhaps she could have moved out a little as Mr May was entitled to push her out. Further consequences were that Ms Lester was pushed out on to "Advance Anvil" driven by Ms Samantha Ottley. That horse, remarkably did not break from its gait, despite Ms Ottley's sulky becoming quite violently unbalanced for a stride.
Ms Lester said that her horse was struggling just prior to the incident and she did not believe that her chances of finishing in a better position were affected. Similarly Ms Ottley told the hearing that she did not think that she would have finished in the first 4 placings.
Mr May, contended that he was entitled to push Ms Lester's horse out, and that the whole incident was caused by a combination of factors. He said that he was moved out by "Comenche" (M Williamson) and the horse inside that. However, he did get out into the gap and conceded that he then had a clear and unobstructed run for the line. Furthermore he maintained that Ms Lester's horse "ducked out" and that he was still being moved out by the horses inside him. He maintained that he was far enough out to enable him to take Ms Lester's line of running and that she should have got out of his way. He put it down to Ms Lester's inexperience, it being her second race night drive. He said that an experienced driver would have got out of the way. He said that he was entitled to push her out.
Mr McIntyre enquired of Ms Lester as where she was going to go, bearing in mind that there was a horse on her outside ("Advance Anvil"). Ms Lester thought that there was a little bit of room.
In summary, Mr McIntyre said that the issue for the Judicial Committee to consider was whether or not the chances of "Silver Pocket" and "Advance Anvil" were affected. He conceded that Mr May did not gain an advantage in terms of his actions.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
Mr May submitted that he was entitled to take the gap that became available to him, and the incident whereby Ms Lester's horse stumbled and nearly fell, was simply as a result of her inexperience. He said : "She has got to learn, somehow, and that this sort of thing happens in nearly every race. A more experienced horseman would have got out of the way."
Mr McIntyre's focus was on whether the chances of Ms Lester's horse and Ms Ottley's horse were affected.
reasonsfordecision:
There is no doubt that Mr May did keep moving out on to Ms Lester's running line when positioning his horse for the run home. To a certain extent he was entitled to push Ms Lester out so long as he could do so with safety. His outward movement was gradual. Mr May told the hearing that he was of the view that at the point where "Silver Pocket's" made contact with the outside wheel of his sulky, that he was in a position whereby he was entitled to the racing line that he was assuming. He felt that Ms Lester should have moved out to avoid him.
Notwithstanding Mr May's views, of greater significance is the fact that both Ms Lester and Ms Ottley said that the chances of their horses were not affected.
We then turn to consider whether the progress of "Silver Pocket" and "Advance Anvil" were interfered with. In both cases, clearly their progress was interfered with. "Silver Pocket" stumbled and nearly fell. "Advance Anvil" was affected by the incident and Ms Ottley's sulky lurched quite violently when contact was made.
However, what is also an important factor is Mr McIntyre's view that Mr May, having got into the gap that became available, that he did not then gain an advantage over the other horses involved.
Rule 869(8) gives a Judicial Committee a discretion, as the rule refers to what a Judicial Committee "may" do.
We have decided that having regard to the views of Ms Lester and Ms Ottley that their chances were not affected and Mr McIntyre's concession that "Delightful Blue" did not gain an advantage, that we should exercise our discretion in favour of the placings in which the horses crossed the line.
Decision:
The protest is dismissed and dividends are to be paid in accordance with the Judge's placings, namely:
Horse 4 - "Cloudy Beach" - 1st
Horse 7 - "Tommy Golightly" - 2nd
Horse 1 - "Roman Affair" - 3rd
Horse 9 - "Delightful Blue" - 4th
Horse 10 - "Comenche" - 5th
Horse 5 - "Lee Van Cleef" - 6th
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Protest
Rules: Rule 869(8)
Informant: N McIntyre - Stipendiary Steward
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent: Ms Loren Lester - Junior Driver - "Silver Pocket", Ms Samantha Ottley - Junior Driver - "Advance Anvil", Mr R May - Open Horseman, Mr L McCormick - Open Horseman (assisting Ms Lester)
Respondent: Mr R May - Open Horseman
StipendSteward:
raceid: d896d7898f1248da92bcbd38502a66c9
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: R6
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: 1a798d1445112df1a5f482df85ef7cbc
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 10/08/2012
meet_title: NZ Metro TC - 10 August 2012
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: nz-metro-tc
meet_racingtype: harness-racing
meet_chair: KHales
meet_pm1: SChing
meet_pm2: none
name: NZ Metro TC