NZ Metro TC 14 June 2013 – R 4
ID: JCA10769
Meet Title:
NZ Metro TC - 14 June 2013
Meet Chair:
RMcKenzie
Meet Committee Member 1:
KHales
Race Date:
2013/06/14
Race Number:
R4
Decision:
The charge was found proved.
Penalty:
Mr Clark was fined the sum of $250.
Charge:
Excessive use of the whip.
Facts:
Following the running of Race 4, Hamptons ITM Building Centre-Ferry Road Handicap Trot, an information was filed by Stipendiary Steward, Mr C J Allison, against Licensed Open Horseman, Mr A L Clark, alleging that Mr Clark, as the driver of THE FIERY GINGA in the race, “used his whip excessively over the final 400 metres”.
Mr Clark was present at the hearing of the information and he indicated that he denied the charge.
Rule 869 provides as follows:
(2) No horseman shall during any race:-
(a) use his whip in an unnecessary, excessive or improper manner.
Submissions for Decision:
Mr Allison referred to a video replay of the final 400-500 metres of the race. He pointed out THE FIERY GINGA, driven by Mr Clark, leading the field past the 400 metres. He then commenced to use his whip and, the Stewards were alleging, from that point to the finish, Mr Clark used his whip on approximately 24 occasions. Mr Clark was asked by the Committee and he stated that he accepted that fact. Included in the total of 24 were seven “rapid fire” hits on the sulky shortly after turning for home. The subsequent strikes were to the horse, Mr Allison alleged.
There were some “slight pauses”, Mr Allison said, including one when Mr Clark activated the removable deafeners. The Stewards’ issue was with the total number of strikes, he said.
Mr Clark said that his defence was based on the guidelines issued by the Stipendiary Stewards as to “discernible pauses” in the whipping action. He submitted that there were “3 or 4 discernible pauses”. “Discernible” was not defined in the guidelines, he submitted. The pauses could be seen and, therefore, were within the guidelines, Mr Clark submitted. The first seven strikes were on the dust sheet and, over the final 50 metres, any whipping was “just flicking along the side” and was “a change of action”. He also “jiggled” the horse’s mouth as a means of getting him to respond which was an “alternative action” within the guidelines, Mr Clark submitted.
Mr Allison submitted, in conclusion, that the concern was with the number of strikes.
Reasons for Decision:
In considering the evidence in this case, the Committee has referred to the “Use of Whip Guidelines” which were issued some time ago and which are familiar to horsemen. “Excessive use of the whip” is defined in those guidelines as “simply meaning too much and relates to the number of times and/or the force with which the whip is used”. In this case, the number of strikes was alleged to be approximately 24 and Mr Clark, when asked by the Committee, confirmed that he accepted that number.
Mr Clark’s defence was based on his contention that there were discernible pauses which, he submitted, brought his actions within the guidelines. He also submitted that he used alternative actions, claiming that he “jiggled” the bit in the horse’s mouth. The Committee finds, from its observations of the video evidence, that Mr Clark was doing this while at the same time continuing to use the whip in his other hand. The guidelines provide, when referring to using “alternative actions”, that a horseman shall interrupt the use of the whip when using any alternative actions. Mr Clark’s were additional actions rather than alternative actions.
In relation to Mr Clark’s submission that there were pauses that could be seen, the Committee has taken the dictionary meaning of “distinct” (being the word used in relation to pauses in the guidelines) – that is to say, “plain”, “unmistakeable” or “clearly defined”. The pauses in this case were, in the Committee’s view, very brief and almost insignificant. Mr Allison did agree that there were some “small pauses”.
However, considering all of the evidence and the submissions of the parties, the Committee is satisfied, principally on the basis of the total number of strikes, that Mr Clark’s use of the whip, on this occasion, was excessive or “too much” in terms of the definition of “excessive use” as set out in the guidelines.
Submissions for Penalty:
Mr Allison stated that Mr Clark has a clear record under the Rule. In the 2011/2012 season, Mr Clark had 35 drives and in the current season to date has had 58. He said that the Stewards did not view the breach as being at the higher end of the scale, in fact, they believed it to be at the lower end. On that basis, the Stewards were asking for a fine at the lower end of the scale, Mr Allison said.
Mr Clark did not wish to make any submissions relating to penalty.
Reasons for Penalty:
In determining penalty, the Committee had regard to the Penalty Guide which provides a starting point for a breach of the Rule of 6 drives or a fine of $300. Taking that starting point of a $300 fine (a fine being the appropriate penalty), the Committee was able to give Mr Clark a discount of $50 for his good record. There were no other mitigating factors. The Committee assessed the circumstances of the breach to be in the low-to-mid range.
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: 129bf5a8e421b1f7bfb8f02b70636566
informantnumber: A5928
horsename:
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea: denied
penaltyrequired: 1
decisiondate: 31/05/2013
hearing_title: NZ Metro TC 14 June 2013 - R 4
charge:
Excessive use of the whip.
facts:
Following the running of Race 4, Hamptons ITM Building Centre-Ferry Road Handicap Trot, an information was filed by Stipendiary Steward, Mr C J Allison, against Licensed Open Horseman, Mr A L Clark, alleging that Mr Clark, as the driver of THE FIERY GINGA in the race, “used his whip excessively over the final 400 metres”.
Mr Clark was present at the hearing of the information and he indicated that he denied the charge.
Rule 869 provides as follows:
(2) No horseman shall during any race:-
(a) use his whip in an unnecessary, excessive or improper manner.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
Mr Allison referred to a video replay of the final 400-500 metres of the race. He pointed out THE FIERY GINGA, driven by Mr Clark, leading the field past the 400 metres. He then commenced to use his whip and, the Stewards were alleging, from that point to the finish, Mr Clark used his whip on approximately 24 occasions. Mr Clark was asked by the Committee and he stated that he accepted that fact. Included in the total of 24 were seven “rapid fire” hits on the sulky shortly after turning for home. The subsequent strikes were to the horse, Mr Allison alleged.
There were some “slight pauses”, Mr Allison said, including one when Mr Clark activated the removable deafeners. The Stewards’ issue was with the total number of strikes, he said.
Mr Clark said that his defence was based on the guidelines issued by the Stipendiary Stewards as to “discernible pauses” in the whipping action. He submitted that there were “3 or 4 discernible pauses”. “Discernible” was not defined in the guidelines, he submitted. The pauses could be seen and, therefore, were within the guidelines, Mr Clark submitted. The first seven strikes were on the dust sheet and, over the final 50 metres, any whipping was “just flicking along the side” and was “a change of action”. He also “jiggled” the horse’s mouth as a means of getting him to respond which was an “alternative action” within the guidelines, Mr Clark submitted.
Mr Allison submitted, in conclusion, that the concern was with the number of strikes.
reasonsfordecision:
In considering the evidence in this case, the Committee has referred to the “Use of Whip Guidelines” which were issued some time ago and which are familiar to horsemen. “Excessive use of the whip” is defined in those guidelines as “simply meaning too much and relates to the number of times and/or the force with which the whip is used”. In this case, the number of strikes was alleged to be approximately 24 and Mr Clark, when asked by the Committee, confirmed that he accepted that number.
Mr Clark’s defence was based on his contention that there were discernible pauses which, he submitted, brought his actions within the guidelines. He also submitted that he used alternative actions, claiming that he “jiggled” the bit in the horse’s mouth. The Committee finds, from its observations of the video evidence, that Mr Clark was doing this while at the same time continuing to use the whip in his other hand. The guidelines provide, when referring to using “alternative actions”, that a horseman shall interrupt the use of the whip when using any alternative actions. Mr Clark’s were additional actions rather than alternative actions.
In relation to Mr Clark’s submission that there were pauses that could be seen, the Committee has taken the dictionary meaning of “distinct” (being the word used in relation to pauses in the guidelines) – that is to say, “plain”, “unmistakeable” or “clearly defined”. The pauses in this case were, in the Committee’s view, very brief and almost insignificant. Mr Allison did agree that there were some “small pauses”.
However, considering all of the evidence and the submissions of the parties, the Committee is satisfied, principally on the basis of the total number of strikes, that Mr Clark’s use of the whip, on this occasion, was excessive or “too much” in terms of the definition of “excessive use” as set out in the guidelines.
Decision:
The charge was found proved.
sumissionsforpenalty:
Mr Allison stated that Mr Clark has a clear record under the Rule. In the 2011/2012 season, Mr Clark had 35 drives and in the current season to date has had 58. He said that the Stewards did not view the breach as being at the higher end of the scale, in fact, they believed it to be at the lower end. On that basis, the Stewards were asking for a fine at the lower end of the scale, Mr Allison said.
Mr Clark did not wish to make any submissions relating to penalty.
reasonsforpenalty:
In determining penalty, the Committee had regard to the Penalty Guide which provides a starting point for a breach of the Rule of 6 drives or a fine of $300. Taking that starting point of a $300 fine (a fine being the appropriate penalty), the Committee was able to give Mr Clark a discount of $50 for his good record. There were no other mitigating factors. The Committee assessed the circumstances of the breach to be in the low-to-mid range.
penalty:
Mr Clark was fined the sum of $250.
hearing_type: Hearing
Rules: 869(2)(a)
Informant: C J Allison, Stipendiary Steward
JockeysandTrainer: A L Clark, Licensed Open Horsemasn
Otherperson:
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: e4e5013ac7288e272aa4da47316721fd
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: R4
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: baa7fd0dafd11dfa9447b91e1783beaa
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 14/06/2013
meet_title: NZ Metro TC - 14 June 2013
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: nz-metro-tc
meet_racingtype: harness-racing
meet_chair: RMcKenzie
meet_pm1: KHales
meet_pm2: none
name: NZ Metro TC