NZ Metro TC 16 September 2017 – R 1 – Chair, Mr R McKenzie
ID: JCA14606
Meet Title:
NZ Metro TC - 16 September 2017
Meet Chair:
RMcKenzie
Meet Committee Member 1:
SChing
Race Date:
2017/09/16
Race Number:
R 1
Decision:
The charge was found proved.
Facts:
Following the running of Race 1, Bishopdale Inn TAB’s + Tavern Harewood (Amateur Drivers) Mobile Pace, an Information was filed by Stipendiary Steward, Mr SW Wallis, against Licensed Advanced Amateur Driver, Mr RA Reekie, alleging that, as the driver of ZAKSPATROL in the race, he “drove in a manner capable of diminishing his chances by challenging for the lead between the 2100 metres and the 1100 metres unsuccessfully resulting in his horse tiring badly from the 900 metres.”
Mr Reekie was present at the hearing of the information and he indicated that he denied the breach.
Rule 869 provides as follows:
(3) No horseman in any race shall drive: -
(g) in any manner capable of diminishing the chances of his horse winning.
Submissions for Decision:
Mr Wallis said that Mr Reekie was the driver of ZAKSPATROL in Race 1. The horse had drawn the outside of the mobile gate (barrier position 9) at the 2600 metres start. The charge was based on the Stewards’ belief that Mr Reekie had diminished the chances of the horse by progressing forward from the start to get to the parked position outside the leader from the 2100 metres, Mr Wallis said. Mr Reekie had then challenged the leader, RUSSIAN EXPRESS (A N Edge) for the lead to no avail. Mr Reekie continued to urge his runner with the whip and activate the removable hood for approximately 900 metres in challenging for the lead, before tiring approximately 900 metres from the finish, finishing in last placing.
Mr Wallis said it was important to note the lead time for the race – 1.10.0. The record for the fastest lead time at Addington Raceway is 1.09.5, only a ½ second faster. The overall time for the race was 3.16.5. The final 800 metres was run in a slow 61.6 seconds and the final 400 metres in 30.0 seconds, reflecting the fact that the first part of the race had been run at such a fast pace. Mr Reekie’s horse was beaten by 35.3 lengths, Mr Wallis said.
Mr Wallis then showed a video replay of the race. He pointed out that several runners were slow from the barrier or galloped. RUSSIAN EXPRESS was the fastest to begin and was able to lead quite easily by the winning post, after 200 metres. Mr Reekie’s horse had begun well and, after being 3-wide early, Mr Reekie urged his horse to reach the parked position. The Stewards had no issue with this or with the early challenge that Mr Reekie made for the lead.
Stewards had spoken to Mr Edge after the race and he made it clear that he wished to maintain the lead and it was evident from the video that Mr Edge wished to hold the lead. Both drivers wanted the lead but Mr Edge had told Mr Reekie that he was staying there, Mr Wallis said. From the 2000 metres, the removable deafeners were out on Mr Reekie’s horse and he could be seen to be urging the horse with the reins and the whip.
This continued over a considerable distance. Mr Reekie continued to challenge for the lead up the home straight. Mr Wallis said that he had viewed the race from the top of the straight and it was clear that Mr Reekie was urging his horse with the whip and “vocally”. From about the 1000 metres, his horse had tired and from the 900 metres it had “run its race” and eventually finished 35 lengths from the winner, Mr Wallis said.
The points of concern to the Stewards were that, after his initial challenge, with which the Stewards had no issue, it became evident that the lead was not there for Mr Reekie. Mr Edge had made this clear and ZAKSPATROL was not progressing forward in such a manner that suggested that it was ever going to get to the front. Stewards believed that Mr Reekie should have ceased urging his horse and been content to sit in the parked position. He had not done so, but had continued to challenge for the lead for approximately 900 metres, which was “extreme”, Mr Wallis submitted.
A subsequent veterinary examination of ZAKSPATROL revealed no abnormalities and that the horse had recovered satisfactorily, Mr Wallis said.
Mr Reekie submitted that, just because Mr Edge had told him he could not lead, this did not mean that he could not do so. He had told Mr Edge that he intended to take the lead. The horse was wearing a galloping hood for the first time and, because it had had breathing problems, he was told not to take a hold of it, as this would be inadvisable. For this reason, his instructions had been to lead. As an Amateur Driver, it was difficult for him to judge the pace and he did not realise that the speed was so fast, he said. The horse lacked a sprint.
Mr Reekie said that he felt that he had “committed himself” to get to the front and, having done so, had to keep going. He said that, in retrospect, he should have taken a hold of his horse earlier on.
Mr Wallis said that the stable representative, Mr JR Dunn, had confirmed to Stewards the instructions to Mr Reekie to drive the horse “in a more forward position”. Mr Dunn felt this was feasible as there was “not much speed inside him”. Mr Dunn confirmed to the Stewards that a senior horseman would not have continued for such a considerable distance.
Reasons for Decision:
Mr Reekie has been charged with driving in a manner capable of diminishing the chances of his horse winning. In the context of the Rule, we take “diminish” to mean “lessen” or “reduce”. The test for whether the chances of a runner have been diminished is, we believe, an objective test – that is to say, the quality of Mr Reekie’s drive is to be assessed by reference to how a reasonable and prudent driver would have driven in the circumstances.
The Committee is satisfied that Mr Reekie’s drive between the 2100 metres and the 1100 metres (as per the information) fell far short of the standard of a reasonable and prudent driver and that the chances of ZAKSPATROL in the race were significantly adversely lessened or reduced by the actions that Mr Reekie took. These actions basically involved hotly contesting the lead, resulting in a hot pace (see the reference to the lead time above) with no chance of the lead being available to him. Nothwithstanding that, throughout the relevant part of the race, between the 2100 metres and the 1100 metres, Mr Reekie activated the removable deafeners at an early stage and urged his horse throughout with the reins and the whip.
That the chances of his horse were diminished is evidenced by the fact that the horse commenced to tire some 900 from the finish before dropping out and finishing a long last, we were told by Mr Wallis, 35.3 lengths from the winner. The hard run to which Mr Reekie had subjected it had, clearly, taken its toll on the horse and it inevitably weakened out a long way from home. Its chances had been diminished.
Mr Reekie’s defence was based, principally, on his instructions from Mr Dunn but, of course, this does not provide and never has provided a defence to a charge. He seemed to think that, once he had made the decision to search for the lead, he was somehow justified in “pressing on” despite it being obvious that he was not going to get the lead. This was his “Plan A” and he had no “Plan B”. The latter would have been to take a hold of his horse and be content to sit outside the leader and see what happened. One could reasonably surmise that, had he adopted such a “Plan B”, his horse would have remained competitive in the race for a lot longer. As an experienced Amateur Driver, he ought to have exercised better judgement, including more accurately judging the pace which, for the class of horses in the race (up to Rating 52), was too fast. In essence, Mr Reekie exercised very poor judgement by any definition.
The Committee is clearly satisfied that Mr Reekie drove in a manner capable of diminishing and which, in fact, diminished the chances of his horse winning.
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: 9961ba4df496cfa2831b9f3fa44a7d98
informantnumber: A09571
horsename:
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge: Drove in manner capable of diminishing his chances
plea: denied
penaltyrequired: 0
decisiondate: 21/09/2017
hearing_title: NZ Metro TC 16 September 2017 - R 1 - Chair, Mr R McKenzie
charge:
facts:
Following the running of Race 1, Bishopdale Inn TAB’s + Tavern Harewood (Amateur Drivers) Mobile Pace, an Information was filed by Stipendiary Steward, Mr SW Wallis, against Licensed Advanced Amateur Driver, Mr RA Reekie, alleging that, as the driver of ZAKSPATROL in the race, he “drove in a manner capable of diminishing his chances by challenging for the lead between the 2100 metres and the 1100 metres unsuccessfully resulting in his horse tiring badly from the 900 metres.”
Mr Reekie was present at the hearing of the information and he indicated that he denied the breach.
Rule 869 provides as follows:
(3) No horseman in any race shall drive: -
(g) in any manner capable of diminishing the chances of his horse winning.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
Mr Wallis said that Mr Reekie was the driver of ZAKSPATROL in Race 1. The horse had drawn the outside of the mobile gate (barrier position 9) at the 2600 metres start. The charge was based on the Stewards’ belief that Mr Reekie had diminished the chances of the horse by progressing forward from the start to get to the parked position outside the leader from the 2100 metres, Mr Wallis said. Mr Reekie had then challenged the leader, RUSSIAN EXPRESS (A N Edge) for the lead to no avail. Mr Reekie continued to urge his runner with the whip and activate the removable hood for approximately 900 metres in challenging for the lead, before tiring approximately 900 metres from the finish, finishing in last placing.
Mr Wallis said it was important to note the lead time for the race – 1.10.0. The record for the fastest lead time at Addington Raceway is 1.09.5, only a ½ second faster. The overall time for the race was 3.16.5. The final 800 metres was run in a slow 61.6 seconds and the final 400 metres in 30.0 seconds, reflecting the fact that the first part of the race had been run at such a fast pace. Mr Reekie’s horse was beaten by 35.3 lengths, Mr Wallis said.
Mr Wallis then showed a video replay of the race. He pointed out that several runners were slow from the barrier or galloped. RUSSIAN EXPRESS was the fastest to begin and was able to lead quite easily by the winning post, after 200 metres. Mr Reekie’s horse had begun well and, after being 3-wide early, Mr Reekie urged his horse to reach the parked position. The Stewards had no issue with this or with the early challenge that Mr Reekie made for the lead.
Stewards had spoken to Mr Edge after the race and he made it clear that he wished to maintain the lead and it was evident from the video that Mr Edge wished to hold the lead. Both drivers wanted the lead but Mr Edge had told Mr Reekie that he was staying there, Mr Wallis said. From the 2000 metres, the removable deafeners were out on Mr Reekie’s horse and he could be seen to be urging the horse with the reins and the whip.
This continued over a considerable distance. Mr Reekie continued to challenge for the lead up the home straight. Mr Wallis said that he had viewed the race from the top of the straight and it was clear that Mr Reekie was urging his horse with the whip and “vocally”. From about the 1000 metres, his horse had tired and from the 900 metres it had “run its race” and eventually finished 35 lengths from the winner, Mr Wallis said.
The points of concern to the Stewards were that, after his initial challenge, with which the Stewards had no issue, it became evident that the lead was not there for Mr Reekie. Mr Edge had made this clear and ZAKSPATROL was not progressing forward in such a manner that suggested that it was ever going to get to the front. Stewards believed that Mr Reekie should have ceased urging his horse and been content to sit in the parked position. He had not done so, but had continued to challenge for the lead for approximately 900 metres, which was “extreme”, Mr Wallis submitted.
A subsequent veterinary examination of ZAKSPATROL revealed no abnormalities and that the horse had recovered satisfactorily, Mr Wallis said.
Mr Reekie submitted that, just because Mr Edge had told him he could not lead, this did not mean that he could not do so. He had told Mr Edge that he intended to take the lead. The horse was wearing a galloping hood for the first time and, because it had had breathing problems, he was told not to take a hold of it, as this would be inadvisable. For this reason, his instructions had been to lead. As an Amateur Driver, it was difficult for him to judge the pace and he did not realise that the speed was so fast, he said. The horse lacked a sprint.
Mr Reekie said that he felt that he had “committed himself” to get to the front and, having done so, had to keep going. He said that, in retrospect, he should have taken a hold of his horse earlier on.
Mr Wallis said that the stable representative, Mr JR Dunn, had confirmed to Stewards the instructions to Mr Reekie to drive the horse “in a more forward position”. Mr Dunn felt this was feasible as there was “not much speed inside him”. Mr Dunn confirmed to the Stewards that a senior horseman would not have continued for such a considerable distance.
reasonsfordecision:
Mr Reekie has been charged with driving in a manner capable of diminishing the chances of his horse winning. In the context of the Rule, we take “diminish” to mean “lessen” or “reduce”. The test for whether the chances of a runner have been diminished is, we believe, an objective test – that is to say, the quality of Mr Reekie’s drive is to be assessed by reference to how a reasonable and prudent driver would have driven in the circumstances.
The Committee is satisfied that Mr Reekie’s drive between the 2100 metres and the 1100 metres (as per the information) fell far short of the standard of a reasonable and prudent driver and that the chances of ZAKSPATROL in the race were significantly adversely lessened or reduced by the actions that Mr Reekie took. These actions basically involved hotly contesting the lead, resulting in a hot pace (see the reference to the lead time above) with no chance of the lead being available to him. Nothwithstanding that, throughout the relevant part of the race, between the 2100 metres and the 1100 metres, Mr Reekie activated the removable deafeners at an early stage and urged his horse throughout with the reins and the whip.
That the chances of his horse were diminished is evidenced by the fact that the horse commenced to tire some 900 from the finish before dropping out and finishing a long last, we were told by Mr Wallis, 35.3 lengths from the winner. The hard run to which Mr Reekie had subjected it had, clearly, taken its toll on the horse and it inevitably weakened out a long way from home. Its chances had been diminished.
Mr Reekie’s defence was based, principally, on his instructions from Mr Dunn but, of course, this does not provide and never has provided a defence to a charge. He seemed to think that, once he had made the decision to search for the lead, he was somehow justified in “pressing on” despite it being obvious that he was not going to get the lead. This was his “Plan A” and he had no “Plan B”. The latter would have been to take a hold of his horse and be content to sit outside the leader and see what happened. One could reasonably surmise that, had he adopted such a “Plan B”, his horse would have remained competitive in the race for a lot longer. As an experienced Amateur Driver, he ought to have exercised better judgement, including more accurately judging the pace which, for the class of horses in the race (up to Rating 52), was too fast. In essence, Mr Reekie exercised very poor judgement by any definition.
The Committee is clearly satisfied that Mr Reekie drove in a manner capable of diminishing and which, in fact, diminished the chances of his horse winning.
Decision:
The charge was found proved.
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Hearing
Rules: 869(3)(g)
Informant: Mr SW Wallis - Stipendiary Steward
JockeysandTrainer: Mr RA Reekie - Licensed Advanced Amateur Driver
Otherperson:
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: 444edb0a89cfb9102e86560de35d12fa
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: R 1
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: 3b815c8a77d8ed491e952b0493374a35
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 16/09/2017
meet_title: NZ Metro TC - 16 September 2017
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: nz-metro-tc
meet_racingtype: harness-racing
meet_chair: RMcKenzie
meet_pm1: SChing
meet_pm2: none
name: NZ Metro TC