NZ Metro TC – 18 July 2008 – Race 1

hearingid: 23131b4a9935db6ff21935f581391dc6

informantnumber:

horsename:

hearing_racingtype: harness-racing

startdate: 18/07/2008

newcharge:

plea:

penaltyrequired:

decisiondate: no date provided

hearing_title: NZ Metro TC - 18 July 2008 - Race 1

charge:

facts:

appealdecision:

isappeal:

submissionsfordecision:

reasonsfordecision:

Decision:

DECISION AND REASONS:

          Following the running of Race 1, the Masta Flooring Ltd Trot, an Information Instigating a Protest was laid by Chief Stipendiary Steward Mr N. R. Escott alleging a breach of Rule 870(3) and the “Breaking Horses” Regulation by “Brownie” (1) which finished 2^nd in the race.  

Mr Borcoskie attended the hearing and he was the trainer and driver of “Brownie”.  Mr Borcoskie also advised that he would represent the interests of the owner of the horse.

The Information reads as follows.

“This is a protest against horse number (1) placed 2^nd by the Judge on the

grounds of breaking from its gait (Rule 870(3)) Breaking Horse Regs. The

 breaking or interference occurred in the run home over the final stages.”

          Rule 870(3) provides as follows.

          “(3) Any horse which breaks from its gait shall promptly regain its proper gait.”

The “Breaking Horses” Regulation, so far as they are relevant to the present case, provide as follows.

“For the avoidance of doubt and in order to clarify the situation for all parties concerned, the following shall apply with regard to breaking horses:

                        (a) ……

(b) Any horse which breaks from its gait within the final 200 metres of any race and continues on in the break for a distance of 50 metres or greater, shall be deemed to be in breach of Rule 870(3) in that it has failed to promptly regain its proper gait.

Where a protest has been duly lodged against the placing of an offending horse, the Judicial Committee shall either:

(i)                 relegate such horse under Rule 870(4) to behind any other horse in respect of which an advantage may have been gained; or

(ii)               disqualify it from the race under Rule 1003(2).

Provided that where such first mentioned horse is not in its correct gait as a result of interference to such horse or its horseman, then [subject to Rule 869(8)] such relegation or disqualification of the horse shall be at the discretion of the Judicial Committee.

This regulation shall not preclude a protest being lodged against a horse’s placing when such horse has been in a break for a lesser distance than stipulated above.”

Stipendiary Steward Mr Ydgren used video coverage to illustrate that

“Brownie” was in second place when entering the home straight for the last time. When moving up to challenge “Our Orb” for the lead “Brownie” broke from it’s gait, and was still in a break when it reached the winning post. A white board marking the point 50 metres from the winning post was also pointed out.

          It was the Stipendiary Stewards’ case that “Brownie” had broken from its gait more than 50 metres from the winning post, and that it was still in a break when it reached the winning post.

          Mr Borcoskie gave evidence and said that he did not believe that it was certain that “Brownie” had broken from its gait before reaching the 50 metre marker.  The video coverage was looked at on numerous occasions by both parties. 

After seeing the video coverage, and after hearing the evidence from both parties, I advised them that I was satisfied that “Brownie” did break from its correct gait more than 50 metres from the winning post.

In his evidence Mr Borcoskie also alleged that his horse had broken from its correct gait as a result of interference by the winner, “Our Orb”.  I asked Mr Borcoskie to illustrate this by use of the video coverage.  He showed where ”Our Orb” had moved wider on the track after entering the straight, and contended that this movement had been the cause of his horse breaking.

The video coverage showed that “Brownie” was some distance behind “Our Orb” on entering the home straight.  “Our Orb” did move outwards a little on entering the straight, but by the time “Brownie” moved up to challenge “Our Orb” was trotting in a straight line, and continued to do so to the winning post.

After hearing the evidence I adjourned to consider my decision.  On returning to the Enquiry Room I advised the parties that a full written decision (as set out above) would be provided later, and I gave the following oral decision.

“Having heard the evidence and having seen the video coverage,  I am satisfied that “Brownie” was in a break for more than 50 metres when it reached the finish of the race.  Mr Borcoskie also raised whether the winner “Our Orb” had contributed to his horse breaking.  I am satisfied that it did not.  The protest is upheld and “Brownie” is disqualified.”

          Accordingly “Brownie” was disqualified from its 2^nd place.  The amended places are as follows.

          1^st – Our Orb (3)

          2^nd – Chew The Fat (10)

          3^rd – Lover Or Loser (11)

          4^th – Loyal Man (5)

          5^th – In Pursuit (4)

          6^th – Miss Rush (8)

J.  M. Phelan

Chairman

sumissionsforpenalty:

reasonsforpenalty:

penalty:

hearing_type: Old Hearing

Rules: 870.3, 870.4, 1003.2, 869.8

Informant:

JockeysandTrainer:

Otherperson:

PersonPresent:

Respondent:

StipendSteward:

raceid: 100a3a19e1b5677d15cdcbb5a84e9d46

race_expapproval:

racecancelled: 0

race_noreport: 0

race_emailed1: 0

race_emailed2: 0

race_title: Race 1

submittochair:

race_expappcomment:

race_km:

race_otherexp:

race_chair:

race_pm1:

race_pm2:

meetid: 87536cb31ba32260b07c3686a6e28856

meet_expapproval:

meet_noreport: 0

waitingforpublication: 0

meet_emailed1: 0

meet_emailed2: 0

meetdate: 18/07/2008

meet_title: NZ Metro TC - 18 July 2008

meet_expappcomment:

meet_km:

meet_otherexp:

tracklocation: nz-metro-tc

meet_racingtype: harness-racing

meet_chair:

meet_pm1:

meet_pm2:

name: NZ Metro TC