NZ Metro TC – 24 April 2009 – Race 1
ID: JCA22084
Hearing Type (Code):
harness-racing
Meet Title:
NZ Metro TC - 24 April 2009
Race Date:
2009/04/24
Race Number:
Race 1
Decision:
Following the running of Race 1, Fred Shaw – Solicitor Mobile Pace, an information was filed by Stipendiary Steward, Mr N G McIntyre, against Licensed Open Horseman, Mr J C Hay, alleging a breach of Rule 869 (4) and (6) (b) & (c) in that “with approximately 1200 metres to run J C Hay (FRANCO NEREUS) shifted TELLTHEBANKER (C D Thornley) wider on the track”.
--
Following the running of Race 1, Fred Shaw – Solicitor Mobile Pace, an information was filed by Stipendiary Steward, Mr N G McIntyre, against Licensed Open Horseman, Mr J C Hay, alleging a breach of Rule 869 (4) and (6) (b) & (c) in that “with approximately 1200 metres to run J C Hay (FRANCO NEREUS) shifted TELLTHEBANKER (C D Thornley) wider on the track”.
--Mr Hay was present at the hearing of the information and did not admit the breach.
--Rule 869 provides as follows:
(4) No horseman shall during any race do anything which interferes or is likely to interfere with his own horse and/or any other horse or its progress.
(6) Subject to sub-rule (4) hereof:-
(b) a horse making a forward movement during any race shall not be forced to race wider on the track;
(c) a horse during a race shall not move ground outwards once the nose of the wider runner coming forward is in line with or past its sulky wheel and until the wider runner going forward is fully past.
Mr Thornley stated that, with approximately 1200 metres to run, he was improving 3-wide on TELLTHEBANKER. He said that, as he got alongside Mr Hay, Mr Hay had come out and forced him over extra ground. TELLTHEBANKER was racing in a boring pole for the first time, Mr Thornley said. He ended up back on Mr Hay’s back and finished up outside the leader going into the back straight.
--Mrs K R Williams, Stipendiary Steward, showed video replays of the incident. Mr Thornley said that he saw Mr Hay coming out but he could not “grab” his horse because of the boring pole. Mr Thornley did not believe that the chances of his horse had been affected.
--With reference to the video, Mr McIntyre stated that Mr Hay was racing 3-back in the one-out line. He could be seen to look around on several occasions before coming out. He had left it too late to do so, Mr McIntyre alleged.
--Mr Hay said that, when he first looked back, he could not see Mr Thornley improving who was “too far back”. When he decided to come out, having by then seen Mr Thornley, his horse was “fighting” him. If the horse had not raced greenly, he would have been “straight out”, ten metres before he was. It took an “extra two metres” to come out. In addition, he was surprised at how quickly Mr Thornley had got there and that he got past him. Mr Hay used the video footage.
--Following a deliberation, the Committee delivered the following oral decision:
“The Committee has listened to the evidence of the parties in this case and we have carefully viewed the video replays of the incident with approximately 1200 metres to run.
Mr Thornley gave evidence that he was forced to race wider on the track when Mr Hay shifted out. This was obvious from the video replay. Mr Thornley made the point that he was not greatly inconvenienced as he ended up in the spot that he wanted. However, this is not relevant in determining the guilt or otherwise of Mr Hay. Mr Hay did not dispute that he had forced Mr Thornley to race wider on the track. He put forward the defence that his horse fought him when he pulled him out and that Mr Thornley got up outside him quicker than anticipated.
Mr McIntyre submitted that Mr Hay should have been out before Mr Thornley got up to him but he simply left it too late.
The Committee agrees with Mr McIntyre. The video replays clearly show Mr Hay looking round several times and Mr Hay acknowledged to the Committee that he saw Mr Thornley coming in the 3-wide line.
It was very clear from the videos that Mr Thornley’s horse was going forward, that its nose was in line with or past the sulky wheel of FRANCO NEREUS and that it was forced to race wider on the track. These are the elements that need to be proved to establish a breach of the pushout Rule.
It is clear that Mr Hay mistimed his move out into the 3-wide line – he simply left it too late – and we are satisfied that the breach of the pushout Rule has been proved”.
In relation to penalty, Mr McIntyre informed the Committee that Mr Hay is an experienced horseman who has been driving for “quite a while”. Mr Hay had not breached any Rule in the past 12 months. Mr McIntyre recommended a fine of $200.
--Mr Hay said that he had driven 1,000 winners and had not previously breached the pushout Rule. He accepted that he had made an error but submitted that a $200 fine was excessive in the circumstances. The breach had no bearing on the outcome of the race, he submitted.
--The Committee regarded the starting point for a breach of the Rule as being a $250 fine (as per the Penalty Guide). However, the Committee took into account Mr Hay’s excellent driving record and, also, that the breach was at the minor end of a scale of seriousness. The Committee was of the view that the fine recommended by Mr McIntyre was appropriate in all of the circumstances and Mr Hay was fined the sum of $200 accordingly.
--R G McKenzie
Chair
67932
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: bfd9f1cf2fd5d66b3697d4cfda40b2ef
informantnumber:
horsename:
hearing_racingtype: harness-racing
startdate: 24/04/2009
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: no date provided
hearing_title: NZ Metro TC - 24 April 2009 - Race 1
charge:
facts:
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
reasonsfordecision:
Decision:
Following the running of Race 1, Fred Shaw – Solicitor Mobile Pace, an information was filed by Stipendiary Steward, Mr N G McIntyre, against Licensed Open Horseman, Mr J C Hay, alleging a breach of Rule 869 (4) and (6) (b) & (c) in that “with approximately 1200 metres to run J C Hay (FRANCO NEREUS) shifted TELLTHEBANKER (C D Thornley) wider on the track”.
--
Following the running of Race 1, Fred Shaw – Solicitor Mobile Pace, an information was filed by Stipendiary Steward, Mr N G McIntyre, against Licensed Open Horseman, Mr J C Hay, alleging a breach of Rule 869 (4) and (6) (b) & (c) in that “with approximately 1200 metres to run J C Hay (FRANCO NEREUS) shifted TELLTHEBANKER (C D Thornley) wider on the track”.
--Mr Hay was present at the hearing of the information and did not admit the breach.
--Rule 869 provides as follows:
(4) No horseman shall during any race do anything which interferes or is likely to interfere with his own horse and/or any other horse or its progress.
(6) Subject to sub-rule (4) hereof:-
(b) a horse making a forward movement during any race shall not be forced to race wider on the track;
(c) a horse during a race shall not move ground outwards once the nose of the wider runner coming forward is in line with or past its sulky wheel and until the wider runner going forward is fully past.
Mr Thornley stated that, with approximately 1200 metres to run, he was improving 3-wide on TELLTHEBANKER. He said that, as he got alongside Mr Hay, Mr Hay had come out and forced him over extra ground. TELLTHEBANKER was racing in a boring pole for the first time, Mr Thornley said. He ended up back on Mr Hay’s back and finished up outside the leader going into the back straight.
--Mrs K R Williams, Stipendiary Steward, showed video replays of the incident. Mr Thornley said that he saw Mr Hay coming out but he could not “grab” his horse because of the boring pole. Mr Thornley did not believe that the chances of his horse had been affected.
--With reference to the video, Mr McIntyre stated that Mr Hay was racing 3-back in the one-out line. He could be seen to look around on several occasions before coming out. He had left it too late to do so, Mr McIntyre alleged.
--Mr Hay said that, when he first looked back, he could not see Mr Thornley improving who was “too far back”. When he decided to come out, having by then seen Mr Thornley, his horse was “fighting” him. If the horse had not raced greenly, he would have been “straight out”, ten metres before he was. It took an “extra two metres” to come out. In addition, he was surprised at how quickly Mr Thornley had got there and that he got past him. Mr Hay used the video footage.
--Following a deliberation, the Committee delivered the following oral decision:
“The Committee has listened to the evidence of the parties in this case and we have carefully viewed the video replays of the incident with approximately 1200 metres to run.
Mr Thornley gave evidence that he was forced to race wider on the track when Mr Hay shifted out. This was obvious from the video replay. Mr Thornley made the point that he was not greatly inconvenienced as he ended up in the spot that he wanted. However, this is not relevant in determining the guilt or otherwise of Mr Hay. Mr Hay did not dispute that he had forced Mr Thornley to race wider on the track. He put forward the defence that his horse fought him when he pulled him out and that Mr Thornley got up outside him quicker than anticipated.
Mr McIntyre submitted that Mr Hay should have been out before Mr Thornley got up to him but he simply left it too late.
The Committee agrees with Mr McIntyre. The video replays clearly show Mr Hay looking round several times and Mr Hay acknowledged to the Committee that he saw Mr Thornley coming in the 3-wide line.
It was very clear from the videos that Mr Thornley’s horse was going forward, that its nose was in line with or past the sulky wheel of FRANCO NEREUS and that it was forced to race wider on the track. These are the elements that need to be proved to establish a breach of the pushout Rule.
It is clear that Mr Hay mistimed his move out into the 3-wide line – he simply left it too late – and we are satisfied that the breach of the pushout Rule has been proved”.
In relation to penalty, Mr McIntyre informed the Committee that Mr Hay is an experienced horseman who has been driving for “quite a while”. Mr Hay had not breached any Rule in the past 12 months. Mr McIntyre recommended a fine of $200.
--Mr Hay said that he had driven 1,000 winners and had not previously breached the pushout Rule. He accepted that he had made an error but submitted that a $200 fine was excessive in the circumstances. The breach had no bearing on the outcome of the race, he submitted.
--The Committee regarded the starting point for a breach of the Rule as being a $250 fine (as per the Penalty Guide). However, the Committee took into account Mr Hay’s excellent driving record and, also, that the breach was at the minor end of a scale of seriousness. The Committee was of the view that the fine recommended by Mr McIntyre was appropriate in all of the circumstances and Mr Hay was fined the sum of $200 accordingly.
--R G McKenzie
Chair
67932
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Old Hearing
Rules: 869.4
Informant:
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: d6a39bc7ebf9fb43c0fdc81cb517bb5a
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: b30fcea976ad6d70fdeaaa2c9027907d
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 24/04/2009
meet_title: NZ Metro TC - 24 April 2009
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: nz-metro-tc
meet_racingtype: harness-racing
meet_chair:
meet_pm1:
meet_pm2:
name: NZ Metro TC