NZ Metro TC 29 May 2014 – R 9 (requesting a ruling)
ID: JCA11451
Meet Title:
NZ Metro TC - 29 May 2014
Meet Chair:
RMcKenzie
Meet Committee Member 1:
SChing
Race Date:
2014/05/29
Race Number:
R9
Decision:
The Committee ruled FOR THE GOODTIMES to be a runner in the race.
Facts:
Following the running of Race 9, Spectators Bar & Bistro Open ‘Til Late Mobile Pace, an information requesting a ruling was filed by Stipendiary Steward, Mr N M Ydgren, “to determine if FOR THE GOODTIMES (S J Ottley) was denied a fair start behind BURN OFF (C D Thornley)”.
Miss Ottley was present at the hearing of the information, and she was assisted by Licensed Public Trainer, Mr D J Anderson, trainer of FOR THE GOODTIMES. Also present was the Starter, Mr P C Lamb.
Rule 213 provides as follows:
(1) A Stipendiary Steward at any time may scratch from a race. . . any horse on all or any of the following grounds:
(j) if a horse was denied a fair start and such occurrence materially prejudiced the chances of that horse.
Submissions for Decision:
Mr Ydgren explained that the request arose out of the third attempt to start the 1950 metres mobile start event. On the first attempt, BURN OFF which had drawn barrier 1 on the front row had galloped prior to the start and had interfered with FOR THE GOODTIMES, which had drawn behind it at 1 on the second row.
Mr Ydgren showed a video replay of the third attempt at the start. On this occasion, BURN OFF had been close up on the gate but, approaching the start point, had drifted to be approximately 1½ lengths out of position. As a result, FOR THE GOODTIMES had been another 1½ lengths behind BURN OFF which had been unable to be driven out of the gate or “muster” any early speed, resulting in FOR THE GOODTIMES starting “some distance” behind.
Mr Ydgren said that Stewards would not have been critical of the starter, Mr Lamb, had he called a false start as FOR THE GOODTIMES had received some interference. It was common in many races for a horse or two to be out of position which may or may not impede a second row runner but not requiring a false start to be called. In the present case, the issue was the distance behind which FOR THE GOODTIMES was forced to start.
Mr Lamb said that similar situations happen quite regularly but, perhaps, not to the extent as in this case. Mr Thornley was driving his horse “conservatively” because it had already caused one false start. He demonstrated on the video replay that the situation had got worse as the field got closer to the start and the mobile barrier was increasing speed. He added that he would not have considered calling a false start in a case such as this – a starter does not in such situations, he said. It was not an uncommon situation – it was a case of lack of gate speed rather than a horse breaking, he said.
He expressed the opinion that the chances of FOR THE GOODTIMES had been only “marginally affected” by the actions of BURN OFF.
Mr Anderson said that BURN OFF should have been on the gate at the starting point and, because it was not, it had cost FOR THE GOODTIMES 1½ lengths at the start which was hard to pick up. He said that it had no bearing on the horse’s final placing (7th). It did not change the run that the mare received, Mr Anderson said.
Miss Ottley said that it was hard to say the extent to which the chances of FOR THE GOODTIMES had been affected. She said that she did not realise how far BURN OFF was behind the gate until she viewed the video replay.
Mr Ydgren said that there was an element of doubt in the minds of the Stewards whether the chances of FOR THE GOODTIMES were materially prejudiced. It would be setting a precedent for a horse to be declared a late scratching as a result of another runner being off the gate. The distance that FOR THE GOODTIMES was behind was at the higher end of the scale. This was not a case of a horse galloping and having its chances extinguished. It was forced to start further back that it should have, because of the “bad manners” of BURN OFF. The distance was of some concern, Mr Ydgren said.
Mr Anderson added that, had BURN OFF been hard up against the gate, Miss Ottley would have had the opportunity to come off its back and get on the back of the horse drawn barrier 2 on the front row. She would thereby have been 2 lengths closer.
Reasons for Decision:
For the Stewards or, in this case, the Committee to late-scratch a horse from a race, there are two elements to Rule 213 (1) (j) that require to be satisfied. Firstly, a horse needs to have been denied a fair start and, secondly, such occurrence must have materially prejudiced the chances of that horse.
We take “fair”, in this context, to mean “proper under the Rules”. Rule 857 (3) (i) requires the Starter to call a false start in a mobile start race if there is “interference” prior to the start. In the Committee’s view, “interference” should be interpreted as involving more than the consequences of being inconvenienced or impeded by another runner on the front row, unable to keep up to the barrier arm. That was what had happened in this case. Of course, each case needs to be considered on its particular facts. The Committee is satisfied that the Starter was justified in not sounding a recall in this case. Had the circumstances been such that the Starter should have sounded a recall, that would have presented a more compelling case for declaring FOR THE GOODTIMES to be a late scratching for the race as having been denied a fair start.
For those reasons, the Committee was satisfied that FOR THE GOODTIMES was not denied a fair start.
It was not, therefore, necessary to go on and consider whether its chances were materially prejudiced. “Materially” we would take to mean “to a significant degree, considerably”. Although we were not required to rule on the matter, having found that FOR THE GOODTIMES was not denied a fair start, on the evidence, we would not have found that its chances were materially prejudiced. Mr Ydgren submitted that its chances had been only “marginally affected” and Mr Anderson said that neither the run that the horse received nor its finishing position were affected. We would agree with Mr Ydgren and Mr Anderson.
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: 1fcca7e0223f08bffe83922fa694d06c
informantnumber: A6144
horsename:
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: 26/05/2014
hearing_title: NZ Metro TC 29 May 2014 - R 9 (requesting a ruling)
charge:
facts:
Following the running of Race 9, Spectators Bar & Bistro Open ‘Til Late Mobile Pace, an information requesting a ruling was filed by Stipendiary Steward, Mr N M Ydgren, “to determine if FOR THE GOODTIMES (S J Ottley) was denied a fair start behind BURN OFF (C D Thornley)”.
Miss Ottley was present at the hearing of the information, and she was assisted by Licensed Public Trainer, Mr D J Anderson, trainer of FOR THE GOODTIMES. Also present was the Starter, Mr P C Lamb.
Rule 213 provides as follows:
(1) A Stipendiary Steward at any time may scratch from a race. . . any horse on all or any of the following grounds:
(j) if a horse was denied a fair start and such occurrence materially prejudiced the chances of that horse.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
Mr Ydgren explained that the request arose out of the third attempt to start the 1950 metres mobile start event. On the first attempt, BURN OFF which had drawn barrier 1 on the front row had galloped prior to the start and had interfered with FOR THE GOODTIMES, which had drawn behind it at 1 on the second row.
Mr Ydgren showed a video replay of the third attempt at the start. On this occasion, BURN OFF had been close up on the gate but, approaching the start point, had drifted to be approximately 1½ lengths out of position. As a result, FOR THE GOODTIMES had been another 1½ lengths behind BURN OFF which had been unable to be driven out of the gate or “muster” any early speed, resulting in FOR THE GOODTIMES starting “some distance” behind.
Mr Ydgren said that Stewards would not have been critical of the starter, Mr Lamb, had he called a false start as FOR THE GOODTIMES had received some interference. It was common in many races for a horse or two to be out of position which may or may not impede a second row runner but not requiring a false start to be called. In the present case, the issue was the distance behind which FOR THE GOODTIMES was forced to start.
Mr Lamb said that similar situations happen quite regularly but, perhaps, not to the extent as in this case. Mr Thornley was driving his horse “conservatively” because it had already caused one false start. He demonstrated on the video replay that the situation had got worse as the field got closer to the start and the mobile barrier was increasing speed. He added that he would not have considered calling a false start in a case such as this – a starter does not in such situations, he said. It was not an uncommon situation – it was a case of lack of gate speed rather than a horse breaking, he said.
He expressed the opinion that the chances of FOR THE GOODTIMES had been only “marginally affected” by the actions of BURN OFF.
Mr Anderson said that BURN OFF should have been on the gate at the starting point and, because it was not, it had cost FOR THE GOODTIMES 1½ lengths at the start which was hard to pick up. He said that it had no bearing on the horse’s final placing (7th). It did not change the run that the mare received, Mr Anderson said.
Miss Ottley said that it was hard to say the extent to which the chances of FOR THE GOODTIMES had been affected. She said that she did not realise how far BURN OFF was behind the gate until she viewed the video replay.
Mr Ydgren said that there was an element of doubt in the minds of the Stewards whether the chances of FOR THE GOODTIMES were materially prejudiced. It would be setting a precedent for a horse to be declared a late scratching as a result of another runner being off the gate. The distance that FOR THE GOODTIMES was behind was at the higher end of the scale. This was not a case of a horse galloping and having its chances extinguished. It was forced to start further back that it should have, because of the “bad manners” of BURN OFF. The distance was of some concern, Mr Ydgren said.
Mr Anderson added that, had BURN OFF been hard up against the gate, Miss Ottley would have had the opportunity to come off its back and get on the back of the horse drawn barrier 2 on the front row. She would thereby have been 2 lengths closer.
reasonsfordecision:
For the Stewards or, in this case, the Committee to late-scratch a horse from a race, there are two elements to Rule 213 (1) (j) that require to be satisfied. Firstly, a horse needs to have been denied a fair start and, secondly, such occurrence must have materially prejudiced the chances of that horse.
We take “fair”, in this context, to mean “proper under the Rules”. Rule 857 (3) (i) requires the Starter to call a false start in a mobile start race if there is “interference” prior to the start. In the Committee’s view, “interference” should be interpreted as involving more than the consequences of being inconvenienced or impeded by another runner on the front row, unable to keep up to the barrier arm. That was what had happened in this case. Of course, each case needs to be considered on its particular facts. The Committee is satisfied that the Starter was justified in not sounding a recall in this case. Had the circumstances been such that the Starter should have sounded a recall, that would have presented a more compelling case for declaring FOR THE GOODTIMES to be a late scratching for the race as having been denied a fair start.
For those reasons, the Committee was satisfied that FOR THE GOODTIMES was not denied a fair start.
It was not, therefore, necessary to go on and consider whether its chances were materially prejudiced. “Materially” we would take to mean “to a significant degree, considerably”. Although we were not required to rule on the matter, having found that FOR THE GOODTIMES was not denied a fair start, on the evidence, we would not have found that its chances were materially prejudiced. Mr Ydgren submitted that its chances had been only “marginally affected” and Mr Anderson said that neither the run that the horse received nor its finishing position were affected. We would agree with Mr Ydgren and Mr Anderson.
Decision:
The Committee ruled FOR THE GOODTIMES to be a runner in the race.
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Request Ruling
Rules: 213(1)(j)
Informant:
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent: S J Ottley, Licensed Open Driver, D J Anderson, Licensed Public Trainer, P C Lamb, Starter
Respondent:
StipendSteward: N M Ydgren, Stipendiary Steward
raceid: 1677992ea664cec1f3c12e5c6bc2eb83
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: R9
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: 5a4f2f817c947feaf9bd04fd06cbd520
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 29/05/2014
meet_title: NZ Metro TC - 29 May 2014
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