NZ Metro TC 30 October 2010 – R 1 (heard 4 November 2010 at Rangiora)
ID: JCA19874
Hearing Type (Code):
harness-racing
Meet Title:
NZ Metro TC - 30 October 2010
Meet Chair:
none
Race Date:
2010/10/30
Race Number:
R 1
Decision:
RACEDAY JUDICIAL COMMITTEE DECISION
Informant: N R Escott, Chief Stipendiary Steward
Defendant: P R Lamb, Licensed Open Starter
Information No: 69314
Meeting: New Zealand Metropolitan Trotting Club
Date: 30 October 2010
Venue: Addington Raceway, Christchurch
Race: 1
Rule No: 213 (1) (j) & 854 (3)
Judicial Committee: R G McKenzie, Chairman – S C Ching, Committee Member
Plea: Not Admitted
FACTS:
Following the running of Race 1, “Gotta Go Cullen” at Wai-Eyre Farm Pace, an information was filed by Chief Stipendiary Steward, Mr N R Escott, against Licensed Open Starter, Mr P R Lamb, alleging a breach of Rules 213 (1) (j) and 854 (3) in that “GRETNA’S BEST (T M Williams) was denied a fair start and was subject to a late scratching by the Stipendiary Stewards. T M Williams was not in the sulky seat trying to attend to the shaft of the sulky which had ridden up the back of the horse and a false start should have been declared”.
Mr Lamb was present at the hearing of the information and he indicated that he did not admit the breach.
Rule 213 provides as follows:
(1) A Stipendiary Steward may at any time scratch from a race or declare ineligible to start in a race until a specific condition is met 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.
Rule 854 provides as follows:
(3) Every Starter and Assistant shall perform such duties and functions as are provided by these Rules.
SUBMISSION(S):
Mr Escott called Mrs K R Williams, Stipendiary Steward, who had been on duty in the patrol box at the top of the straight for Race 1 and had viewed the start from behind. She said that she could see that Mr Williams was having difficulty with GRETNA’S BEST. The horse had started to play up and had turned around, by which time the sulky shaft had gone up over the rump of the horse. A starter’s assistant went to assist Mr Williams. Mr Williams had to get out of the sulky as it had gone over on an angle. Mr Lamb then dispatched the field and a false start should have been declared. The horse was denied a fair start. It is the starter’s job to ensure that all horses are given a fair start, Mrs Williams said. She was not sure whether the starter’s assistant was calling out to Mr Lamb but he should have been. She did hear “a lot of shouting” from more than one person.
Mrs Williams showed a video replay of the race, a 2600 metres standing start. The Committee noted that GRETNA’S BEST had drawn the inside position on the second line.
The Committee was aware that GRETNA’S BEST had been declared a late scratching from the Race pursuant to Rule 213 (1) (j) referred to above.
Mr Lamb stated that he had been charged with failing to call a false start. He submitted that he was not in a position to do so. He referred to the three conditions in Rule 857 (6) which provides:
STANDING START
RECALL – REASONS FOR
The Starter shall sound a recall for the following reasons and no other:-
(a) interference prior to the barrier strand(s) being released;
(b) a barrier strand fails to release or its incorrect release interferes with a horse;
(c) a Starter’s Assistant impedes the progress of a horse.
Mr Lamb said that, when he released the field, he was unaware that any of those situations existed. He said that the horse, GRETNA’S BEST, had previously displayed poor barrier manners. Further, he said that he had attended a meeting some 5-6 weeks ago at which a discussion took place between himself, Stipendiary Stewards and horsemen. Horsemen had requested a speeding up of the standing start process by releasing the field as soon as the horses came into line to shorten the time horses were left standing at the barrier. This meant that some fractious horses would be left at the start due to their fractious manners, and they would be dealt with by the Stewards. He recalled that the Stewards had agreed with this.
He stated that, on the night, there was a strong, gusty, easterly wind. The sun was setting in the west and he was facing that. This caused some “visual impairment”. The field contained 12 non-winners – a front line of ten and two on the second row. GRETNA’S BEST had drawn one on the second row. After the field had been called into line, some horses had to be “repositioned”, leading to a slight delay. Because of the wind, he had to call to the drivers in a louder voice than usual. He had heard a request from a driver near the outside of the front row, 12-15 metres away.
GRETNA’S BEST would have been “at least 35 metres away” when in position. His practice was to “glance again” across the field as the horses addressed the tape. From his position on his stand, he only got a “partial look” at the second row horses, his view being obscured by the front row runners. He said that he could see the head and shoulders of GRETNA’S BEST and Mr Williams’ head and helmet at the rear of the horse. He was happy that he was in the correct position and ready. He heard no calls for assistance – possibly because of the wind or, possibly, because he was “overcalling”, issuing instructions to other drivers. He did not see Mr Williams get out of the sulky prior to the start.
Mr Lamb said that, at that stage of the start, he expected all drivers to be in their sulkies and ready for the start. If not, a driver needs to make him aware of a problem or risk being left behind. He believed that all drivers would accept that position. He said that his focus had to be on the entire field at that late stage.
After declaring a start, his attention was drawn to GRETNA’S BEST which had reared and fallen to the track. At the same time, he noticed Mr Williams standing on the track at the rear of the horse. That was the first time he became aware that Mr Williams had dismounted. He presumed that he had dismounted as the horse reared.
He did not sound a recall because he was not aware that any of the situations provided in Rule 857 (6) (see above) existed. He later discovered that one of his assistants had called out but he did not hear him, Mr Lamb said. His two assistants on the outside of the front row had not heard the call either, he said.
Mr Lamb submitted that his view of the start was different from any of the video angles shown. There was “no deliberate action or non-action” on his part. He did not see it as a false start situation at the time and had no authority to sound a recall. He described what happened as “an unfortunate racing incident that could be dealt with by the late scratching of the horse.
Mr Lamb acknowledged, when questioned by Mr Escott, that he had viewed the start from an elevated position approximately 12 feet above ground level. Mr Lamb denied it was an error of judgement on his part. He accepted that he and his assistants had been spoken to by Mr Escott on several occasions as to their duties and responsibilities. The assistants were his regular staff and very experienced, Mr Lamb said.
REASONS:
Mr Lamb has been charged with failing to declare a false start in Race 1. The allegation of the Stipendiary Stewards is that GRETNA’S BEST was denied a fair start in that its driver, Mr T M Williams, was not in the sulky seat but was trying to attend to the shaft of the sulky which had ridden up the back of the horse.
Mr Lamb did not admit the charge. The Committee heard evidence from Mrs K R Williams, Stipendiary Steward, and submissions from Chief Stipendiary Steward, Mr Escott. Mr Lamb made submissions on his own behalf.
The Committee viewed video replays of the start of the race and prior to the start. It was clear that, at the time Mr Lamb declared a start in the race, Mr Williams was out of the sulky and standing behind his horse on the track. Further, the shaft of the sulky could clearly be seen to be up over the rump of the horse.
GRETNA’S BEST was, clearly, denied a fair start and the Stipendiary Stewards, quite properly, exercised their discretion under Rule 231 (1) (j) in declaring it a late scratching.
Mr Lamb told the Committee that he failed to see that Mr Williams was in difficulty and he put forward a number of factors which, he submitted, led to that omission.
Mr Lamb also referred to Rule 857 (6) which stipulates three circumstances in which a starter shall sound a recall and no other:-
1. Interference prior to the barrier strand being released;
2. A barrier strand fails to release or its incorrect release interferes with a horse; and
3. A starter’s assistant impeded the progress of the horse.
Mr Lamb submitted that none of those situations applied and, because the Rule does not permit him to call a false start for any other reason, he did not call a false start.
The provisions of the Rule are clear and, on any interpretation of it, Mr Lamb was not able to call a false start on this occasion.
Mr Lamb ought not to have dispatched the field with Mr Williams out of the sulky and he admitted that he had not seen that Mr Williams was in difficulty but had not been alerted to the fact by either Mr Williams or any of his assistants. He made a mistake, as a starter will do from time to time. He was not careless or reckless – the Committee is satisfied that he was taking all reasonable care and had simply made a human error.
To deal with the specific charge, the allegation is that Mr Lamb should have declared a false start. In dealing with that charge, we are bound to have regard to the provisions of Rule 857 (6). As we have said, in strict terms of that Rule, Mr Lamb could not declare a false start in this case. For that reason, this charge is dismissed.
In dismissing the charge, the Committee wishes to record its view that Mr Lamb did err in sending the field away and that he should not have done so. He will need to take care in the future to avoid a repeat.
In dismissing this particular charge, the Committee is not saying that a race starter will not face consequences. The responsibility on a starter is great and he must take all due care to ensure that all horses are afforded a fair start.
DECISION:
The charge was dismissed.
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: 425fdd7d9f71b18fec5f8d04082cb31c
informantnumber:
horsename:
hearing_racingtype: harness-racing
startdate: 30/10/2010
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: no date provided
hearing_title: NZ Metro TC 30 October 2010 - R 1 (heard 4 November 2010 at Rangiora)
charge:
facts:
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
reasonsfordecision:
Decision:
RACEDAY JUDICIAL COMMITTEE DECISION
Informant: N R Escott, Chief Stipendiary Steward
Defendant: P R Lamb, Licensed Open Starter
Information No: 69314
Meeting: New Zealand Metropolitan Trotting Club
Date: 30 October 2010
Venue: Addington Raceway, Christchurch
Race: 1
Rule No: 213 (1) (j) & 854 (3)
Judicial Committee: R G McKenzie, Chairman – S C Ching, Committee Member
Plea: Not Admitted
FACTS:
Following the running of Race 1, “Gotta Go Cullen” at Wai-Eyre Farm Pace, an information was filed by Chief Stipendiary Steward, Mr N R Escott, against Licensed Open Starter, Mr P R Lamb, alleging a breach of Rules 213 (1) (j) and 854 (3) in that “GRETNA’S BEST (T M Williams) was denied a fair start and was subject to a late scratching by the Stipendiary Stewards. T M Williams was not in the sulky seat trying to attend to the shaft of the sulky which had ridden up the back of the horse and a false start should have been declared”.
Mr Lamb was present at the hearing of the information and he indicated that he did not admit the breach.
Rule 213 provides as follows:
(1) A Stipendiary Steward may at any time scratch from a race or declare ineligible to start in a race until a specific condition is met 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.
Rule 854 provides as follows:
(3) Every Starter and Assistant shall perform such duties and functions as are provided by these Rules.
SUBMISSION(S):
Mr Escott called Mrs K R Williams, Stipendiary Steward, who had been on duty in the patrol box at the top of the straight for Race 1 and had viewed the start from behind. She said that she could see that Mr Williams was having difficulty with GRETNA’S BEST. The horse had started to play up and had turned around, by which time the sulky shaft had gone up over the rump of the horse. A starter’s assistant went to assist Mr Williams. Mr Williams had to get out of the sulky as it had gone over on an angle. Mr Lamb then dispatched the field and a false start should have been declared. The horse was denied a fair start. It is the starter’s job to ensure that all horses are given a fair start, Mrs Williams said. She was not sure whether the starter’s assistant was calling out to Mr Lamb but he should have been. She did hear “a lot of shouting” from more than one person.
Mrs Williams showed a video replay of the race, a 2600 metres standing start. The Committee noted that GRETNA’S BEST had drawn the inside position on the second line.
The Committee was aware that GRETNA’S BEST had been declared a late scratching from the Race pursuant to Rule 213 (1) (j) referred to above.
Mr Lamb stated that he had been charged with failing to call a false start. He submitted that he was not in a position to do so. He referred to the three conditions in Rule 857 (6) which provides:
STANDING START
RECALL – REASONS FOR
The Starter shall sound a recall for the following reasons and no other:-
(a) interference prior to the barrier strand(s) being released;
(b) a barrier strand fails to release or its incorrect release interferes with a horse;
(c) a Starter’s Assistant impedes the progress of a horse.
Mr Lamb said that, when he released the field, he was unaware that any of those situations existed. He said that the horse, GRETNA’S BEST, had previously displayed poor barrier manners. Further, he said that he had attended a meeting some 5-6 weeks ago at which a discussion took place between himself, Stipendiary Stewards and horsemen. Horsemen had requested a speeding up of the standing start process by releasing the field as soon as the horses came into line to shorten the time horses were left standing at the barrier. This meant that some fractious horses would be left at the start due to their fractious manners, and they would be dealt with by the Stewards. He recalled that the Stewards had agreed with this.
He stated that, on the night, there was a strong, gusty, easterly wind. The sun was setting in the west and he was facing that. This caused some “visual impairment”. The field contained 12 non-winners – a front line of ten and two on the second row. GRETNA’S BEST had drawn one on the second row. After the field had been called into line, some horses had to be “repositioned”, leading to a slight delay. Because of the wind, he had to call to the drivers in a louder voice than usual. He had heard a request from a driver near the outside of the front row, 12-15 metres away.
GRETNA’S BEST would have been “at least 35 metres away” when in position. His practice was to “glance again” across the field as the horses addressed the tape. From his position on his stand, he only got a “partial look” at the second row horses, his view being obscured by the front row runners. He said that he could see the head and shoulders of GRETNA’S BEST and Mr Williams’ head and helmet at the rear of the horse. He was happy that he was in the correct position and ready. He heard no calls for assistance – possibly because of the wind or, possibly, because he was “overcalling”, issuing instructions to other drivers. He did not see Mr Williams get out of the sulky prior to the start.
Mr Lamb said that, at that stage of the start, he expected all drivers to be in their sulkies and ready for the start. If not, a driver needs to make him aware of a problem or risk being left behind. He believed that all drivers would accept that position. He said that his focus had to be on the entire field at that late stage.
After declaring a start, his attention was drawn to GRETNA’S BEST which had reared and fallen to the track. At the same time, he noticed Mr Williams standing on the track at the rear of the horse. That was the first time he became aware that Mr Williams had dismounted. He presumed that he had dismounted as the horse reared.
He did not sound a recall because he was not aware that any of the situations provided in Rule 857 (6) (see above) existed. He later discovered that one of his assistants had called out but he did not hear him, Mr Lamb said. His two assistants on the outside of the front row had not heard the call either, he said.
Mr Lamb submitted that his view of the start was different from any of the video angles shown. There was “no deliberate action or non-action” on his part. He did not see it as a false start situation at the time and had no authority to sound a recall. He described what happened as “an unfortunate racing incident that could be dealt with by the late scratching of the horse.
Mr Lamb acknowledged, when questioned by Mr Escott, that he had viewed the start from an elevated position approximately 12 feet above ground level. Mr Lamb denied it was an error of judgement on his part. He accepted that he and his assistants had been spoken to by Mr Escott on several occasions as to their duties and responsibilities. The assistants were his regular staff and very experienced, Mr Lamb said.
REASONS:
Mr Lamb has been charged with failing to declare a false start in Race 1. The allegation of the Stipendiary Stewards is that GRETNA’S BEST was denied a fair start in that its driver, Mr T M Williams, was not in the sulky seat but was trying to attend to the shaft of the sulky which had ridden up the back of the horse.
Mr Lamb did not admit the charge. The Committee heard evidence from Mrs K R Williams, Stipendiary Steward, and submissions from Chief Stipendiary Steward, Mr Escott. Mr Lamb made submissions on his own behalf.
The Committee viewed video replays of the start of the race and prior to the start. It was clear that, at the time Mr Lamb declared a start in the race, Mr Williams was out of the sulky and standing behind his horse on the track. Further, the shaft of the sulky could clearly be seen to be up over the rump of the horse.
GRETNA’S BEST was, clearly, denied a fair start and the Stipendiary Stewards, quite properly, exercised their discretion under Rule 231 (1) (j) in declaring it a late scratching.
Mr Lamb told the Committee that he failed to see that Mr Williams was in difficulty and he put forward a number of factors which, he submitted, led to that omission.
Mr Lamb also referred to Rule 857 (6) which stipulates three circumstances in which a starter shall sound a recall and no other:-
1. Interference prior to the barrier strand being released;
2. A barrier strand fails to release or its incorrect release interferes with a horse; and
3. A starter’s assistant impeded the progress of the horse.
Mr Lamb submitted that none of those situations applied and, because the Rule does not permit him to call a false start for any other reason, he did not call a false start.
The provisions of the Rule are clear and, on any interpretation of it, Mr Lamb was not able to call a false start on this occasion.
Mr Lamb ought not to have dispatched the field with Mr Williams out of the sulky and he admitted that he had not seen that Mr Williams was in difficulty but had not been alerted to the fact by either Mr Williams or any of his assistants. He made a mistake, as a starter will do from time to time. He was not careless or reckless – the Committee is satisfied that he was taking all reasonable care and had simply made a human error.
To deal with the specific charge, the allegation is that Mr Lamb should have declared a false start. In dealing with that charge, we are bound to have regard to the provisions of Rule 857 (6). As we have said, in strict terms of that Rule, Mr Lamb could not declare a false start in this case. For that reason, this charge is dismissed.
In dismissing the charge, the Committee wishes to record its view that Mr Lamb did err in sending the field away and that he should not have done so. He will need to take care in the future to avoid a repeat.
In dismissing this particular charge, the Committee is not saying that a race starter will not face consequences. The responsibility on a starter is great and he must take all due care to ensure that all horses are afforded a fair start.
DECISION:
The charge was dismissed.
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Old Hearing
Rules: 213(1)(j) & 854(3)
Informant:
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: 96dbf66fd0615e337a7d13718438ce55
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: 6a1639b5db7d63da721fe1381bca4ba2
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 30/10/2010
meet_title: NZ Metro TC - 30 October 2010
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: nz-metro-tc
meet_racingtype: harness-racing
meet_chair: none
meet_pm1: none
meet_pm2: none
name: NZ Metro TC