NZ Metropolitan TC 4 August 2017 – R 1 – Chair, Mr S Ching
ID: JCA15569
Meet Title:
NZ Metro TC - 4 August 2017
Meet Chair:
SChing
Meet Committee Member 1:
GClapp
Race Date:
2017/08/04
Race Number:
R 1
Decision:
As Mr Stratford had admitted this breach of the Rules it was found to be proved in accordance with Rule 1111(1)(d).
Penalty:
Accordingly, Mr Stratford was fined the sum of $450.
Facts:
Following the running of Race 1, Bishopdale/Bush Inn TAB’s & Tavern Harewood (Amateur Drivers) Mobile Pace, an Information was filed by Stipendiary Steward, Mr S Renault against Advanced Amateur Horseman, Mr M Stratford, alleging a breach of Rule 869(2)(a) in that he used his whip in a manner Stewards deemed excessive.
Rule 869(2)(a) reads as follows:
“(2) No horseman shall during any race:-
(a) Use his whip in an unnecessary, excessive or improper manner.”
Use of the Whip Guidelines provides:
-The whip shall not be used more than 10 times in the last 400m of a race, otherwise this will be deemed excessive use pursuant to these guidelines.
Mr Stratford had endorsed the information that the breach was admitted which he confirmed at the hearing. He also confirmed he understood the rule he was being charged with. Mr Stratford was assisted at the hearing by Open Horseman, Mr J Cox.
Mr Renault gave evidence and showed video replays of the run home. He pointed out Mr Stratford driving LIVING LEGEND positioned in the trail as the field entered the final straight inside the 400m, with LIVING LEGEND moving down into the passing lane when it became available. Mr Renault showed Mr Stratford draw the whip and use it free of the rein on 19 occasions in a fore hand manner over the final stages. Mr Renault said that Mr Stratford stopped using the whip briefly when activating the gear on the horse part way in the straight.
He stated that the breach was high end due to the number of strikes being nearly twice the limit with the force of the strikes being low-range.
Mr Stratford did not dispute the number of strikes. He said he stopped using the whip in the middle to activate the removable ear plugs. He also said he thought he had the reins in each hand but was obviously mistaken after viewing the replays. He said that they were not forceful strikes and LIVING LEGEND found a little more every time he hit him. Mr Stratford did concede that as it was several years since his last win he had got carried away and got over enthusiastic over the final stages.
Mr Cox agreed with the evidence presented by Mr Renault and that Mr Stratford had got carried away with the event. He also stated that the strikes were not forceful.
Submissions for Penalty:
Mr Renault stated that Mr Stratford had 10 drives last season and 3 drives the season prior. Mr Renault stated that Mr Stratford had a clear penalty record and had readily admitted the breach. He said the number of strikes were high end which was an aggravating factor but that the force was low level. Mr Renault said the JCA Penalty Guide recommends a starting point of a $500 fine or a 10-drive suspension for a breach of this rule, and submitted that after taking all factors into consideration, a fine of no less than $400 fine be considered as penalty in this case.
Mr Stratford stated that consideration should be given to the factor that had he not driven the horse out as strongly with the whip, it may not have won. He said the margin was only a neck and submitted that he had he not used the whip as much, he may only have finished 2nd or 3rd place.
Reasons for Penalty:
The JCA Penalty Guide recommends a starting point of a $500 fine or a 10-drive suspension for a mid-range breach of this rule. After consideration, we determined that a fine was an appropriate penalty. The Committee assessed this breach as at a high-level due to the number of strikes and therefore adopted $600 as a starting point. There were no aggravating factors to consider so therefore no uplift in penalty was deemed necessary. In mitigation, we were able to afford Mr Stratford a combined discount for his admission of the breach and his good record. This we set at $150. We therefore determined that a $450 fine was an appropriate penalty in this case.
In reference to Mr Stratford’s submission that had he not used the whip as much over the final stages of the race, he may not have won the race. This Committee find this is not a defence to excessive use of the whip and was further supported in this finding by decision, NZTR v Enright, in 1996. This decision was further upheld at a subsequent appeal decision. In this decision, it was quoted;
“it is not an excuse for a breach of the rules for one to say it was necessary to drive in that particular way in order to win a race. If the race cannot be won within the application of the rules of racing which govern the manner in which the race is to be won then so be it, it cannot win”.
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: b50e3da76dbab1975ac102e260ade2d4
informantnumber: A5525
horsename:
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge: Excessive use of th whip
plea: admitted
penaltyrequired: 1
decisiondate: 10/08/2017
hearing_title: NZ Metropolitan TC 4 August 2017 - R 1 - Chair, Mr S Ching
charge:
facts:
Following the running of Race 1, Bishopdale/Bush Inn TAB’s & Tavern Harewood (Amateur Drivers) Mobile Pace, an Information was filed by Stipendiary Steward, Mr S Renault against Advanced Amateur Horseman, Mr M Stratford, alleging a breach of Rule 869(2)(a) in that he used his whip in a manner Stewards deemed excessive.
Rule 869(2)(a) reads as follows:
“(2) No horseman shall during any race:-
(a) Use his whip in an unnecessary, excessive or improper manner.”
Use of the Whip Guidelines provides:
-The whip shall not be used more than 10 times in the last 400m of a race, otherwise this will be deemed excessive use pursuant to these guidelines.
Mr Stratford had endorsed the information that the breach was admitted which he confirmed at the hearing. He also confirmed he understood the rule he was being charged with. Mr Stratford was assisted at the hearing by Open Horseman, Mr J Cox.
Mr Renault gave evidence and showed video replays of the run home. He pointed out Mr Stratford driving LIVING LEGEND positioned in the trail as the field entered the final straight inside the 400m, with LIVING LEGEND moving down into the passing lane when it became available. Mr Renault showed Mr Stratford draw the whip and use it free of the rein on 19 occasions in a fore hand manner over the final stages. Mr Renault said that Mr Stratford stopped using the whip briefly when activating the gear on the horse part way in the straight.
He stated that the breach was high end due to the number of strikes being nearly twice the limit with the force of the strikes being low-range.
Mr Stratford did not dispute the number of strikes. He said he stopped using the whip in the middle to activate the removable ear plugs. He also said he thought he had the reins in each hand but was obviously mistaken after viewing the replays. He said that they were not forceful strikes and LIVING LEGEND found a little more every time he hit him. Mr Stratford did concede that as it was several years since his last win he had got carried away and got over enthusiastic over the final stages.
Mr Cox agreed with the evidence presented by Mr Renault and that Mr Stratford had got carried away with the event. He also stated that the strikes were not forceful.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
reasonsfordecision:
Decision:
As Mr Stratford had admitted this breach of the Rules it was found to be proved in accordance with Rule 1111(1)(d).
sumissionsforpenalty:
Mr Renault stated that Mr Stratford had 10 drives last season and 3 drives the season prior. Mr Renault stated that Mr Stratford had a clear penalty record and had readily admitted the breach. He said the number of strikes were high end which was an aggravating factor but that the force was low level. Mr Renault said the JCA Penalty Guide recommends a starting point of a $500 fine or a 10-drive suspension for a breach of this rule, and submitted that after taking all factors into consideration, a fine of no less than $400 fine be considered as penalty in this case.
Mr Stratford stated that consideration should be given to the factor that had he not driven the horse out as strongly with the whip, it may not have won. He said the margin was only a neck and submitted that he had he not used the whip as much, he may only have finished 2nd or 3rd place.
reasonsforpenalty:
The JCA Penalty Guide recommends a starting point of a $500 fine or a 10-drive suspension for a mid-range breach of this rule. After consideration, we determined that a fine was an appropriate penalty. The Committee assessed this breach as at a high-level due to the number of strikes and therefore adopted $600 as a starting point. There were no aggravating factors to consider so therefore no uplift in penalty was deemed necessary. In mitigation, we were able to afford Mr Stratford a combined discount for his admission of the breach and his good record. This we set at $150. We therefore determined that a $450 fine was an appropriate penalty in this case.
In reference to Mr Stratford’s submission that had he not used the whip as much over the final stages of the race, he may not have won the race. This Committee find this is not a defence to excessive use of the whip and was further supported in this finding by decision, NZTR v Enright, in 1996. This decision was further upheld at a subsequent appeal decision. In this decision, it was quoted;
“it is not an excuse for a breach of the rules for one to say it was necessary to drive in that particular way in order to win a race. If the race cannot be won within the application of the rules of racing which govern the manner in which the race is to be won then so be it, it cannot win”.
penalty:
Accordingly, Mr Stratford was fined the sum of $450.
hearing_type: Hearing
Rules: 869(2)(a)
Informant: Mr S Renault - Stipendiary Steward
JockeysandTrainer: Mr M Stratford - Advanced Amateur Horseman
Otherperson: Mr J Cox - Open Horseman assisting Mr Stratford
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: e0725f4a6d5f33e591fcce58dafe7c91
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: fee09f452ab61cc360eb8563a6ab98e1
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 04/08/2017
meet_title: NZ Metro TC - 4 August 2017
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: nz-metro-tc
meet_racingtype: harness-racing
meet_chair: SChing
meet_pm1: GClapp
meet_pm2: none
name: NZ Metro TC