NZGRA Request for Review C Roberts v RIU – Decision dated 13 November 2018 – Chair, Prof G Hall
ID: JCA14008
Decision:
BEFORE A JUDICIAL COMMITTEE
OF THE JCA
IN THE MATTER of the Rules of New Zealand Greyhound Racing Association (Incorporated)
BETWEEN
CRAIG ROBERTS, Licensed Trainer
Applicant
AND-RACING INTEGRITY UNIT (RIU)
Respondent
Judicial Committee: --Prof G Hall, Chairman
Mr S Ching, Member
Appearing:--The Applicant in person
Mr S Wallis, Stipendiary Steward, for the Respondent
DECISION OF THE JUDICIAL COMMITTEE
[1]-Mr Roberts has applied for a review of the decision from Race 8 at a race meeting of the Christchurch Greyhound Racing Club held on Tuesday, 23 October 2018 at Addington where DYNA LENNY was stood down for 3 months (2nd offence) for failing to pursue the lure. This is an alleged breach of r 55.1(b) of the Greyhound Racing New Zealand Rules of Racing.
[2]-Rule 55.1 provides:
Where a Greyhound:
(b) Fails to pursue the Lure in a Race the Stewards may impose the following periods of suspension:
(c) in the case of a first offence, twenty-eight (28) days and until the completion of a Satisfactory Trial; or
(d) in the case of a second offence under Rule 55.1 (which for clarity need not be the same offence as the first offence under that subsection), three (3) months and until the completion of a Satisfactory Trial….
[3]-A teleconference was held on 30 October last during which Mr Roberts stated that he did not dispute that DYNA LENNY had failed to pursue the lure but he questioned whether the stand down under r 55.1 should have been 28 days rather than three months.
[4]-Both parties referred the Committee to r 55.7. This rule provides:
Where the Certificate of Registration of a Greyhound contains an endorsement under Rule 55.6 for Marring or failing to pursue the Lure and that Greyhound competes in ten (10) Races, without again having its Certificate of Registration endorsed for another offence under Rule 55.1, the Chief Executive or his/her appointed nominee may, upon application by the Owner or Trainer of the Greyhound, cancel the endorsement. Only one (1) application may be made pursuant to this Rule in respect of a Greyhound.
[5]-Mr Roberts alleged that the application of r 55.7 was inconsistent throughout the country and referred us to the BLAZIN’ AUDREY case. Mr Wallis did not believe this case was relevant to the one that was before this Committee.
[6]-It was evident that the Committee would benefit from submissions directed at the wording and scope of r 55.7 and related provisions, and the manner in which these had been applied, and we required the parties to file written submissions directed to these issues.
Applicant’s submissions
[7]-Mr Roberts has accepted that it is not in dispute that this was DYNA LENNY's second offence. However, he believed the appropriate penalty should be 28 days. This was allowed for under r 55.7, in that the dog had had 10 clear runs without any further endorsement on its Certificate of Registration prior to the breach in question.
[8]-Mr Roberts emphasised that the rule states that upon application from the owner or trainer after said 10 clear runs, the original endorsement can be cancelled. The rule, he noted, “does not stipulate where, when or how the application has to take place. To date this has been done in varying ways.”
[9]-Mr Roberts stated that in some instances the Stipendiary Steward has been aware of the 10 clear runs before the trainer has been, and the Steward has then notified them. On the night in question (23 October 2018) and subsequent to the breach, Mr Roberts’ kennel foreman was informed by the Stipendiary Steward of two other dogs in the Roberts’ kennels that had completed 10 clear runs. Mr Roberts said that “this shows the casual nature of the application of the rule.”
[10]-Mr Roberts believed there was a need for discussions directed at the wording and related provisions of this rule. As the rule stands now, it allows for ambiguity and confusion. He said, “the “looseness of the rule at present absolutely allows for my appeal to be upheld.”
[11]-The BLAZIN' AUDREY case was pertinent, Mr Roberts believed. There had been a breach of r 55.1 and the dog was cleared in retrospect. It would therefore be consistent, he said, to reduce the penalty for DYNA LENNY to 28 days, and he asked this Committee to do so.
[12]-Mr Roberts concluded his submission by stating that “consistency was paramount in judicial matters” and it was “crucial that all trainers be treated equally.”
Respondent’s submissions
[13]-DYNA LENNY came to New Zealand with a stand down for marring at The Meadows raceway (Victoria) on 11 April 2018. The dog completed the required satisfactory trial at Addington raceway (Christchurch) when trained by Mr Roberts on 3 July 2018.
[14]-DYNA LENNY then went on to have 10 clear races, with the 10th start being on 16 October 2018. After this race there was no application made by Mr Roberts, DYNA LENNY's owner or a kennel representative on behalf of Mr Roberts, to have the endorsement for marring at The Meadows cancelled.
[15]-DYNA LENNY had its 11th and most recent start, after being stood down for marring, on 23 October 2018 at the Christchurch GRC's meeting. Again, prior to this race, no application was made by Mr Roberts, DYNA LENNY's owner or a kennel representative on behalf of Mr Roberts, to have the endorsement for marring at The Meadows cancelled.
[16]-Following the race the Stewards deemed the greyhound to be guilty of GRNZ's r 55.1(b). Mr Roberts does not dispute that the greyhound has failed to pursue the lure.
[17]-Rule 55.8 provides:
Where the endorsement is cancelled pursuant to r 55.7 the Chief Executive or his/her appointed nominee shall, upon the Certificate of Registration of the Greyhound concerned being produced, cause "Cancelled" to be stamped across the endorsement.
[18]-Due to no application being made, DYNA LENNY's Certificate of Registration had not had the endorsement for the prior offence "Cancelled". This, Mr Wallis submitted, meant that it was DYNA LENNY's second offence under r 55.1.
[19]-Rule 55.9 provides:
Where the Chief Executive or his/her appointed nominee causes "Cancelled" to be stamped over an endorsement pursuant to r 55.8 then that one cancelled endorsement shall not be treated as a prior offence for the purpose of determining the length of the period of Suspension to be imposed on a subsequent offence under Rule 55.1.
[20]-Mr Wallis submitted that r 55.9 was important in relation to this review. It infers that if the prior endorsement is not "Cancelled", the length of suspension must be calculated as a second or third offence, as the case may be. So, if a trainer has not applied for the first endorsement to be "Cancelled" after 10 clear races, as in the case with DYNA LENNY, and the greyhound re-offends, the trainer can then, after 10 clear races from its second offence, apply to have that one (ie the second offence) "Cancelled".
[21]-Mr Wallis believed “it has always been understood by trainers that the application to have an endorsement "Cancelled" be made as quickly as possible after 10 clear runs to avoid the chance of another offence adding to the suspension.” He noted that at the race meeting preceding 23 October, Mr Roberts' kennel representative, Mr B Blackburn, had made application for the greyhounds BERTIE ALLEN and DYNA WALTER to have their offences under r 55.1 "Cancelled". This was the greyhounds’ 12th and 15th clear races, respectively.
[22]-Mr Wallis replied to Mr Roberts’ submission concerning BLAZIN' AUDREY. He referred to the following extract from the Stewards’ report from the Wanganui GRC's meeting on 14 September 2018.
Under the auspices of r 11.1b the Stewards reviewed the racing manners of BLAZIN' AUDREY during the running of race 10 at the Wanganui GRC meeting on the 7-9-2018. BLAZIN' AUDREY marred the running of another runner on the home turn and has now been stood down rule (55.1a) marring with a 28 day stand down and to the completion of a satisfactory trial. BLAZIN' AUDREY has had a previous stand down for marring in Australia on the 22-6-2017 and since completing a Satisfactory trial had raced 23 times in Australia and New Zealand without transgressing the rules. The representative for the Cole kennels made submissions to the Stewards regarding the endorsement in Australia - in that the Kennels were not aware of the stand down when the dog was imported as no information was forwarded to them or the Stewards. The Stewards have accepted the submission that had the kennels been made aware of the stand down they would have applied under r 55.7 to have the endorsement cancelled on the completion of 10 clear runs- which would have cleared the first endorsement off the dog’s record. The Stewards after making enquiries are satisfied that the kennels have applied in recent times for cancellation of endorsements and the stand down now imposed is treated as a 1st offence.
[23]-Mr Wallis did not believe the BLAZIN' AUDREY case was relevant to this review. He was of the view that a case of interest recently in Australia involved the dog JESAULENKO. It was originally stood down for three months however an appeal found that the trainer had requested the cancellation be noted before the dog re-offended. GRV had made an error by not cancelling the first endorsement. However, if the trainer had not been able to prove that she had made the application, the three-month suspension would have been correctly imposed.
[24]-Mr Wallis summarised the respondent’s case by stating that Mr Roberts knew that he has to apply to have any endorsement under r 55.1 "Cancelled" after 10 clear races. In the case of DYNA LENNY he had not done so and unfortunately for Mr Roberts the greyhound has re-offended prior to him making such application. In this case the Stewards, as per the Rules, applied the correct stand down to DYNA LENNY of three months and pending a satisfactory trial for a second breach of r 55.1.
Decision
[25]-The Rules, as worded, (and, in particular r 55.7) clearly place the onus on trainers to keep a record of the number of starts a greyhound has had subsequent to a stand down for marring or failing to pursue the lure. After 10 clear starts, and upon application by the owner, the trainer or a kennel representative, a dog’s record is stamped “Cancelled” (r 55.8). Significantly, this returning of the calculation for a dog back to where it was prior to this application, can occur only once (r 55.9). Thus it is possible that a trainer may not wish to avail him or herself of this concession immediately upon a dog reaching the figure of 10 clear races for the first time.
[26]-We note Mr Wallis’ submission that the BLAZIN' AUDREY case involved a misunderstanding concerning whether the dog had been stood down in Australia. The Stewards’ ruling in that case appears to reflect the fact that the Cole kennel was not aware of the stand down. There has been no similar misunderstanding in this case. We thus do not find the BLAZIN' AUDREY case to be of assistance in determining the issue before us.
[27]-Again, we do not find the circumstances in the JESAULENKO case to be similar to those before us, and we do not further consider that case.
[28]-Mr Roberts is concerned as to what he perceives to be an inconsistent application of r 55 in this country. We do not have sufficient information before us to determine whether or not this is the case and are not able to comment further.
[29]-Whether there should be a mechanism to alert trainers to the fact that a dog’s 10th start is pending is not a matter that need concern this Committee. If Mr Roberts feels strongly about this issue, and we believe he does, then this is an issue that a trainers’ association, or the like, can take up with GRNZ.
[30]-The Rules require “the Owner or Trainer of the Greyhound” to apply for a dog’s stand down to be lifted upon the completion of 10 clear races. The Chief Executive or his/her appointed nominee may then cancel the endorsement in accordance with the provisions of r 55.8. In the case of DYNA LENNY, for whatever reason, this had not been done. Thus the imposition of a three month stand down together with a satisfactory trial is required by r 55.1(d).
[31]-The application for a review of the stand down of DYNA LENNY is thus not successful. The three month stand down imposed on 23 October 2018 remains in force.
Dated at Dunedin this 13th day of November 2018.
Geoff Hall, Chairman
Appeal Decision: NO LINKED APPEAL DECISION
Decision Date: 13/11/2018
Publish Date: 13/11/2018
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: 8b36a0f9bf4ffff9b7346f69bbb26d05
informantnumber:
horsename:
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: 13/11/2018
hearing_title: NZGRA Request for Review C Roberts v RIU - Decision dated 13 November 2018 - Chair, Prof G Hall
charge:
facts:
appealdecision: NO LINKED APPEAL DECISION
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
reasonsfordecision:
Decision:
BEFORE A JUDICIAL COMMITTEE
OF THE JCA
IN THE MATTER of the Rules of New Zealand Greyhound Racing Association (Incorporated)
BETWEEN
CRAIG ROBERTS, Licensed Trainer
Applicant
AND-RACING INTEGRITY UNIT (RIU)
Respondent
Judicial Committee: --Prof G Hall, Chairman
Mr S Ching, Member
Appearing:--The Applicant in person
Mr S Wallis, Stipendiary Steward, for the Respondent
DECISION OF THE JUDICIAL COMMITTEE
[1]-Mr Roberts has applied for a review of the decision from Race 8 at a race meeting of the Christchurch Greyhound Racing Club held on Tuesday, 23 October 2018 at Addington where DYNA LENNY was stood down for 3 months (2nd offence) for failing to pursue the lure. This is an alleged breach of r 55.1(b) of the Greyhound Racing New Zealand Rules of Racing.
[2]-Rule 55.1 provides:
Where a Greyhound:
(b) Fails to pursue the Lure in a Race the Stewards may impose the following periods of suspension:
(c) in the case of a first offence, twenty-eight (28) days and until the completion of a Satisfactory Trial; or
(d) in the case of a second offence under Rule 55.1 (which for clarity need not be the same offence as the first offence under that subsection), three (3) months and until the completion of a Satisfactory Trial….
[3]-A teleconference was held on 30 October last during which Mr Roberts stated that he did not dispute that DYNA LENNY had failed to pursue the lure but he questioned whether the stand down under r 55.1 should have been 28 days rather than three months.
[4]-Both parties referred the Committee to r 55.7. This rule provides:
Where the Certificate of Registration of a Greyhound contains an endorsement under Rule 55.6 for Marring or failing to pursue the Lure and that Greyhound competes in ten (10) Races, without again having its Certificate of Registration endorsed for another offence under Rule 55.1, the Chief Executive or his/her appointed nominee may, upon application by the Owner or Trainer of the Greyhound, cancel the endorsement. Only one (1) application may be made pursuant to this Rule in respect of a Greyhound.
[5]-Mr Roberts alleged that the application of r 55.7 was inconsistent throughout the country and referred us to the BLAZIN’ AUDREY case. Mr Wallis did not believe this case was relevant to the one that was before this Committee.
[6]-It was evident that the Committee would benefit from submissions directed at the wording and scope of r 55.7 and related provisions, and the manner in which these had been applied, and we required the parties to file written submissions directed to these issues.
Applicant’s submissions
[7]-Mr Roberts has accepted that it is not in dispute that this was DYNA LENNY's second offence. However, he believed the appropriate penalty should be 28 days. This was allowed for under r 55.7, in that the dog had had 10 clear runs without any further endorsement on its Certificate of Registration prior to the breach in question.
[8]-Mr Roberts emphasised that the rule states that upon application from the owner or trainer after said 10 clear runs, the original endorsement can be cancelled. The rule, he noted, “does not stipulate where, when or how the application has to take place. To date this has been done in varying ways.”
[9]-Mr Roberts stated that in some instances the Stipendiary Steward has been aware of the 10 clear runs before the trainer has been, and the Steward has then notified them. On the night in question (23 October 2018) and subsequent to the breach, Mr Roberts’ kennel foreman was informed by the Stipendiary Steward of two other dogs in the Roberts’ kennels that had completed 10 clear runs. Mr Roberts said that “this shows the casual nature of the application of the rule.”
[10]-Mr Roberts believed there was a need for discussions directed at the wording and related provisions of this rule. As the rule stands now, it allows for ambiguity and confusion. He said, “the “looseness of the rule at present absolutely allows for my appeal to be upheld.”
[11]-The BLAZIN' AUDREY case was pertinent, Mr Roberts believed. There had been a breach of r 55.1 and the dog was cleared in retrospect. It would therefore be consistent, he said, to reduce the penalty for DYNA LENNY to 28 days, and he asked this Committee to do so.
[12]-Mr Roberts concluded his submission by stating that “consistency was paramount in judicial matters” and it was “crucial that all trainers be treated equally.”
Respondent’s submissions
[13]-DYNA LENNY came to New Zealand with a stand down for marring at The Meadows raceway (Victoria) on 11 April 2018. The dog completed the required satisfactory trial at Addington raceway (Christchurch) when trained by Mr Roberts on 3 July 2018.
[14]-DYNA LENNY then went on to have 10 clear races, with the 10th start being on 16 October 2018. After this race there was no application made by Mr Roberts, DYNA LENNY's owner or a kennel representative on behalf of Mr Roberts, to have the endorsement for marring at The Meadows cancelled.
[15]-DYNA LENNY had its 11th and most recent start, after being stood down for marring, on 23 October 2018 at the Christchurch GRC's meeting. Again, prior to this race, no application was made by Mr Roberts, DYNA LENNY's owner or a kennel representative on behalf of Mr Roberts, to have the endorsement for marring at The Meadows cancelled.
[16]-Following the race the Stewards deemed the greyhound to be guilty of GRNZ's r 55.1(b). Mr Roberts does not dispute that the greyhound has failed to pursue the lure.
[17]-Rule 55.8 provides:
Where the endorsement is cancelled pursuant to r 55.7 the Chief Executive or his/her appointed nominee shall, upon the Certificate of Registration of the Greyhound concerned being produced, cause "Cancelled" to be stamped across the endorsement.
[18]-Due to no application being made, DYNA LENNY's Certificate of Registration had not had the endorsement for the prior offence "Cancelled". This, Mr Wallis submitted, meant that it was DYNA LENNY's second offence under r 55.1.
[19]-Rule 55.9 provides:
Where the Chief Executive or his/her appointed nominee causes "Cancelled" to be stamped over an endorsement pursuant to r 55.8 then that one cancelled endorsement shall not be treated as a prior offence for the purpose of determining the length of the period of Suspension to be imposed on a subsequent offence under Rule 55.1.
[20]-Mr Wallis submitted that r 55.9 was important in relation to this review. It infers that if the prior endorsement is not "Cancelled", the length of suspension must be calculated as a second or third offence, as the case may be. So, if a trainer has not applied for the first endorsement to be "Cancelled" after 10 clear races, as in the case with DYNA LENNY, and the greyhound re-offends, the trainer can then, after 10 clear races from its second offence, apply to have that one (ie the second offence) "Cancelled".
[21]-Mr Wallis believed “it has always been understood by trainers that the application to have an endorsement "Cancelled" be made as quickly as possible after 10 clear runs to avoid the chance of another offence adding to the suspension.” He noted that at the race meeting preceding 23 October, Mr Roberts' kennel representative, Mr B Blackburn, had made application for the greyhounds BERTIE ALLEN and DYNA WALTER to have their offences under r 55.1 "Cancelled". This was the greyhounds’ 12th and 15th clear races, respectively.
[22]-Mr Wallis replied to Mr Roberts’ submission concerning BLAZIN' AUDREY. He referred to the following extract from the Stewards’ report from the Wanganui GRC's meeting on 14 September 2018.
Under the auspices of r 11.1b the Stewards reviewed the racing manners of BLAZIN' AUDREY during the running of race 10 at the Wanganui GRC meeting on the 7-9-2018. BLAZIN' AUDREY marred the running of another runner on the home turn and has now been stood down rule (55.1a) marring with a 28 day stand down and to the completion of a satisfactory trial. BLAZIN' AUDREY has had a previous stand down for marring in Australia on the 22-6-2017 and since completing a Satisfactory trial had raced 23 times in Australia and New Zealand without transgressing the rules. The representative for the Cole kennels made submissions to the Stewards regarding the endorsement in Australia - in that the Kennels were not aware of the stand down when the dog was imported as no information was forwarded to them or the Stewards. The Stewards have accepted the submission that had the kennels been made aware of the stand down they would have applied under r 55.7 to have the endorsement cancelled on the completion of 10 clear runs- which would have cleared the first endorsement off the dog’s record. The Stewards after making enquiries are satisfied that the kennels have applied in recent times for cancellation of endorsements and the stand down now imposed is treated as a 1st offence.
[23]-Mr Wallis did not believe the BLAZIN' AUDREY case was relevant to this review. He was of the view that a case of interest recently in Australia involved the dog JESAULENKO. It was originally stood down for three months however an appeal found that the trainer had requested the cancellation be noted before the dog re-offended. GRV had made an error by not cancelling the first endorsement. However, if the trainer had not been able to prove that she had made the application, the three-month suspension would have been correctly imposed.
[24]-Mr Wallis summarised the respondent’s case by stating that Mr Roberts knew that he has to apply to have any endorsement under r 55.1 "Cancelled" after 10 clear races. In the case of DYNA LENNY he had not done so and unfortunately for Mr Roberts the greyhound has re-offended prior to him making such application. In this case the Stewards, as per the Rules, applied the correct stand down to DYNA LENNY of three months and pending a satisfactory trial for a second breach of r 55.1.
Decision
[25]-The Rules, as worded, (and, in particular r 55.7) clearly place the onus on trainers to keep a record of the number of starts a greyhound has had subsequent to a stand down for marring or failing to pursue the lure. After 10 clear starts, and upon application by the owner, the trainer or a kennel representative, a dog’s record is stamped “Cancelled” (r 55.8). Significantly, this returning of the calculation for a dog back to where it was prior to this application, can occur only once (r 55.9). Thus it is possible that a trainer may not wish to avail him or herself of this concession immediately upon a dog reaching the figure of 10 clear races for the first time.
[26]-We note Mr Wallis’ submission that the BLAZIN' AUDREY case involved a misunderstanding concerning whether the dog had been stood down in Australia. The Stewards’ ruling in that case appears to reflect the fact that the Cole kennel was not aware of the stand down. There has been no similar misunderstanding in this case. We thus do not find the BLAZIN' AUDREY case to be of assistance in determining the issue before us.
[27]-Again, we do not find the circumstances in the JESAULENKO case to be similar to those before us, and we do not further consider that case.
[28]-Mr Roberts is concerned as to what he perceives to be an inconsistent application of r 55 in this country. We do not have sufficient information before us to determine whether or not this is the case and are not able to comment further.
[29]-Whether there should be a mechanism to alert trainers to the fact that a dog’s 10th start is pending is not a matter that need concern this Committee. If Mr Roberts feels strongly about this issue, and we believe he does, then this is an issue that a trainers’ association, or the like, can take up with GRNZ.
[30]-The Rules require “the Owner or Trainer of the Greyhound” to apply for a dog’s stand down to be lifted upon the completion of 10 clear races. The Chief Executive or his/her appointed nominee may then cancel the endorsement in accordance with the provisions of r 55.8. In the case of DYNA LENNY, for whatever reason, this had not been done. Thus the imposition of a three month stand down together with a satisfactory trial is required by r 55.1(d).
[31]-The application for a review of the stand down of DYNA LENNY is thus not successful. The three month stand down imposed on 23 October 2018 remains in force.
Dated at Dunedin this 13th day of November 2018.
Geoff Hall, Chairman
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Non-race day
Rules:
Informant:
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid:
race_expapproval:
racecancelled:
race_noreport:
race_emailed1:
race_emailed2:
race_title:
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid:
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport:
waitingforpublication:
meet_emailed1:
meet_emailed2:
meetdate: no date provided
meet_title:
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation:
meet_racingtype:
meet_chair:
meet_pm1:
meet_pm2:
name: