Paeroa RC 3 February 2012 – R 7
ID: JCA10592
Code:
Thoroughbred
Meet Title:
Paeroa RC - 3 February 2012
Meet Chair:
GJones
Meet Committee Member 1:
GTankard
Race Date:
2012/02/03
Race Number:
R 7
Decision:
The committee finds the charge proved.
Penalty:
We impose a penalty of 6 riding days, commencing after racing on 16 February and concluding after racing on 25 February 2012 (6 riding days).
The reason for this suspension commencing after racing on 16 February is that this is the date in which Mr Forbes previous suspension concludes.
Charge:
Careless riding
Facts:
The information alleged that Apprentice Jockey, Mr A Forbes, “Permitted his mount ‘Wrecking Crew’ to shift inwards near the 1400 metre mark when not sufficiently clear of ‘Providores’ (S Shirahama) which was crowded and checked”.
At the commencement of the hearing Mr Cole read the Careless Riding Rule and Mr A Forbes acknowledged that he understood the nature of the Rule. Mr Cole told the Judicial Committee (the “Committee”) that he intended to call two witnesses in support of the charge, Mr J Oatham and Mr S Shirahama. Mr G Forbes who was acting on behalf of the Respondent advised the Committee that he intended to call two witnesses to establish his defence to the charge, Mr M Cropp and the Respondent Mr A Forbes.
Submissions for Decision:
Mr Oatham demonstrated the alleged incident by way of available video footage. This included rear and side-on views, but did not include a head-on view. Mr Oatham advised the committee barrier positions that the relevant horses started from. He said that Mr Forbes mount drew three places outside of Mr Shirahama’s mount. They drew barriers 8 and 11 respectively.
Mr Oatham said that shortly after the start of the race, Mr Forbes was intent on moving his mount forward to take up a prominent position. In doing so he crowded and checked Mr Shirahama’s mount for several strides. Mr Oatham told the committee that at the same time there was also some crowding involving horses on the inside, but in his view that crowding was not the cause of Mr Shrahama’s mount being checked.
Using side-on (back straight) video footage, Mr Oatham demonstrated to the committee that Mr Forbes mount was no more that half a length in front of Mr Shirahama’s mount when the incident occurred and that Mr Shirahama was entitled to maintain his position at that point.
Mr Oatham was not cross examined or challenged on any aspect of his evidence.
Mr Shirahama, the rider of Providores told the committee that his mount was checked as a result of outside pressure from Mr Forbes mount. He said that there was no inward pressure from any other horses or riders. He reinforced that Mr Forbes’ mount was half a length ahead of him when the incident occurred.
Mr Shirahama was not cross examined or challenged on any aspect of his evidence.
Mr Cropp, the rider of Saucy Magic told the committee that in his view the interference to Providores occurred as a direct result of the crowding of horses on the in-side. He said several horses on the in-side bumped and his mount made contact with Providores. He said that the incident was a chain reaction instigated by Karaka Vintage ridden by Apprentice Jockey Ms A Edmeads.
The committee asked Mr Cropp to demonstrate his evidence by way of available video footage.
Mr Cropp was not cross examined on any aspect of his evidence.
Mr A Forbes told the committee that the interference occurred because Ms A Edmonds who was racing on the in-side over reacted. He demonstrated this point by way of video footage and suggested that Ms Edmonds mount, had its head turned outwards which lead to other horses becoming crowded.
Mr Forbes was not cross examined on any aspect of his evidence.
In summing up for the Informant, Mr Cole said that it was clear that Mr Forbes was angling his mount across the field and checked Providores resulting in Mr Shirahama having to take hold of his mount. He said that at the point of contact Mr Shrihama’s mount was being dictated to by the actions of Mr Forbes.
In summing up on behalf of Mr A Forbes, Mr G Forbes submitted that this was an Apprentice Riders only race and there is a sharp turn between the start point and the first turn into the back straight. He said that this starting point should not be used for Apprentice Riders races. Mr Forbes submitted that the interference was as the result of inward pressure, not outward pressure from Mr A Forbes mount. He also submitted that there was insufficient video footage available to prove that Mr A Forbes caused the interference.
Reasons for Decision:
Our reasons are that when contact was made Mr Forbes was never any more than half a length clear of Mr Shirahama’s mount. This is clearly supported by the available video footage. We believe that Mr Forbes had an obligation to ensure that his mount was sufficiently clear when he angled across the field. On this occasion he did not fulfil that obligation.
Mr Cropps evidence that his mount made contact with Providores is unconvincing and not supported by the available video footage. On this point the committee carefully examined the incident in slow motion and freeze frame.
The committee does not believe that the interference was a result of inward pressure. We heard direct evidence from Mr Oatham and Mr Shrihama on this point and their evidence is supported by available video footage.
The committee has noted Mr G Forbes submission that there is a relatively sharp bend from the 1670m starting point to the entrance to the back straight. In our view that is all the more reason for the need for jockeys to exercise a higher degree of care.
The committee accepts that it would have been useful to have had better video footage of the incident, particularly head-on. But we feel that the evidence of witnesses, coupled with rear and side on video footage was more than sufficient to enable us to interpret the incident and make a determination.
Submissions for Penalty:
Mr Cole submitted that Mr Forbes has incurred four previous suspensions for careless riding this season. The most recent being the previous day at Wanganui (2 February 2012) and prior to that on 13 January 2012.
Mr Cole submitted that the level of carelessness was mid-range and that given the circumstances it merited a suspension of between 5 and 7 days.
Mr G Forbes submitted that Mr A Forbes is already facing a 5 day suspension and that he was trying to sort out his riding problems.
The committee asked Mr Hazlett whether or not he could assist Mr Forbes in his capacity as Apprentice Jockeys' Mentor. Mr Hazlett submitted that Mr Forbes was going through a phase where things are not going right for him and that he would be available to provide him with ongoing support and assistance.
Reasons for Penalty:
The committee carefully considered the submissions made by the Informant and those made on behalf of the Respondent. We note that Mr Forbes is a relatively inexperienced Apprentice Jockey who has now incurred three suspensions within the past twenty one days. This is not a good record and we feel that he requires ongoing support, coaching and mentoring to address any identified riding issues.
The committee has independently assessed the breach as mid-range but due to Mr Forbes recent record this breaches requires the imposition of a penalty beyond 5 riding days.
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: 034bf980484ed1fb13311bb3aadbb07e
informantnumber: 2024
horsename:
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea: denied
penaltyrequired: 1
decisiondate: 02/02/2012
hearing_title: Paeroa RC 3 February 2012 - R 7
charge:
Careless riding
facts:
The information alleged that Apprentice Jockey, Mr A Forbes, “Permitted his mount ‘Wrecking Crew’ to shift inwards near the 1400 metre mark when not sufficiently clear of ‘Providores’ (S Shirahama) which was crowded and checked”.
At the commencement of the hearing Mr Cole read the Careless Riding Rule and Mr A Forbes acknowledged that he understood the nature of the Rule. Mr Cole told the Judicial Committee (the “Committee”) that he intended to call two witnesses in support of the charge, Mr J Oatham and Mr S Shirahama. Mr G Forbes who was acting on behalf of the Respondent advised the Committee that he intended to call two witnesses to establish his defence to the charge, Mr M Cropp and the Respondent Mr A Forbes.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
Mr Oatham demonstrated the alleged incident by way of available video footage. This included rear and side-on views, but did not include a head-on view. Mr Oatham advised the committee barrier positions that the relevant horses started from. He said that Mr Forbes mount drew three places outside of Mr Shirahama’s mount. They drew barriers 8 and 11 respectively.
Mr Oatham said that shortly after the start of the race, Mr Forbes was intent on moving his mount forward to take up a prominent position. In doing so he crowded and checked Mr Shirahama’s mount for several strides. Mr Oatham told the committee that at the same time there was also some crowding involving horses on the inside, but in his view that crowding was not the cause of Mr Shrahama’s mount being checked.
Using side-on (back straight) video footage, Mr Oatham demonstrated to the committee that Mr Forbes mount was no more that half a length in front of Mr Shirahama’s mount when the incident occurred and that Mr Shirahama was entitled to maintain his position at that point.
Mr Oatham was not cross examined or challenged on any aspect of his evidence.
Mr Shirahama, the rider of Providores told the committee that his mount was checked as a result of outside pressure from Mr Forbes mount. He said that there was no inward pressure from any other horses or riders. He reinforced that Mr Forbes’ mount was half a length ahead of him when the incident occurred.
Mr Shirahama was not cross examined or challenged on any aspect of his evidence.
Mr Cropp, the rider of Saucy Magic told the committee that in his view the interference to Providores occurred as a direct result of the crowding of horses on the in-side. He said several horses on the in-side bumped and his mount made contact with Providores. He said that the incident was a chain reaction instigated by Karaka Vintage ridden by Apprentice Jockey Ms A Edmeads.
The committee asked Mr Cropp to demonstrate his evidence by way of available video footage.
Mr Cropp was not cross examined on any aspect of his evidence.
Mr A Forbes told the committee that the interference occurred because Ms A Edmonds who was racing on the in-side over reacted. He demonstrated this point by way of video footage and suggested that Ms Edmonds mount, had its head turned outwards which lead to other horses becoming crowded.
Mr Forbes was not cross examined on any aspect of his evidence.
In summing up for the Informant, Mr Cole said that it was clear that Mr Forbes was angling his mount across the field and checked Providores resulting in Mr Shirahama having to take hold of his mount. He said that at the point of contact Mr Shrihama’s mount was being dictated to by the actions of Mr Forbes.
In summing up on behalf of Mr A Forbes, Mr G Forbes submitted that this was an Apprentice Riders only race and there is a sharp turn between the start point and the first turn into the back straight. He said that this starting point should not be used for Apprentice Riders races. Mr Forbes submitted that the interference was as the result of inward pressure, not outward pressure from Mr A Forbes mount. He also submitted that there was insufficient video footage available to prove that Mr A Forbes caused the interference.
reasonsfordecision:
Our reasons are that when contact was made Mr Forbes was never any more than half a length clear of Mr Shirahama’s mount. This is clearly supported by the available video footage. We believe that Mr Forbes had an obligation to ensure that his mount was sufficiently clear when he angled across the field. On this occasion he did not fulfil that obligation.
Mr Cropps evidence that his mount made contact with Providores is unconvincing and not supported by the available video footage. On this point the committee carefully examined the incident in slow motion and freeze frame.
The committee does not believe that the interference was a result of inward pressure. We heard direct evidence from Mr Oatham and Mr Shrihama on this point and their evidence is supported by available video footage.
The committee has noted Mr G Forbes submission that there is a relatively sharp bend from the 1670m starting point to the entrance to the back straight. In our view that is all the more reason for the need for jockeys to exercise a higher degree of care.
The committee accepts that it would have been useful to have had better video footage of the incident, particularly head-on. But we feel that the evidence of witnesses, coupled with rear and side on video footage was more than sufficient to enable us to interpret the incident and make a determination.
Decision:
The committee finds the charge proved.
sumissionsforpenalty:
Mr Cole submitted that Mr Forbes has incurred four previous suspensions for careless riding this season. The most recent being the previous day at Wanganui (2 February 2012) and prior to that on 13 January 2012.
Mr Cole submitted that the level of carelessness was mid-range and that given the circumstances it merited a suspension of between 5 and 7 days.
Mr G Forbes submitted that Mr A Forbes is already facing a 5 day suspension and that he was trying to sort out his riding problems.
The committee asked Mr Hazlett whether or not he could assist Mr Forbes in his capacity as Apprentice Jockeys' Mentor. Mr Hazlett submitted that Mr Forbes was going through a phase where things are not going right for him and that he would be available to provide him with ongoing support and assistance.
reasonsforpenalty:
The committee carefully considered the submissions made by the Informant and those made on behalf of the Respondent. We note that Mr Forbes is a relatively inexperienced Apprentice Jockey who has now incurred three suspensions within the past twenty one days. This is not a good record and we feel that he requires ongoing support, coaching and mentoring to address any identified riding issues.
The committee has independently assessed the breach as mid-range but due to Mr Forbes recent record this breaches requires the imposition of a penalty beyond 5 riding days.
penalty:
We impose a penalty of 6 riding days, commencing after racing on 16 February and concluding after racing on 25 February 2012 (6 riding days).
The reason for this suspension commencing after racing on 16 February is that this is the date in which Mr Forbes previous suspension concludes.
hearing_type: Hearing
Rules: 638(1)(d)
Informant:
JockeysandTrainer: Mr A Forbes - Apprentice Jockey
Otherperson: Mr G Forbes - Assisting Mr A Forbes, Mr T Hazlett - Apprentice's Mentor, Mr J Oatham - Stipendiary Steward, Mr S Shirahama - Apprentice Jockey, Mr M Cropp - Apprentice Jockey
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: 2541dc92803a78ee5038024dbef04ab0
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: R 7
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: e09094e1462d3c77bc699635e41747d4
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 03/02/2012
meet_title: Paeroa RC - 3 February 2012
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: paeroa-rc
meet_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
meet_chair: GJones
meet_pm1: GTankard
meet_pm2: none
name: Paeroa RC