Rangiora HRC – 2 February 2010 – Race 4
ID: JCA20423
Hearing Type (Code):
harness-racing
Meet Title:
Rangiora HRC - 2 February 2010
Race Date:
2010/02/02
Race Number:
Race 4
Decision:
RACEDAY JUDICIAL COMMITTEE DECISION
--Information No: 68703
--Meeting: Rangiora Harness Racing Club
--Date: 2 February 2010
--Venue: Addington Raceway
--Race No. 4: Clonakilty Connection @ Bailie’s Mobile Pace
--Rules: 868(3)
--Judicial Chairman: J. M. Phelan, Committee: J. Millar
Plea: Not admitted.
Appearing: Informant: Stipendiary Steward Mr N. M. Ydgren
Defendant: Mr I. R. Cameron – Open Horseman
DECISION AND REASONS:
--Following the running of Race 4, the Clonakilty Connection @ Bailie’s Mobile Pace, an information was filed by Stipendiary Steward Mr N. M. Ydgren against Mr I. R. Cameron, the driver of “Glenlivet” (16), alleging that he had committed a breach of Rule 868(3). The charge reads as follows.
--“I the above named informant allege that the above named Defendant committed a breach of Rule 868(3) in that Mr Cameron has failed to drive his horse Glenlivet out over the final stages of this event.”
--
RACEDAY JUDICIAL COMMITTEE DECISION
--Information No: 68703
--Meeting: Rangiora Harness Racing Club
--Date: 2 February 2010
--Venue: Addington Raceway
--Race No. 4: Clonakilty Connection @ Bailie’s Mobile Pace
--Rules: 868(3)
--Judicial Chairman: J. M. Phelan, Committee: J. Millar
Plea: Not admitted.
Appearing: Informant: Stipendiary Steward Mr N. M. Ydgren
Defendant: Mr I. R. Cameron – Open Horseman
DECISION AND REASONS:
--Following the running of Race 4, the Clonakilty Connection @ Bailie’s Mobile Pace, an information was filed by Stipendiary Steward Mr N. M. Ydgren against Mr I. R. Cameron, the driver of “Glenlivet” (16), alleging that he had committed a breach of Rule 868(3). The charge reads as follows.
--“I the above named informant allege that the above named Defendant committed a breach of Rule 868(3) in that Mr Cameron has failed to drive his horse Glenlivet out over the final stages of this event.”
--Rule 868(3) reads as follows.
--”(3) Every horseman shall drive his horse out to the end of the race if he has any reasonable chance of running first, second, third, fourth, fifth, or sixth”
--Mr Cameron had indicated on the Information that he did not admit this breach of the Rules and he confirmed this at the hearing. Mr Cameron also agreed that he understood the charge and the Rule it was brought under.
--As this was a serious charge, Mr Cameron was given the option of having this matter heard at a later date, but he said that he preferred not to have the hearing delayed.
--Mr Ydgren gave evidence and used video coverage to show that “Glenlivet” had been in or close to the lead when entering the home straight. Mr Cameron did not use his whip at all in the straight, but did use his reins near the finish. Although “Glenlivet” was leading just short of the finish, it was beaten into second place by a short head by the faster finishing “Dari’s Girl” (12).
--It was the Stipendiary Stewards’ case that a driver in a race must take demonstrable and discernable actions to fully drive his horse out to the finish of a race. In this case, it was alleged, Mr Cameron did very little to drive his horse out fully to the end of the race.
--Mr Ydgren used video coverage of “Glenlivet’s” previous start on this course on 26 January 2010 to show that Mr Cameron had used his whip on his horse on a number of occasions in the run home. Mr Ydgren said that “Glenlivet” had been well tried with the whip on that occasion, and that he believed that there was no valid reason why Mr Cameron could not use his whip on this occasion.
--Mr Cameron gave evidence that his horse had paced roughly around the final bend, and that it had struck a knee. He also said that it did not feel right all the way down the straight and that near the finish he thought he was “holding them”. Mr Cameron also said that he did use his reins on the horse near the end of the race.
--Mr K. G. Cameron (Mr Cameron’s son) gave evidence that he has driven “Glenlivet” in trials, workouts and during training. He said that this horse was difficult to drive, paced roughly, and often put on a “performance”. This witness was shown the video coverage of the race and thought that that “Glenlivet” was not steering that well down the straight.
--At the conclusion of the evidence Mr Ydgren summarised the Stipendiary Steward’s case as follows.
--- That Mr Cameron did not fully drive his horse out as required by the Rule, in that he took no discernable and demonstrable actions to do so.
- That it must be apparent to an observer that every effort has been made to drive a horse out to the end of the race.
- That although Mr Cameron had used his reins late in the race, this was not enough.
- That the margin between 1st and 2nd was a short head.
- That at best Mr Cameron had made an error of judgement.
Mr Cameron summarised his defence as follows.
--- That he did use his reins towards the end of the race.
- That his horse didn’t respond that well to the whip last week.
- That he felt he was “holding them” towards the end of the race.
We adjourned to consider our decision,
--After we had reviewed the evidence and the video coverage we were satisfied that Mr Cameron had not driven his horse out to the end of the race as required by the Rules. It is well established that the test is an objective one and an alleged breach of the Rule is to be considered by objective standards and not by the subjective views of the driver. The Rule requires a demonstration of tactics which can, by objective standards, be said to show that a horse was driven out to the end of the race. In particular we took account of the complete lack of use of the whip. Mr Cameron’s explanation for not using his whip was not credible.
--On returning to the Enquiry Room we advised that a full written decision would be given later, and we gave the following oral decision.
--“Having heard the evidence and having seen the video coverage we are satisfied that “Glenlivet” finished second in this race, beaten by a short head.
--The charge is that Mr Cameron failed to drive his horse out to the end of the race. The evidence was clear that Mr Cameron did not use his whip at all, and that he slapped his horse with the reins late in the race, being beaten by the faster finishing “Dari’s Girl”.
--It was the Stipendiary Stewards’ case that Mr Cameron showed no vigour over the concluding stages, and that as he carried a whip he should have used it.
--Video coverage of a similar race on this course on 26 January 2010 showed that Mr Cameron had used his whip on the horse on a number of occasions, with no adverse reaction from the horse.
--Mr Cameron said that he did use the reins over the final stages, and that his horse did not respond too well to the whip last week. He also said that his horse did not feel right down the straight.
--Of major concern to us is that Mr Cameron said that he thought he was “holding them”.
--A driver in a race must, we believe, show clearly that his horse is being fully tried, and if he carries a whip he should use it unless there are exceptional circumstances for not doing so. We are satisfied that Mr Cameron did not drive his horse out to the finish of the race, and we find the charge proved.”
--Penalty:
--Mr Ydgren advised us that Mr Cameron had no relevant convictions, and that the Penalty Guide recommended as a starting point for a breach of this Rule, a fine of $500-00 and/or a four week suspension.
--There were discussions as to whether Mr Cameron would prefer a fine as opposed to a suspension, and in the end we took his choice to be a suspension. Mr Ydgren then recommended that the period of the suspension should be 4 – 6 weeks.
Mr Cameron had no relevant submissions to make regarding penalty.
We adjourned to consider our decision on penalty.
--We were satisfied that this charge is relatively serious, and on checking previous penalties for a breach of this Rule noted that penalties imposed have been quite severe. We were also satisfied that a breach of this particular Rule invariably jeopardises the integrity of harness racing, and this is one of the specific matters which we must have regard to when assessing penalty; see Rule 1114(2)(d). It is expected that all participants in a race will be given every possible opportunity by their drivers and that when the race has been run all participating horses will have been fully tested.
--We were satisfied that the recommended range suggested for a suspension was appropriate in the circumstances. We took into account that this was a $3000-00 race and that Mr Cameron had no previous convictions under this Rule.
--Taking all the above matters into account we determined that an appropriate period of suspension was four weeks. On returning the Enquiry Room we advised the parties that Mr Cameron’s Horseman’s Licence was suspended from after the conclusion of racing today, the 2 February 2010, until after the conclusion of racing on 1 March 2010.
--
J. M. Phelan J. Millar
CHAIR Committee Member
68703
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: 82cc4c657a041211e78976af9349cbdc
informantnumber:
horsename:
hearing_racingtype: harness-racing
startdate: 02/02/2010
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: no date provided
hearing_title: Rangiora HRC - 2 February 2010 - Race 4
charge:
facts:
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
reasonsfordecision:
Decision:
RACEDAY JUDICIAL COMMITTEE DECISION
--Information No: 68703
--Meeting: Rangiora Harness Racing Club
--Date: 2 February 2010
--Venue: Addington Raceway
--Race No. 4: Clonakilty Connection @ Bailie’s Mobile Pace
--Rules: 868(3)
--Judicial Chairman: J. M. Phelan, Committee: J. Millar
Plea: Not admitted.
Appearing: Informant: Stipendiary Steward Mr N. M. Ydgren
Defendant: Mr I. R. Cameron – Open Horseman
DECISION AND REASONS:
--Following the running of Race 4, the Clonakilty Connection @ Bailie’s Mobile Pace, an information was filed by Stipendiary Steward Mr N. M. Ydgren against Mr I. R. Cameron, the driver of “Glenlivet” (16), alleging that he had committed a breach of Rule 868(3). The charge reads as follows.
--“I the above named informant allege that the above named Defendant committed a breach of Rule 868(3) in that Mr Cameron has failed to drive his horse Glenlivet out over the final stages of this event.”
--
RACEDAY JUDICIAL COMMITTEE DECISION
--Information No: 68703
--Meeting: Rangiora Harness Racing Club
--Date: 2 February 2010
--Venue: Addington Raceway
--Race No. 4: Clonakilty Connection @ Bailie’s Mobile Pace
--Rules: 868(3)
--Judicial Chairman: J. M. Phelan, Committee: J. Millar
Plea: Not admitted.
Appearing: Informant: Stipendiary Steward Mr N. M. Ydgren
Defendant: Mr I. R. Cameron – Open Horseman
DECISION AND REASONS:
--Following the running of Race 4, the Clonakilty Connection @ Bailie’s Mobile Pace, an information was filed by Stipendiary Steward Mr N. M. Ydgren against Mr I. R. Cameron, the driver of “Glenlivet” (16), alleging that he had committed a breach of Rule 868(3). The charge reads as follows.
--“I the above named informant allege that the above named Defendant committed a breach of Rule 868(3) in that Mr Cameron has failed to drive his horse Glenlivet out over the final stages of this event.”
--Rule 868(3) reads as follows.
--”(3) Every horseman shall drive his horse out to the end of the race if he has any reasonable chance of running first, second, third, fourth, fifth, or sixth”
--Mr Cameron had indicated on the Information that he did not admit this breach of the Rules and he confirmed this at the hearing. Mr Cameron also agreed that he understood the charge and the Rule it was brought under.
--As this was a serious charge, Mr Cameron was given the option of having this matter heard at a later date, but he said that he preferred not to have the hearing delayed.
--Mr Ydgren gave evidence and used video coverage to show that “Glenlivet” had been in or close to the lead when entering the home straight. Mr Cameron did not use his whip at all in the straight, but did use his reins near the finish. Although “Glenlivet” was leading just short of the finish, it was beaten into second place by a short head by the faster finishing “Dari’s Girl” (12).
--It was the Stipendiary Stewards’ case that a driver in a race must take demonstrable and discernable actions to fully drive his horse out to the finish of a race. In this case, it was alleged, Mr Cameron did very little to drive his horse out fully to the end of the race.
--Mr Ydgren used video coverage of “Glenlivet’s” previous start on this course on 26 January 2010 to show that Mr Cameron had used his whip on his horse on a number of occasions in the run home. Mr Ydgren said that “Glenlivet” had been well tried with the whip on that occasion, and that he believed that there was no valid reason why Mr Cameron could not use his whip on this occasion.
--Mr Cameron gave evidence that his horse had paced roughly around the final bend, and that it had struck a knee. He also said that it did not feel right all the way down the straight and that near the finish he thought he was “holding them”. Mr Cameron also said that he did use his reins on the horse near the end of the race.
--Mr K. G. Cameron (Mr Cameron’s son) gave evidence that he has driven “Glenlivet” in trials, workouts and during training. He said that this horse was difficult to drive, paced roughly, and often put on a “performance”. This witness was shown the video coverage of the race and thought that that “Glenlivet” was not steering that well down the straight.
--At the conclusion of the evidence Mr Ydgren summarised the Stipendiary Steward’s case as follows.
--- That Mr Cameron did not fully drive his horse out as required by the Rule, in that he took no discernable and demonstrable actions to do so.
- That it must be apparent to an observer that every effort has been made to drive a horse out to the end of the race.
- That although Mr Cameron had used his reins late in the race, this was not enough.
- That the margin between 1st and 2nd was a short head.
- That at best Mr Cameron had made an error of judgement.
Mr Cameron summarised his defence as follows.
--- That he did use his reins towards the end of the race.
- That his horse didn’t respond that well to the whip last week.
- That he felt he was “holding them” towards the end of the race.
We adjourned to consider our decision,
--After we had reviewed the evidence and the video coverage we were satisfied that Mr Cameron had not driven his horse out to the end of the race as required by the Rules. It is well established that the test is an objective one and an alleged breach of the Rule is to be considered by objective standards and not by the subjective views of the driver. The Rule requires a demonstration of tactics which can, by objective standards, be said to show that a horse was driven out to the end of the race. In particular we took account of the complete lack of use of the whip. Mr Cameron’s explanation for not using his whip was not credible.
--On returning to the Enquiry Room we advised that a full written decision would be given later, and we gave the following oral decision.
--“Having heard the evidence and having seen the video coverage we are satisfied that “Glenlivet” finished second in this race, beaten by a short head.
--The charge is that Mr Cameron failed to drive his horse out to the end of the race. The evidence was clear that Mr Cameron did not use his whip at all, and that he slapped his horse with the reins late in the race, being beaten by the faster finishing “Dari’s Girl”.
--It was the Stipendiary Stewards’ case that Mr Cameron showed no vigour over the concluding stages, and that as he carried a whip he should have used it.
--Video coverage of a similar race on this course on 26 January 2010 showed that Mr Cameron had used his whip on the horse on a number of occasions, with no adverse reaction from the horse.
--Mr Cameron said that he did use the reins over the final stages, and that his horse did not respond too well to the whip last week. He also said that his horse did not feel right down the straight.
--Of major concern to us is that Mr Cameron said that he thought he was “holding them”.
--A driver in a race must, we believe, show clearly that his horse is being fully tried, and if he carries a whip he should use it unless there are exceptional circumstances for not doing so. We are satisfied that Mr Cameron did not drive his horse out to the finish of the race, and we find the charge proved.”
--Penalty:
--Mr Ydgren advised us that Mr Cameron had no relevant convictions, and that the Penalty Guide recommended as a starting point for a breach of this Rule, a fine of $500-00 and/or a four week suspension.
--There were discussions as to whether Mr Cameron would prefer a fine as opposed to a suspension, and in the end we took his choice to be a suspension. Mr Ydgren then recommended that the period of the suspension should be 4 – 6 weeks.
Mr Cameron had no relevant submissions to make regarding penalty.
We adjourned to consider our decision on penalty.
--We were satisfied that this charge is relatively serious, and on checking previous penalties for a breach of this Rule noted that penalties imposed have been quite severe. We were also satisfied that a breach of this particular Rule invariably jeopardises the integrity of harness racing, and this is one of the specific matters which we must have regard to when assessing penalty; see Rule 1114(2)(d). It is expected that all participants in a race will be given every possible opportunity by their drivers and that when the race has been run all participating horses will have been fully tested.
--We were satisfied that the recommended range suggested for a suspension was appropriate in the circumstances. We took into account that this was a $3000-00 race and that Mr Cameron had no previous convictions under this Rule.
--Taking all the above matters into account we determined that an appropriate period of suspension was four weeks. On returning the Enquiry Room we advised the parties that Mr Cameron’s Horseman’s Licence was suspended from after the conclusion of racing today, the 2 February 2010, until after the conclusion of racing on 1 March 2010.
--
J. M. Phelan J. Millar
CHAIR Committee Member
68703
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Old Hearing
Rules: 868.3, 1114.2.d
Informant:
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: 607868279f57a1a458603df8f81f3d32
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: Race 4
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: c515ba2f51c2814fd809fdf841911822
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 02/02/2010
meet_title: Rangiora HRC - 2 February 2010
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: rangiora-hrc
meet_racingtype: harness-racing
meet_chair:
meet_pm1:
meet_pm2:
name: Rangiora HRC