Tuapeka HRC – 29 October 2006 – Race 1

hearingid: 7bf38f6e3ee5e193136978a5e614c606

informantnumber:

horsename:

hearing_racingtype: harness-racing

startdate: 29/10/2006

newcharge:

plea:

penaltyrequired:

decisiondate: no date provided

hearing_title: Tuapeka HRC - 29 October 2006 - Race 1

charge:

facts:

appealdecision:

isappeal:

submissionsfordecision:

reasonsfordecision:

Decision:

Mr Knowles, stipendiary steward, has alleged that in race 1 Mr Smolenski was in breach of rule 869(3)(b) in that he drove carelessly

Mr Knowles, stipendiary steward, has alleged that in race 1 Mr Smolenski was in breach of rule 869(3)(b) in that he drove carelessly when allowing his horse to move inwards striking the wheel of FANTASY FLIGHT causing LYCATOFF to fall and checking VERA LYNELLE and SUBLIME.

Mr Knowles had Mr Allison demonstrate on the videos that with some 500 metres to run and when FANTASY FLIGHT was racing 3 wide, that Mr Smolenski, who was endeavouring to improve LYCATOFF, moved in, striking the wheel of FANTASY FLIGHT. Mr Knowles added that immediately prior to the incident Mr Smolenski had hit the horse once with the stick in his right hand and that the horse had moved in. He said there was no interference from any other horse and that Mr Smolenski should have kept driving the horse with his hands and not hit it at this time.

Mr M Smolenski, speaking on Mr S Smolenski's behalf, stated that Mr McKay the driver of FANTASY FLIGHT was moving about like a "drunken sailor". He said that FANTASY FLIGHT had moved out and caused the incident. He added there was general tightening and that the 2 horses outside LYCATOFF contributed to this. Mr S Smolenski said the incident had nothing to do with his use of the whip and that he was steering LYCATOFF at the time. He confirmed there was general tightening, and added that FANTASY FLIGHT was stopping.

We accept that the incident occurred at a time when the 2 horses involved were racing in tight quarters. We do not accept that any movement from the outside horses contributed to the incident. We agree Mr McKay moved out slightly but this was prior to Mr Smolenski striking LYCATOFF and was thus prior to the incident. We are also satisfied that the incident occurred following Mr Smolenski striking LYCATOFF once when he was travelling in close quarters. This was also at a time that he was trying to improve his position. Unfortunately, and most probably as a consequence of being hit with the stick, LYCATOFF moved in shortly thereafter, and struck the sulky wheel of FANTASY FLIGHT. LYCATOFF fell interfering with VERA LYNELLE and SUBLIME.

We find that the cause of the incident was inwards movement from LYCATOFF and not outwards movement from FANTASY FLIGHT. Thus we find in attempting to improve in tight quarters, Mr Smolenski allowed his horse to come into contact with the sulky wheel of FANTASY FLIGHT. In so doing, we believe his actions fell below those of a reasonably prudent driver, or a careful driver, in these particular circumstances. We thus find the charge proved.

Mr S Smolenski was not present for the decision as to whether there had been a breach of the Rule nor for consideration of the penalty. Mr M Smolenski indicated he continued to appear on his behalf but made no submissions as to penalty. Mr Knowles requested a suspension of Mr Smolenski's licence for 2 days, stating that the carelessness was at the lower end but the outcome at the worst end of the scale of seriousness. By the outcome we assume Mr Knowles is referring to LYCATOFF falling, Mr Smolenski suffering an injury to his hip, and VERA LYNELLE and SUBLIME, who were racing towards the rear of the field, receiving interference.

We agree the carelessness is at the lower end of the scale and that the consequences were unfortunate for the 3 horses, and Mr Smolenski in particular. We intend to give significant credit to Mr Smolenski's excellent record ? 600 drives and no previous charges under this Rule. It is a record of which Mr Smolenski, as a junior horseman, can feel justifiably proud.

We fine Mr Smolenski the sum of $250 and remind him of his obligations under the Rules of Harness Racing. We trust he recovers quickly from his injury.

The issue arose during the hearing as to what constitutes careless driving with Mr M Smolenski questioning Mr Knowles to this effect. We believed it was appropriate for the Committee to explain the term. We informed Mr Smolenski that in our view careless means falling below the standard expected of a reasonably prudent driver, ie below the standard expected of a careful driver in these particular circumstances. It is an objective test. Mr Knowles indicated he did not disagree with this explanation, and added that, in his view, it was a lack of care and attention in a race; there need be nothing intentional.

G Hall, Chairman

N Johnstone, Member

sumissionsforpenalty:

reasonsforpenalty:

penalty:

hearing_type: Old Hearing

Rules: 869.3.b

Informant:

JockeysandTrainer:

Otherperson:

PersonPresent:

Respondent:

StipendSteward:

raceid: 06950e7af579e67647dcbe7520c6057d

race_expapproval:

racecancelled: 0

race_noreport: 0

race_emailed1: 0

race_emailed2: 0

race_title: Race 1

submittochair:

race_expappcomment:

race_km:

race_otherexp:

race_chair:

race_pm1:

race_pm2:

meetid: 5ca0afa6a6fecc9f2045cbafef52a298

meet_expapproval:

meet_noreport: 0

waitingforpublication: 0

meet_emailed1: 0

meet_emailed2: 0

meetdate: 29/10/2006

meet_title: Tuapeka HRC - 29 October 2006

meet_expappcomment:

meet_km:

meet_otherexp:

tracklocation: tuapeka-hrc

meet_racingtype: harness-racing

meet_chair:

meet_pm1:

meet_pm2:

name: Tuapeka HRC