Waipa RC 9 February 2011 – R 3 (request for a ruling)
ID: JCA14430
Code:
Thoroughbred
Meet Title:
Waipa RC - 9 February 2011
Meet Chair:
BRowe
Meet Committee Member 1:
BTims
Race Date:
2011/02/09
Race Number:
R 3
Decision:
The request to have WISECRACK declared a non starter is declined.
Facts:
Request for a ruling that WISECRACK be declared a non starter because it was denied a fair start and such occurrence materially affected its chances.
Submissions for Decision:
Mr Kelso said WISECRACK had been playing up in the stalls, had an attendant beside it and based on what Mr Ormsby had told him, he believed WISECRACK was denied a fair start – it lost 5 lengths at the start.
Mr Ormsby said WISECRACK was fractious in the stalls, kicked the gate, sat back, propped and twisted. He called out “no, no, no”. He understood 2 other horses were fractious. He said the attendant was doing his best to get the horse to move forward. He said WISECRACK was not given a fair chance to jump away with the field, had its head sideways and the attendant “was a tad slow to let go of it”.
The video film of the lead up to the start and the actual start was played. Mr Humphries said there were 2 or 3 fractious horses. He did not hear Mr Ormsby call out, but did hear other jockeys calling out. He then concentrated on WISECRACK – he was positioned right behind it. It had been going up and down. It came down, the other horses were standing reasonably and he “let them go”. He said he gave WISECRACK the fairest possible start it could have got. It had been loaded last because “it did the same thing last start at Matamata”. He said WISECRACK would have “bounded” like it did no matter when he let the field go.
Mr Williamson said Mr Kelso and Mr Ormsby had admitted WISECRACK was playing up in the stalls and that the attendant was doing his best to ensure the horse got a fair start. He said a starter has to act in the best interests of all horses and to wait for an extended period of time for one horse can affect the chances of other horses. He said Mr Humphries had affected the start at what he considered the best time for WISECRACK. The stewards considered WISECRACK had got the fairest possible start in the circumstances.
Mr Harding said WISECRACK was given insufficient time to settle.
Reasons for Decision:
The video film showed WISECRACK was fractious in the stalls and an attendant was trying to get it to move forward. When the gates were released, WISECRACK was in a stable position, not quite up to the front of the gate, was slow to jump then bounded forward. It lost 4 – 5 lengths. All other horses began normally. We are satisfied Mr Humphries effected the start at the best possible time for all horses. For there to be a ruling that a horse has been denied a fair start, the “denial” must be brought about by some cause extraneous to the horse itself. There is no such cause in this case. WISECRACK was the author of its own misfortune.
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: 8225b232fd9931dcbd1cae8546fe6094
informantnumber:
horsename:
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: 09/02/2011
hearing_title: Waipa RC 9 February 2011 - R 3 (request for a ruling)
charge:
facts:
Request for a ruling that WISECRACK be declared a non starter because it was denied a fair start and such occurrence materially affected its chances.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
Mr Kelso said WISECRACK had been playing up in the stalls, had an attendant beside it and based on what Mr Ormsby had told him, he believed WISECRACK was denied a fair start – it lost 5 lengths at the start.
Mr Ormsby said WISECRACK was fractious in the stalls, kicked the gate, sat back, propped and twisted. He called out “no, no, no”. He understood 2 other horses were fractious. He said the attendant was doing his best to get the horse to move forward. He said WISECRACK was not given a fair chance to jump away with the field, had its head sideways and the attendant “was a tad slow to let go of it”.
The video film of the lead up to the start and the actual start was played. Mr Humphries said there were 2 or 3 fractious horses. He did not hear Mr Ormsby call out, but did hear other jockeys calling out. He then concentrated on WISECRACK – he was positioned right behind it. It had been going up and down. It came down, the other horses were standing reasonably and he “let them go”. He said he gave WISECRACK the fairest possible start it could have got. It had been loaded last because “it did the same thing last start at Matamata”. He said WISECRACK would have “bounded” like it did no matter when he let the field go.
Mr Williamson said Mr Kelso and Mr Ormsby had admitted WISECRACK was playing up in the stalls and that the attendant was doing his best to ensure the horse got a fair start. He said a starter has to act in the best interests of all horses and to wait for an extended period of time for one horse can affect the chances of other horses. He said Mr Humphries had affected the start at what he considered the best time for WISECRACK. The stewards considered WISECRACK had got the fairest possible start in the circumstances.
Mr Harding said WISECRACK was given insufficient time to settle.
reasonsfordecision:
The video film showed WISECRACK was fractious in the stalls and an attendant was trying to get it to move forward. When the gates were released, WISECRACK was in a stable position, not quite up to the front of the gate, was slow to jump then bounded forward. It lost 4 – 5 lengths. All other horses began normally. We are satisfied Mr Humphries effected the start at the best possible time for all horses. For there to be a ruling that a horse has been denied a fair start, the “denial” must be brought about by some cause extraneous to the horse itself. There is no such cause in this case. WISECRACK was the author of its own misfortune.
Decision:
The request to have WISECRACK declared a non starter is declined.
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Request Ruling
Rules: 632
Informant:
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent: Mr K Kelso - trainer of WISECRACK placed 7th, Mr Ormsby - rider of WISECRACK, Mr G Harding - owner of WISECRACK, Mr J Humphries - Official Starter
Respondent:
StipendSteward: Mr M Williamson
raceid: d22e3ed58ab107200887d39e9e3cf30e
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: R 3
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: 481fa38b8d3a601653e727f9f12fe82b
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 09/02/2011
meet_title: Waipa RC - 9 February 2011
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: waipa-rc
meet_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
meet_chair: BRowe
meet_pm1: BTims
meet_pm2: none
name: Waipa RC