Wellington RC 12 April 2014 – R 9
ID: JCA16393
Code:
Thoroughbred
Meet Title:
Wellington RC - 12 April 2014
Meet Chair:
PWilliams
Meet Committee Member 1:
GBuchanan
Race Date:
2014/04/12
Race Number:
R 9
Decision:
As Mr Walker admitted the breach the charge was found to be proved.
Penalty:
Mr Walker is suspended for three riding days – being Rotorua (16 April), New Plymouth (17 April) and Hawkes Bay/Tauranga/Riverton (19 April).
Facts:
Following the running of Race 9, The Silent Achiever Cup over 2200m, Information A3304 was filed by Co-Chief Stipendiary Steward Mr R Neal against Licensed Jockey Mr D Walker pursuant to Rule 638(1)(d). The Information alleged “that D Walker permitted his mount “Jack’s Boy” to shift in passing the 100 metres resulting in “Ought To Be Bad” being checked”.
Rule 638(1)(d) sates:- “A Rider shall not ride a horse in a manner which the Judicial Committee considers to be careless”.
Mr Walker confirmed that he understood the Rule and that he admitted the breach.
Mr Neal used the head on film to show Mr Walker racing down the straight and moving in from a position approximately 7 to 8 widths off the rail to a position approximately 4 horse widths off the rail at the 100m mark. He said at that point Mr Walker made contact with Mr Doyle’s mount causing that rider to restrain his mount and check out. He said Mr Doyle had lost considerable momentum as a result of the interference received.
Mr Walker said his horse was hanging in badly and was proving a difficult ride in the home straight. He said he was not fully aware of the horse on his inside but when he did see Mr Doyle he did stop riding. He said he did not consider the inward movement was dangerous and considered it to be a “low end” breach of the Rule.
Submissions for Penalty:
Mr Neal said Mr Walker had an exceptional riding record and had not been charged with a breach of the rule since late October 2010. He conceded that “Jack’s Boy” had been laying in but said the onus was on Mr Walker to straighten his mount and whilst he did after the interference had occurred it was a case of too little too late. He said the Stewards saw the interference as being in the low to mid-range of severity and submitted a period of suspension was an appropriate penalty.
Mr Walker said he had been asked to ride at meetings in Rotorua and Riverton next week as well as the upcoming New Plymouth and Hastings meetings in the Central Districts. However, he said if he were to be suspended he wished to take it straight away as he was keen to ride at Blenheim later in the month. He asked the Committee to take into account his very good riding record when coming to a decision on penalty.
Reasons for Penalty:
This charge of Careless Riding arose out of an earlier protest hearing. The Committee has therefore had ample opportunity during that hearing and this one to review all of the films of the interference that occurred near the 100m mark. It is not disputed by Mr Walker that his horse moved in near the 100m and caused interference to Mr Doyle’s horse. Mr Walker claimed his horse was proving a difficult ride because it was laying in. Whilst this may be true the onus is on Mr Walker as a senior jockey to maintain a straight line at all times. The committee notes Mr Walker had managed to straighten his mount at an earlier point in the run home when brief contact had been made with Mr Doyle’s horse and had he done so again at the 100m mark he would not have been charged.
In mitigation the Committee notes that Mr Walker has an excellent riding record having not been charged with a breach of this Rule for over three and a half years. The Committee believes the severity of the interference is in the low-mid range. The Committee has also reviewed penalties issued to jockeys who have not breached this Rule in their previous twelve months of riding to ensure consistency in our decision making process.
From a starting point of five riding days and taking all of the above factors into account we believe a period of suspension of less than five days is an appropriate penalty.
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: ade9f5fb9177a44bd34d6ac72bf75eaf
informantnumber: A3304
horsename:
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge: Careless riding
plea: admitted
penaltyrequired: 1
decisiondate: 07/04/2014
hearing_title: Wellington RC 12 April 2014 - R 9
charge:
facts:
Following the running of Race 9, The Silent Achiever Cup over 2200m, Information A3304 was filed by Co-Chief Stipendiary Steward Mr R Neal against Licensed Jockey Mr D Walker pursuant to Rule 638(1)(d). The Information alleged “that D Walker permitted his mount “Jack’s Boy” to shift in passing the 100 metres resulting in “Ought To Be Bad” being checked”.
Rule 638(1)(d) sates:- “A Rider shall not ride a horse in a manner which the Judicial Committee considers to be careless”.
Mr Walker confirmed that he understood the Rule and that he admitted the breach.
Mr Neal used the head on film to show Mr Walker racing down the straight and moving in from a position approximately 7 to 8 widths off the rail to a position approximately 4 horse widths off the rail at the 100m mark. He said at that point Mr Walker made contact with Mr Doyle’s mount causing that rider to restrain his mount and check out. He said Mr Doyle had lost considerable momentum as a result of the interference received.
Mr Walker said his horse was hanging in badly and was proving a difficult ride in the home straight. He said he was not fully aware of the horse on his inside but when he did see Mr Doyle he did stop riding. He said he did not consider the inward movement was dangerous and considered it to be a “low end” breach of the Rule.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
reasonsfordecision:
Decision:
As Mr Walker admitted the breach the charge was found to be proved.
sumissionsforpenalty:
Mr Neal said Mr Walker had an exceptional riding record and had not been charged with a breach of the rule since late October 2010. He conceded that “Jack’s Boy” had been laying in but said the onus was on Mr Walker to straighten his mount and whilst he did after the interference had occurred it was a case of too little too late. He said the Stewards saw the interference as being in the low to mid-range of severity and submitted a period of suspension was an appropriate penalty.
Mr Walker said he had been asked to ride at meetings in Rotorua and Riverton next week as well as the upcoming New Plymouth and Hastings meetings in the Central Districts. However, he said if he were to be suspended he wished to take it straight away as he was keen to ride at Blenheim later in the month. He asked the Committee to take into account his very good riding record when coming to a decision on penalty.
reasonsforpenalty:
This charge of Careless Riding arose out of an earlier protest hearing. The Committee has therefore had ample opportunity during that hearing and this one to review all of the films of the interference that occurred near the 100m mark. It is not disputed by Mr Walker that his horse moved in near the 100m and caused interference to Mr Doyle’s horse. Mr Walker claimed his horse was proving a difficult ride because it was laying in. Whilst this may be true the onus is on Mr Walker as a senior jockey to maintain a straight line at all times. The committee notes Mr Walker had managed to straighten his mount at an earlier point in the run home when brief contact had been made with Mr Doyle’s horse and had he done so again at the 100m mark he would not have been charged.
In mitigation the Committee notes that Mr Walker has an excellent riding record having not been charged with a breach of this Rule for over three and a half years. The Committee believes the severity of the interference is in the low-mid range. The Committee has also reviewed penalties issued to jockeys who have not breached this Rule in their previous twelve months of riding to ensure consistency in our decision making process.
From a starting point of five riding days and taking all of the above factors into account we believe a period of suspension of less than five days is an appropriate penalty.
penalty:
Mr Walker is suspended for three riding days – being Rotorua (16 April), New Plymouth (17 April) and Hawkes Bay/Tauranga/Riverton (19 April).
hearing_type: Hearing
Rules: 638(1)(d)
Informant: Mr R Neal - Co-Chief Stipendiary Steward
JockeysandTrainer: Mr D Walker - Licensed Jockey
Otherperson: Mr N Ydgren - Stipendiary Steward
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: 76ee6a8a18e3932e05087aba9171e379
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: R 9
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: 729bc861e63e980064cbd32a000a4080
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 12/04/2014
meet_title: Wellington RC - 12 April 2014
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: wellington-rc
meet_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
meet_chair: PWilliams
meet_pm1: GBuchanan
meet_pm2: none
name: Wellington RC