Winton HRC 14 April 2013 – R 1 (request for a ruling)
ID: JCA11697
Meet Title:
Winton HRC - 14 April 2013
Meet Chair:
GHall
Meet Committee Member 1:
PKnowles
Race Date:
2013/04/14
Race Number:
R1
Decision:
We rule accordingly.
Facts:
At the conclusion of Race 1 an information was lodged by Mr Renault under r 213(1)(j) seeking a ruling as to whether the chances of MAIN DIVIDE (A R Beck) “were affected by the mobile.”
Rule 213(1)(j) provides:
“A Stipendiary Steward at any time may scratch from a race … if a horse was denied a fair start and such occurrence materially prejudiced the chances of that horse.”
Submissions for Decision:
Mr Renault showed this committee a video of the horses at the starting point and shortly thereafter. He pointed out that r 213(1)(j) refers to a horse being denied a fair start and that MAIN DIVIDE, which had drawn 1 behind the mobile, broke about 100 metres past the starting point. He said the circumstances were most unusual in that at this point in the race the mobile was yet to pull away from the field. He asked us to consider whether this fact had affected the chances of MAIN DIVIDE.
In giving evidence, Mr Beck stated that MAIN DIVIDE had had to be checked when the mobile did not pull away. He said the mobile was going too slow and his horse galloped some 50 or 60 metres after the start at the point immediately before the mobile picked up speed and moved away from the field. He confirmed that MAIN DIVIDE had not come into contact with the mobile arm at any time but he said he was expecting to be able to progress forward with MAIN DIVIDE but had not been able to when the mobile did not pull away. He said he had had to change tactics and the horse broke when he took hold of it. He emphasised the horse was a first starter.
The starter gave evidence that he had a new assistant who had failed to give him the necessary calls as to the imminent arrival of the mobile at the starting point. The consequence was the field was dispatched some 60 or so metres after the starting point.
Reasons for Decision:
Our task is to determine whether MAIN DIVIDE was denied a fair start and, if so, whether, in the circumstances, what was a slow and belated start from the mobile materially prejudiced the chances of that horse. Fundamentally the issue is whether the continued presence of the mobile arm denied MAIN DIVIDE a fair start.
We accept that any interference that was suffered was some 60 or so metres after the official starting point of the race, but we prefer not to base our decision on any technical interpretation of the rule or upon a determination that this point was the “start” of the race.
There is no video evidence of Mr Beck having to take a strong hold of MAIN DIVIDE or of that horse being checked due to the continued presence of the mobile arm. Significantly, there was no contact between MAIN DIVIDE and the mobile arm. We are satisfied that Mr Beck anticipated that the field would gain momentum quicker than it actually did but we believe this was the case for all of the horses in the field. We do not believe the delay in the mobile pulling away was the cause of MAIN DIVIDE breaking, rather the horse appeared to break of its own accord. In these circumstances, we do not believe that the horse was denied a fair start.
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: 2f20c995de166745dc09204b3a65c53a
informantnumber:
horsename:
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: 01/04/2013
hearing_title: Winton HRC 14 April 2013 - R 1 (request for a ruling)
charge:
facts:
At the conclusion of Race 1 an information was lodged by Mr Renault under r 213(1)(j) seeking a ruling as to whether the chances of MAIN DIVIDE (A R Beck) “were affected by the mobile.”
Rule 213(1)(j) provides:
“A Stipendiary Steward at any time may scratch from a race … if a horse was denied a fair start and such occurrence materially prejudiced the chances of that horse.”
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
Mr Renault showed this committee a video of the horses at the starting point and shortly thereafter. He pointed out that r 213(1)(j) refers to a horse being denied a fair start and that MAIN DIVIDE, which had drawn 1 behind the mobile, broke about 100 metres past the starting point. He said the circumstances were most unusual in that at this point in the race the mobile was yet to pull away from the field. He asked us to consider whether this fact had affected the chances of MAIN DIVIDE.
In giving evidence, Mr Beck stated that MAIN DIVIDE had had to be checked when the mobile did not pull away. He said the mobile was going too slow and his horse galloped some 50 or 60 metres after the start at the point immediately before the mobile picked up speed and moved away from the field. He confirmed that MAIN DIVIDE had not come into contact with the mobile arm at any time but he said he was expecting to be able to progress forward with MAIN DIVIDE but had not been able to when the mobile did not pull away. He said he had had to change tactics and the horse broke when he took hold of it. He emphasised the horse was a first starter.
The starter gave evidence that he had a new assistant who had failed to give him the necessary calls as to the imminent arrival of the mobile at the starting point. The consequence was the field was dispatched some 60 or so metres after the starting point.
reasonsfordecision:
Our task is to determine whether MAIN DIVIDE was denied a fair start and, if so, whether, in the circumstances, what was a slow and belated start from the mobile materially prejudiced the chances of that horse. Fundamentally the issue is whether the continued presence of the mobile arm denied MAIN DIVIDE a fair start.
We accept that any interference that was suffered was some 60 or so metres after the official starting point of the race, but we prefer not to base our decision on any technical interpretation of the rule or upon a determination that this point was the “start” of the race.
There is no video evidence of Mr Beck having to take a strong hold of MAIN DIVIDE or of that horse being checked due to the continued presence of the mobile arm. Significantly, there was no contact between MAIN DIVIDE and the mobile arm. We are satisfied that Mr Beck anticipated that the field would gain momentum quicker than it actually did but we believe this was the case for all of the horses in the field. We do not believe the delay in the mobile pulling away was the cause of MAIN DIVIDE breaking, rather the horse appeared to break of its own accord. In these circumstances, we do not believe that the horse was denied a fair start.
Decision:
We rule accordingly.
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Request Ruling
Rules: 213(1)(j)
Informant:
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent: Mr N Popham - Starter, Mr A Beck - Driver of MAIN DIVIDE
Respondent:
StipendSteward: Mr S Renault - Stipendiary Steward
raceid: cc3cd5ed7dc3697ad2f2c4bf41826a98
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: R1
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: ddc77433dca18e5834281befc8327a78
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 14/04/2013
meet_title: Winton HRC - 14 April 2013
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: winton-hrc
meet_racingtype: harness-racing
meet_chair: GHall
meet_pm1: PKnowles
meet_pm2: none
name: Winton HRC