You are here: Home / Race Days / Avondale JC - 7 October 2013 / Avondale JC 7 October 2013 - R 2

Avondale JC 7 October 2013 - R 2

Created on 08 October 2013

Rules:
638(1)(d)
Committee:
ADooley (chair)
AGodsalve
Name(s):
Mr L Innes - Licensed Rider of BUCKLEBERY
Mr J Oatham - Senior Stipendiary Steward
Informant
Mr M Williamson - Stipendiary Steward
Information Number
A5661
Plea:
Admitted
Charge:

Following race 2, Tulloch Cafe 1400, an Information was filed pursuant to Rule 638(1)(d). The Informant, Mr Williamson, alleged that Mr Innes permitted his mount BUCKLEBERY to shift inwards when not sufficiently of clear of LITTLE RED DEVIL which was forced inwards into the line of APACHEE TAAT which was severely checked near the 1200 metres.

Mr Innes acknowledged that he understood the nature of the charge and the Rule.

Rule 638(1)(d) provides : A Rider shall not ride a horse in a manner which the Judicial Committee considers to be careless.

Evidence:

Mr Oatham identified that Mr Innes had drawn barrier 8 and he pointed out to the Committee LITTLE RED DEVIL which drew barrier 4 and APACHEE TAAT which drew barrier 2. He demonstrated on the head on video film that Mr Innes permitted his mount to shift in 200 metres after the start. In doing so he was only ¾ of a length clear of LITTLE RED DEVIL which was forced inwards into the line of APACHE TAAT. He described the interference as rather severe but noted APACHE TAAT did not react well to the check.

Mr Innes asked the Stewards why the starting stalls were positioned a long way out from the running rail. Mr Williamson acknowledged that at the 1400 metre start at Avondale the barriers are placed wider on the track however the Stewards had not received any complaints.

Mr Innes said that he shifted in towards the running rail on a gradual movement. He said when Ms Collett called out to him to he took corrective action albeit it was too late. He admitted that he did not realise that APACHEE TAAT was racing on the inside of Ms Collett's mount. He acknowledged the interference was an error of judgement on his part. He added that the incident looked quite bad on the video films but noted that APACHEE TAAT over reacted to the check.

Decision:

As Mr Innes admitted the breach we find the charge proved.

Submission For Penalty:

Mr Williamson produced Mr Innes' record which showed 2 previous breaches under this Rule in the last 12 months. He said both those breaches occurred in February 2013 and he described the interference as severe and assessed it in the mid to high range. He submitted a suspension of not less than 6 days would be appropriate.

Mr Innes advised that he had upcoming commitments at Melbourne on October 12, and that any period of suspension could commence after that. He submitted that his record is better than it was last year. He admitted that he had no intention of riding at Winton or Dunedin later in the month. He said in his view 6 days seemed quite high as a penalty.

Mr Innes was granted a brief adjournment to confirm his upcoming commitments on ZONZA in Australia. Mr Innes advised us that he would like to ride ZONZA in Melbourne on October 19. He noted that would require a 4 day suspension.

Reasons For Penalty:

The Committee carefully considered all the evidence and submissions presented. We have adopted 5 riding days as the starting point in considering the term of suspension. The mitigating factors are Mr Innes' admission of the breach and his good record in relation to this Rule in the last 12 months. The aggravating factors are the level of carelessness was clearly in the mid to high range and several horses were affected as a result of his carelessness.

We did consider Mr Innes' submission regarding ZONZA however the level of carelessness does not permit this Committee to impose a 4 day suspension.

In slight mitigation for Mr Innes is the head on film shows that he does look inwards and attempt to straighten his mount when Ms Collett called out however, the interference had already occurred. We note that APACHEE TAAT did not react kindly to the check.

After taking into account all the above factors we consider an appropriate penalty is a 5 day suspension.

Penalty:

We grant Mr Innes' request to seek a deferment to his suspension as per Rule 1106(2).

Accordingly, we impose a suspension on Mr Innes which will commence after racing on October 12 and conclude after racing on October 19 (5 days).

The penalty did not include any South Island meetings as Mr Innes confirmed that he did not intend riding at any upcoming South Island meetings.

Document Actions