You are here: Home / Race Days / Hawkes Bay RI - 24 April 2010 / Hawkes Bay Racing 24 April 2010 - R 8

Hawkes Bay Racing 24 April 2010 - R 8



Informant:  C. George

Defendant:  L. Innes

Information No:  6692

Meeting:  Hawkes Bay Racing

Date:  24 April 2010

Venue:  Hastings

Race:  8

Rule No:  638 (1) (d)

Judicial Committee:  N.Moffatt, Chair

Plea:  Admitted



Following the running of Race 8, the Group 3 Hawkes Bay Gold Cup, Mr. L. Innes admitted a charge of careless riding brought under Rule 638 (1) (d).


Judicial Committee member Mr Castles stood down from consideration of this matter given his personal knowledge of the defendant.  The matter was accordingly determined by the Chair.


The Information alleged that L. Innes the rider of BOUNDLESS allowed his mount to shift inward near the 200m when not clear of CASSINI (S. Spratt) and COURT RULER (M. Wenn) which were checked.


Mr Goodwin outlined the incident on the available videos.  The head-on showed Mr Innes on BOUNDLESS racing in tight quarters with CASSINI and COURT RULER to his inside.  Mr Innes hit his horse behind the saddle and BOUNDLESS proceeded to move inwards with resultant tightening to these two horses. Mr Goodwin estimated the inward movement to be two horse-widths.  Despite being on an inward movement Mr. Innes kept riding with vigour pushing BOUNDLESS forward and eventually winning the race. The side-on view confirmed the interference.


Mr George said that the interference was not at the high end but Mr Innes should have made a greater effort to keep his horse straight. The interference did not have a bearing on the finish of the race.


Mr. Innes said that he did try to pull his horse off CASSINI and believed that he had only moved inwards one horse-width.



Mr George said that Mr Innes rides regularly around the country and had incurred only three suspensions in the last 12 months. He submitted that a suspension in the vicinity of 5 – 7 days be imposed. Despite the race having Group 3 status the Stewards’ were not seeking an additional monetary penalty in this instance because there had been no intent on Mr Innes’s part and the carelessness was not at the higher end.


Mr Innes advised that he had commitments up to and including Saturday May 1st.



The committee carefully considered all of the evidence and submissions presented including Mr Innes’s admission of the breach.  His riding record was considered to be reasonably good taking into account the number of rides that he has.

The level of carelessness was well outlined by Mr George and I accept that the two horses interfered with did not have their chances of finishing in a higher position affected. For that reason the level of carelessness was not considered to be high.


I also took into account the Group 3 status of the race and the riding engagements of Mr Innes over the next 7 days.


Balancing all of those matters Mr Innes is suspended from the close of racing on Saturday May 1st until the close of racing on Sunday May 9th – in effect six days. It was noted that one of those six days was a premier day at Riccarton.







Document Actions