You are here: Home / Race Days / Racing Tauranga - 6 February 2019 / R Tauranga 6 February 2019 - R 4 - Chair, Mr A Dooley

R Tauranga 6 February 2019 - R 4 - Chair, Mr A Dooley

Created on 07 February 2019

ADooley (chair)
Mr M Hashizume - Apprentice Rider of SHORT FUSE
Mr B Jones - Stipendiary Steward
Mr N Harris - Apprentice Jockey Mentor assisting Mr Hashizume
Mr G Richardson - Trainer assisting Mr Hashizume
Mr J Oatham - Chief Stipendiary Steward
Information Number
Careless Riding

Following the running of race 4, Happy 70th Birthday Carol Rickard 1200, an Information was filed pursuant to Rule 638 (1)(d). The Informant, Mr Oatham, alleged that Mr Hashizume permitted his mount SHORT FUSE to shift in shortly after leaving the barriers when not sufficiently clear, causing interference to multiple runners.

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

Mr Oatham read the Rule aloud to Mr Hashizume.

Mr Hashizume acknowledged that he understood the Rule and confirmed that he admitted the breach. Mr Richardson and Mr Harris assisted Mr Hashizume at the hearing.

Mr Jones demonstrated the incident using the available video footage. He identified that SHORT FUSE had drawn the outside barrier (number 9) and he named the entire field that had drawn on his inside. He said that all the horses on SHORT FUSE’s inside suffered direct or indirect interference as a result of Mr Hashizume shifting in when not sufficiently clear. He said when Mr Hashizume initially shifted in he was only half a length clear at best. He then identified that when SHORT FUSE was racing into the first bend (1000 metres) he was only half a length to three quarters of a length clear. At that point Mr Hashizume continued to improve forward to the lead when he had 4 horses racing on his inside. He stated that all horses suffered varying degrees of interference due to Mr Hashizume’s actions. In conclusion he said that Mr Hashizume misinterpreted the situation and he “rushed in too quick”.

Mr Hashizume said that he accepted Mr Jones’ interpretation of the incident. He added that the interference was “his fault”.

Mr Richardson said that he accepted Mr Jones’ interpretation of the interference. He added that Mr Hashizume would learn a lot from today’s incident.

Mr Harris identified on the video footage that Mr Hashizume looked to his inside when he shifted in and he misread the situation. He said that Mr Hashizume tried to give some room to the horses on his inside but reiterated he misread the situation.


As Mr Hashizume admitted the breach the Committee found the charge proved.

Submission For Penalty:

Mr Oatham said that Mr Hasizume had a clear record under this Rule from 21 race day rides to date. He said Mr Hashizume’s relative inexperience was the only mitigating factor. He described the level of carelessness as high and noted that all 8 horses suffered various degrees of interference. He stated that the interference was some of the worst he had seen without a fall occurring. Mr Oatham submitted that a significant uplift from the starting point of 10 days ought to be imposed.

Mr Oatham referred to a similar high range careless riding breach where Mr Goindasamy incurred a 16 day suspension. He said the Stewards rate today’s breach higher although he moderated that with the fact he was not present on course for Mr Goindasamy’s breach. In conclusion he reiterated that the entire field was interfered with directly or indirectly because of Mr Hashizume’s carelessness.

Mr Hashizume advised that he had engagements at Palmerston North on 8 February and any proposed suspension could start after that date.

Mr Richardson and Mr Harris accept that the level of carelessness was high range.

Mr Richardson submitted that Mr Hashizume was a talented rider and he misread the situation today.

Mr Harris noted that in Mr Goindasamy’s breach a rider was nearly dislodged shortly after the start.

Reasons For Penalty:

The Committee carefully considered all the evidence and submissions presented.

When reviewing the incident it was clear that all of the other 8 runners suffered various degrees of interference as a result of Mr Hashizume’s actions. The head on film was compelling. It showed that shortly after the start Mr Hashizume allowed his mount to shift in from the outside barrier when only half a length clear. As a result this initially caused crowding to TOGETHER, HIGH DISTINCTION and CUTTING UP ROUGH.

It was evident that Mr Hashizume was shifting in rapidly prior to the first bend and he was on an acute angle. Mr Hashizume continued to ride his mount forward when shifting in and he failed to take any corrective action. As a consequence Mr Hashizume dictated MEMORIES ONLY inwards onto WONDER WOMAN, ITS DESTINYS CHILD and STAR TREASURE which were all severely checked near the 1000 metres. Mr Grylls, the rider of STAR TREASURE was forced to firmly restrain his mount when racing adjacent to the running rail. When that runner was checked it then shifted out sharply and badly hampered CHADSDALE with resultant interference to CUTTING UP ROUGH, HIGH DISTINCTION and TOGETHER which were all inconvenienced.

The Committee observed that it was fortunate that ITS DESTINY CHILD did not fall when it made firm contact with the running rail near the 1000 metres.

The actions of Mr Hashizume involved a significant element of risk and riding in that manner is likely to put in danger the safety of a horse and rider. It was of concern to the Committee that when Mr Hashizume was shifting in he looked to his inside on more than one occasion yet he made no attempt to straighten his mount to avoid causing the interference. Mr Hashizume appeared intent on leading at all costs and he displayed very poor judgement.

The Committee deemed this breach to be at the very high end of carelessness with half of the field (4) being severely checked. The above reasons are notable aggravating factors.

When deliberating the Committee took into account the circumstances of this case compared with Mr Goindasamy’s charge where a 16 day suspension was imposed.

The JCA Penalty Guide starting point for high end carelessness is 10 plus national riding days. It is important that a penalty has the effect of deterring other riders from committing similar offences. The Committee was satisfied that this breach was so serious that it justified a significant uplift. Therefore 19 national riding days was adopted as the appropriate starting point.

The mitigating factors were Mr Hashizume’s admission of the breach, his clear record from limited riding opportunities and his inexperience as an Apprentice rider. For these combined factors Mr Hashizume was afforded a 2 day reduction in penalty.

The Committee notes that SHORT FUSE finished in 3rd place.

The Committee had regard for the race meetings included in Mr Hashizume’s suspension.

After taking into account all the above factors the Committee considered that an appropriate suspension was 17 national riding days.


The Committee grants a deferment to Mr Hashizume’s suspension pursuant to Rule 1106(2).

Accordingly, Mr Hashizume had his license to ride in races suspended for a period to commence after racing on 8 February and conclude after racing on 8 March 2019.

The race meeting scheduled for Te Rapa on 9 February was not included in the penalty because the declaration of riders had closed.

Document Actions