You are here: Home / Race Days / Wellington RC - 19 March 2016 / Wellington RC 19 March 2016 - R 6 - Chair, Mrs N Moffatt

Wellington RC 19 March 2016 - R 6 - Chair, Mrs N Moffatt

Created on 21 March 2016

Rules:
638(1)(d)
Committee:
NMoffatt (chair)
NMcCutcheon
Name(s):
Mrs L Allpress
Mr J Oatham - Stipendiary Steward
Mr Bradley - Rider of BELLA COURT
Mr M Cameron - Rider of TOMELILLA
Informant
Mr R Neal - Co-Chief Stipendiary Steward
Information Number
A3526
Plea:
Denied
Charge:
Careless Riding
Evidence:

Following the running of Race 6, Go Racing Syndications Wellington Guineas, an information was lodged by Mr R Neal alleging a breach of Rule 638(1) (d). The information alleged that L Allpress permitted her mount SHADOWS CAST to shift outwards making contact with TOMELILLA forcing that runner onto BELLA COURT which was checked near the 100 metres.

Submission For Decision:

Mr Neal asked Mr Oatham to explain the incident by way of the films. He showed Mrs Allpress blocked for a run, in a position behind other runners. To her outside and forward of her was TOMELILLA (M Cameron) and outside of that runner was Mr Bradley on BELLA COURT. With no run ahead of her Mrs Allpress angled outward from behind Mr Hill and in doing so made contact with Mr Cameron who was forced out onto Mr Bradley, who had to check. Mr Oatham said once Mrs Allpress made contact with Mr Cameron her horse wanted to lay out but by that time the damage had already been done. Mr Oatham used the side-on film to show that when Mrs Allpress commenced to move out she was only about a neck ahead of Mr Cameron.

Mr Bradley gave evidence. He told the Committee that near the 200m mark he was nursing his horse to the line because it had run its race and was wilting. At this stage he was one length behind Mr Cameron. Mr Bradley said he had to abruptly turn his mount sideways when Mr Cameron was dictated outwards onto him. He said prior to the incident both he and Mr Cameron had clear running and both were travelling in a nice straight line.

Mr Cameron told the Committee that his mount was weakening and not making any ground. He had Mr Bradley on his outside and Mr Hills in front of him, slightly to his inside. He was aware that Mrs Allpress’ mount was travelling better than either he or Mr Bradley and Mr Hills was holding his ground in front. Mrs Allpress moved out from behind Mr Hills and pushed his mount TOMELILLA out onto Mr Bradley. Mr Cameron agreed with Mr Neal that while his horse was not travelling as well as Mrs Allpress’ mount he was entitled to his line of running.

Mrs Allpress asked Mr Cameron the following question:” if you were in my position and travelling so good would you have gone for that run, or do you believe there is no run there?” Mr Cameron’s answer was somewhat inconclusive.

Mrs Allpress conceded that when her horse came out it did cause interference to Mr Cameron but she denied the breach because she said it was her job, as a jockey, to go out and find a run. During the race she believed there was a legitimate run between Mr Hills and Mr Cameron and she was riding competitively in taking that run. She said Mr Hill’s horse stopped a little in front of her. Mrs Allpress said she tried her utmost to hold her horse straight explaining she had her left hand down trying to hold her line. She maintained that the interference was caused by her horse running out and if it had run straight there would have been no interference.

Reasons For Decision:

The Committee looked very carefully at all the films and had regard to all of the submissions. The evidence of Mr Bradley and Mr Cameron was very clear and corroborated by the video evidence. Mrs Allpress angled her mount outwards when there was insufficient room to do so and as a consequence TOMELILLA (M Cameron) was forced outwards into the line of BELLA COURT (D Bradley) which was checked. It was observed that Mrs Allpress did take some corrective action by attempting to ease her mount away from TOMELILLA but this course of action was subsequent to the interference that had taken place.

Decision:

We found the charge of careless riding proved.

Submission For Penalty:

Mr Neal advised the hearing that Mrs Allpress had incurred two suspensions for careless riding in the last 12 months. These were:

20/2/16 5 days

28/10/15 3 days + $500

He said the degree of carelessness for today’s breach was above midrange and it took place in a Group 2 race. The Stewards’ submission was for a period of suspension in the vicinity of six to eight days.

Mrs Allpress was invited to make submissions on penalty. She said her record was very good considering all the riding she does around the country. It was her opinion that there should be no difference between a Group 2 race and a maiden race as riders were trying just as hard in both.

Mrs Allpress advised of commitments on Sires Produce Day on April 2nd. She said she would like to start any suspension following riding at Waipukarau on Sunday March 20th. She had spoken to her riding agent, Mr Rodley, and while she had rides at Avondale on Wednesday, rider declarations for that meeting did not close until Monday. Mrs Allpress told the Committee she could “get off those rides” as Mr Rodley had said he could use his other jockeys for Avondale.

In response, Mr Neal argued that the deferment Rule (Rule 1106) was put in place to protect the connections who had already engaged riders.

Reasons For Penalty:

The Judicial Committee Penalty Guide provides that the starting point for penalties imposed for careless riding is a five day suspension. We identified as aggravating factors, the Group 2 status of the race and the stake money of $100,000, for which we applied an uplift of two days.

Rule: 920 (2) states:

On finding a breach proved the Judicial Committee may impose any penalty provided by these Rules. In imposing a penalty provided in these Rules the Judicial Committee may have regard to such matters as it considers appropriate including:

(a) the status of the Race;

(b) the stake payable in respect of the Race;

Judicial committees have consistently applied an uplift in penalty for Group races.

We placed the degree of interference at just above midrange. Mrs Allpress affected two horses by angling out when not clear. Although evidence was given that both these runners were tiring they were, nevertheless, entitled to clear racing room. We accept that Mrs Allpress has a very good record for the number of rides she has in a season, and for this we allowed a discount of one day. Taking into account all of the penalty submissions it was our opinion that a six day suspension was an appropriate penalty for today’s breach.

Penalty:

On the evidence presented to the Committee, by the Stipendiary Stewards and Mrs Allpress, and having regard to Rule 1106(2) it was our view that Mrs Allpress has an obligation to fulfil her riding engagements at Avondale on Wednesday 23rd. This was consistent with the approach taken by the Judicial Committee in relation to the earlier careless riding charge against Ms Johnson.

1106 provides:

(2) Each suspension of a Rider or Rider’s Licence which is imposed under these Rules by the Judicial Committee during any day of a Race Meeting shall take effect as follows:

(a) if, at the time the suspension is imposed, the Rider has no engagements to ride a horse in a Race during the next seven day period after that Race day, from the completion of that Rider’s engagements on that Race day; or

(b) if, at the time the suspension is imposed, the Rider is engaged to ride a horse or horses in a Race(s) during the next seven day period after that Race day, then from the earlier of:

(i) the completion of such engagements within that seven day period; or

(ii) the completion of that seven day period.

Accordingly Mrs Allpress is suspended from riding from the close of racing on Wednesday March 23rd up to and including racing on Saturday April 2nd. We were mindful that one of the days included in the suspension was of premier status.

Document Actions