NZ Metro TC 25 October 2024 – R1- Ricky May

Summary of Facts:

Following the running of Race 1, the Respondent Open Driver Ricky May denied a breach of Rule 869(3)(b); namely that when driving MELTON MAGNATE, he drove carelessly near the 50m when not clear of JUST FOXIN (Tim Williams) which was checked and broke in consequence.

The Respondent, Mr May, endorsed the Information ‘I do not admit the breach of the Rule’ and confirmed he understood the Rule, his denial of the breach and the nature of the charge.

Rule 869(3)(b) provides:

No driver in any race shall drive carelessly.

Using available video footage, Stipendiary Steward, Shane Renault, identified the horses involved in the incident namely, MELTON MAGNATE, driven by Mr May, racing mid track, positioned behind the leaders and to the inside of JUST FOXIN, driven by Tim Williams, as they approached the 50m. He pointed out Mr May looking to improve to the outside of FREDASTAIRE, driven by Robbie Close, and at the 50m, he shifted out into the line of JUST FOXIN, who was checked and broke momentarily.

Mr May, in defense, stated that he was a victim of circumstances. He said that his horse ducked out a fraction wider than anticipated and JUST FOXIN just touched his wheel. He added that Mr Williams’ horse was slow to react, in shifting wider on the track, to give him some room. Mr Williams gave evidence to say that his horse was having its first start in cup blinds and that Mr May has come out gradually. He added that Mr May was almost past him, when his horse saw Mr May from the corner of its eye. Mr Williams stated there was not a lot in it.

Reasons for Decision:

The Adjudicative Committee is satisfied that near the 50m, Mr May, when in the trail of Mr Close, and racing on the inside of Mr Williams, was looking to improve to the outside of that horse, and was not quite clear in that movement, resulting in the leg of JUST FOXIN striking the sulky wheel of  MELTON MAGNATE, which caused JUST FOXIN to check.

Decision:

The Adjudicative Committee therefore determined that on this occasion, Mr May has driven carelessly and therefore finds the charge proved,

Submissions for Penalty:

Stipendiary Steward Mr Renault, produced the Respondent’s record, which indicated a clear record. He added that Mr May had to date, this season, 425 drives.

Mr Renault stated that the Stewards assessed this breach as low level, with the Penalty Guide providing a $300 fine or a 2 day suspension for an initial breach of this Rule.

He submitted that a fine commensurate with the Penalty Guide be considered as Penalty.

The Respondent stated that a fine was preferred as penalty.

Reasons for Penalty:

The Penalty Guide provides a starting point of a $300 fine or a 2 day suspension for an initial breach of this Rule.

This Adjudicative Committee agreed with the Stewards and determined that the breach was low-range.

There were no aggravating factors to consider, therefore no uplift was warranted.

After evaluating all of the factors, the Adjudicative Committee determined a $300 fine to be an appropriate penalty in the circumstances of this case.

Conclusion:

Mr May is fined the sum of $300.