Auckland TR 3 December 2022 – R4 – Hakim Kamaruddin

Evidence:

Following the running of Race 4, Information A18061 was lodged alleging the Respondent, Apprentice Rider Mr H Kamaruddin, struck his mount, OZARK with his arm raised above shoulder height.

Rule 639(3)(f)(ii) provides that: “a rider must not use the whip above shoulder height.”

Apprentice Rider Mr Kamaruddin was assisted at the hearing by Mr N Harris (Rider Mentor). Mr Harris advised the Adjudicative Committee that he would speak on behalf of Mr Kamaruddin who has recently commenced riding in New Zealand ex-Singapore. He said that he has ridden eighty-seven winners so far during his 3-year Apprenticeship and last year was the leading Singapore Apprentice Rider.

Using available film, Senior Stipendiary Steward Mr Jones demonstrated that Mr Kamaruddin struck his mount (OZARK), raising his whip above shoulder height five times.

OZARK finished in fourth place. He said that the strikes were reasonably forceful.

Mr Harris agreed with the number of strikes and the whip action of Mr Kamaruddin. Using the race films, he pointed out that Mr Kamaruddin was racing in tight quarters and raised his whip to avoid contacting the runner on his inner.

Mr Harris said that there was no parallel Rule in Singapore where Riders are permitted to raise their whip above shoulder height. He added that Mr Kamaruddin will need to adapt his style to ensure compliance with the New Zealand Rule.

Decision:

As the Respondent admitted the breach, the Adjudicative Committee finds the breach proved.

Submissions for Penalty:

Mr Jones said that Mr Kamaruddin has a clear record, from a limited number of rides, in New Zealand, but he was spoken to advisedly on 1 December 2022 at New Plymouth regarding his whip action.

Mr Jones submitted a fine of $500 be imposed in recognition of the number of strikes (5) above shoulder height.

Mr Harris reinforced the fact that Mr Kamaruddin will need to adjust his action and quickly adapt to the New Zealand Whip Rules.

Reasons for Penalty:

There have been six breaches of whip use above shoulder height in the past 12 months. Four have resulted in $250 fines, one other has resulted in a $500 fine (3^rd breach) and the other a 5-day suspension and $150 fine, which included one strike above shoulder as part of excessive use of whip charge. Based on the previous cases, a $250 fine was adopted as the starting point.

In assessing penalty, the Adjudicative Committee considered the submissions of Mr Jones and Mr Harris.  In particular, the number of strikes and force used deemed it necessary to apply an uplift to the starting point and determined a $450 fine to be appropriate in the circumstances.

Mr Harris will ensure that Mr Kamaruddin will receive remedial coaching in relation to his whip use.

Conclusion:

The Respondent Mr H Kamaruddin is fined $450.