Non Raceday Inquiry – Written Decision dated 21 December 2022 – Rory McIlwrick

ID: RIB14629

Respondent(s):
Rory McIlwrick - Driver

Applicant:
Miss R Haley - Stipendiary Steward

Adjudicators:
G Hall, N Skelt

Persons Present:
Mr N McIntyre, Chairman of Stewards

Information Number:
A19505

Decision Type:
Race Related Charge

Charge:
Careless Driving

Rule(s):
869(3)(b) - Riding/driving infringement

Plea:
Not Admitted

Animal Name:
BLACK OPS

Code:
Harness

Race Date:
02/12/2022

Race Club:
Forbury Park Trotting Club

Race Location:
Wingatui Racecourse - 285 Gladstone Road North, Mosgiel, Dunedin,

Race Number:
R7

Hearing Date:
17/12/2022

Hearing Location:
Ascot Park Raceway, Invercargill

Outcome: Proved

Penalty: Driver Rory McIlwrick is suspended for 1 day and fined $200

Evidence

Miss Haley asked Mr McIntyre to describe the incident. He pointed out that the markers were well out from the inside fence on the day and the field was racing off the markers. At the 1600 metres the Respondent went to the front and was about ½ a cart off. The field was in normal racing formation. On the home bend and straightening for the run home BLACK OPS came out forcing Mr Williamson, who was racing to his outside, wider on the track. Mr McIntyre estimated the shift to be about a horse width. The result of BLACK OPS shifting out was that WHATA RAZZLE DAZZLE, a stablemate, driven by Mr Orange, was given a run to the inside of BLACK OPS before the passing lane. Mr McIntyre emphasised it was not part of the Informant’s case that this run had been given intentionally to Mr Orange.

Mr McIntyre pointed out that the Respondent was driving with a loose inside rein; it was not tight. He believed this had allowed BLACK OPS to shift up the track and he would have expected Mr McIlwrick to have taken steps to straighten BLACK OPS, but he had not. He believed this was an error of judgement. He did not believe there were tractability issues with the horse. The head of the horse was not turned. He described BLACK OPS as shifting in then out again as the horse raced down the home straight.

Mr McIntyre said it was a gradual drift across the track by BLACK OPS, which started on the bend. Mr Orange had been behind Mr McIlwrick and had followed him around the bend but had taken the inside run once it was presented to him. Mr McIntyre concluded by stating that the principal concern of the Stewards was the absence of corrective action by the Respondent.

Miss Haley produced BLACK OPS’ Penalty History. This showed that this year the horse had been stood down from mobile starts in November and in April it had been warned for performance. There were also examples of the horse being required to be vetted after its race. Miss Haley commented that Mr McIntyre had fully described the Informant’s case and she had nothing further to add.

Mr McIlwrick stated that he agreed that BLACK OPS had shifted ground at the top of the straight. The horse had moved off the markers. He said BLACK OPS was extremely difficult to steer and when racing down the back he had been wider than he had wanted. He said BLACK OPS was biting down on the bit and he believed it was an unhappy horse. BLACK OPS’ racing manners were terrible; it over-races and pulls hard. The horse had been warned by the Stewards for performance and had been late scratched on 17 November for refusing to leave the pre-race formation and in October it had broken its cart at workouts.

Mr McIlwrick said on the home bend he had decided to change tactics and rather than keep pressure on the inside rein, as he had when racing down the back, on the home bend he was jerking the reins without holding continuous tension. He had hoped this would help the horse come out of the bend better. He said the horse was hanging out and biting down on the bit more and more.

When questioned by the Adjudicative Committee, Mr McIlwrick stated that he believed he had two options: to go back to the rein but he was aware he might lose control of the horse as the horse’s manners were getting worse the further, they went; or to do as he had done with the loose rein. He emphasised there was no camber on the bend and that BLACK OPS was being difficult and was not working with him. He said this was the third time he had driven the horse. On the first occasion it was “ok”, on the second it had lugged out and had dropped out to last.

Mr Norman, the Trainer of BLACK OPS, gave evidence by telephone. He said BLACK OPS was not a very co-operative horse. He had difficulty in working BLACK OPS; it would do whatever it wanted. The horse had had a number of Trainers and he had now finished with the horse. The horse had had two starts for him. He had not given specific instructions to Mr McIlwrick as to how to drive the horse, other than to put it into the race.

Mr McIlwrick concluded his defence by stating that he accepted he had not put continuous pressure on the inside rein and had thought on the day that intermittently pulling on the rein and slapping the horse with the inside rein without undue touching of the mouth, was the best way to get the horse around the home bend without it drifting out.

Decision

The Adjudicative Committee accepts that BLACK OPS is not the easiest horse to drive, and its recent racing record is evidence of this. Mr McIlwrick accepts that he was not applying continuous pressure to the inside rein of BLACK OPS despite the fact he was aware the horse was shifting wider on the track both on the home bend and when entering the straight. BLACK OPS has shifted out, we believe, one cart width, which gave a run prior to the passing lane to the horse which was trailing. The Stipendiary Stewards do not allege this was intentional notwithstanding it was a stablemate that got the run. We do not disagree with this assessment.

Mr McIlwrick has said that BLACK OPS was biting down on the bit, and he believed intermittent pressure by jerking the inside rein was a better option than his applying continuous pressure. However, when this strategy did not work, it is not evident that Mr McIlwrick took any steps at all to straighten BLACK OPS. The consequence was Mr Williamson was shifted a cart width wider on the track on exiting the bend.

We do not accept Mr McIlwrick’s statement that placing continued pressure on the inside rein might have made the horse over-react and cause further issues. We believe this is the course of action that he should have adopted when he was aware that BLACK OPS was gradually continuing to drift wider on the track. In these circumstances, we find the charge of careless driving proved.

Submissions as to penalty

Miss Haley produced Mr McIlwrick’s record. He has had 2443 lifetime drives, 318 last season and 189 this. The Stewards believed he averaged five drives per meeting. He had no breaches of the Careless Driving Rule this season. The Penalty Guide has a 10 drive or a $500 starting point for a breach of the Careless Driving Rule.

Miss Haley referred the Adjudicative Committee to the recent case of Mr Chin where he had been suspended for three days for what the Stewards believed was a similar breach in that he had allowed his horse to drift out on the final bend. The Stewards accepted that the racing manners of BLACK OPS were a mitigating factor and submitted a two-day suspension was appropriate for Mr McIlwrick where his carelessness related to his shifting ground.

Mr McIlwrick asked the Adjudicative Committee to consider a fine. He said his record was good and BLACK OPS was difficult to drive.

Penalty

Mr McIlwrick’s carelessness, as we have found, lies in his not taking any remedial action when he was aware that BLACK OPS was drifting out. The starting point in the Penalty Guide is two days’ suspension, based on the Respondent having on average five drives per meeting. The penalty submitted by the Informant thus provides no discount for Mr McIlwrick’s very good record under this Rule and for the fact that the breach is clearly low range, when regard is had to the racing manners of BLACK OPS. The Chin decision, which we cannot access due to issues with the RIB website, is described in the RIB’s penalty update as being mid-range. Mr McIlwrick’s breach is not of this ilk.

To afford some discount to Mr McIlwrick, we impose a one day’s suspension and a fine of $200. We emphasise we have not reduced the penalty from two days in order to permit Mr McIlwrick to drive at a meeting at which he has said he wants to drive. To the contrary, Mr McIlwrick has said that if the Adjudicative Committee believes a two-day suspension is appropriate, he will accept that penalty. For the reasons we have outlined, we do not believe a two-day, 10-drive, suspension is warranted in the circumstances of this case.

Mr McIlwrick is suspended from the end of the meeting today up to and including 24 December 2022 (one day) and is fined the sum of $200.

Decision Date: 17/12/2022

Publish Date: 18/01/2023