Non Raceday Inquiry – Written Decision dated 25 March 2024 – Ciel Butler

Evidence:

Following racing at Trentham on 9 March 2024, Mr Goodwin charged Ms C Butler with a breach of Rule 636(1)(b), alleging that she failed to take all reasonable and permissible measures throughout the race on her mount SINBIN.  Due to there being no suitable person to assist Ms Butler on the day, the charge was deferred to a later date.

Ms Butler indicated she did not admit the alleged breach of the Rule, and the Information was heard by the Adjudicative Committee, prior to Race 1 at New Plymouth, on a defended basis.

SINBIN was a $3 favourite and started from barrier 2 in an 1100m sprint race. The horse finished in 4th place with the margins being 1 – 3/4 L / short head/ nose. The race was run on a Good 4 track.

Mr Goodwin said it was the submission of the Stewards that Ms Butler failed to take advantage of a good draw by restraining her mount at the back of the field over the initial stages of the race. By restraining, he did not mean that she hauled or pulled SINBIN back, but rather, it was a controlled and managed ride where she kept within a managed boundary. In contrast, Mr Goodwin pointed to the Rider on her inside, Mr Ace Lawson-Carroll, who kicked his mount up after leaving the barrier and got away to a flying start. Ms Butler did not do that, which allowed the rest of the field to come across, effectively losing her advantage of a good draw. Mr Goodwin maintained that Ms Butler should have made much more of an effort to keep the outside horses out, which would have placed SINBIN in a very good position, particularly in a sprint race where there are no second chances. Instead of being competitive and in a good spot, Ms Butler had to come wide in the home straight looking for a run. Mr Goodwin said SINBIN jumped well, but the lack of urgency after the start was of concern to the Stewards, hence the charge against Ms Butler. Sectional times showed that SINBIN ran the fastest last sectionals of the race and the slowest first 400 sectional of all the horses, confirming a lack of urgency at the start.

Mr Goodwin was concerned with Ms Butler’s ride and following the race, phoned Mr Patterson (Trainer of SINBIN), who was en route to races at Ellerslie. Mr Patterson conveyed that he was far from happy with the ride and his riding instructions to Ms Butler had been to be positive right from the start. Mr Goodwin said although Ms Butler was an Apprentice, with 317 prior rides, she was not an inexperienced Rider.

Mr Patterson gave evidence in person at the hearing. He explained his instructions to Ms Butler were “to be a bit positive without being negative” and “to not lose contact with the horse in front”. Mr Patterson described Ms Butler as a patient Rider out of the gates, and said the horse is very laid back, so these 2 factors combined, led to a tactical error at the start. In all other ways, Ms Butler executed the ride well and finished strongly. While he wasn’t happy with the ride, he said sometimes that’s how things pan out.

In her defense, Ms Butler said she did not believe she restrained her mount at the start. Mr Patterson told her the morning of the races, to ride the horse “neutral” – not to pull back, but not to push forward. After studying the form in the race, Ms Butler identified that there was a lot of speed amongst the runners with  IDYLLIC and GEE STRING in particular, considered hard-going horses. SINBIN has a tendency to overrace, so when she jumped away, Ms Butler was content to let her roll along. Her past form is on wetter tracks, and Ms Butler felt the horse was a bit flat on her feet coming down the shute. In the straight, SINBIN was behind a wall of horses and Ms Butler made a decision to come wide before it was too late to get out. From that point, she ran on well.

Ms Clapperton said, in a race, everything happens in a split second and Riders have to make decisions on the day based on a variety of factors that might be right or wrong., eg at its first start, SINBIN was last out of the gates and raced last the whole way, whereas another time, it was up handy. Ms Butler knows the horse better than anyone, having ridden it a number of times. SINBIN has had 6 starts, for 2 wins on a soft track where the pace was a lot slower than this race, which actually set a new track record. Ms Clapperton showed the start of the race and highlighted the Riders to the outside of Ms Butler – none of whom were riding their mounts forward. She said if Ms Butler was charged, then others must be as well. Ms Clapperton finished by saying that in her opinion, a Rider should not be charged just because a Trainer was unhappy with the way his horse had been ridden on the day.  Mr Patterson was not to know that they were going to run a track record.  Ms Clapperton said she called Mr Patterson on the Monday morning and expressed her opinion that there wasn’t a charge to be put forward, and he agreed with her.

Mr Patterson confirmed he told Mr Goodwin on the phone that he didn’t believe the punters and Owner got a fair go and Ms Butler needs to show a “a bit more urgency” at times. He had watched the race on his cellphone in the car, and at the time was frustrated by being stuck in traffic trying to get to Ellerslie. Mr Patterson admitted that Ms Butler kept in contact with the horse in front as instructed, and had not restrained her mount, but described the ride as “being complacent out of the gates.” He said SINBIN is always “off the nickel” at the start and picks up as the race goes on. Looking back now, particularly knowing about the track record, there were other Riders who also made a tactical error and maybe a warning would have sufficed.

Reasons for Decision:

Rule 636(1)(b) reads: A person being the Rider of a horse in a Race, must take all reasonable and permissible measures throughout the Race to ensure that his horse is given full opportunity to win the Race or to obtain the best possible finishing place.

It is part of the Stewards’ duty to enquire into the conduct of a race, especially when a favourite is beaten, so it was necessary and proper for Mr Goodwin to scrutinise Ms Butler’s riding tactics on this occasion.

Today’s hearing took place notably 2 weeks after the event and provided the first opportunity for all parties to present their perspective firsthand, allowing for crucial cross-examination and clarification of pertinent points.

Ms Butler clearly articulated her reasons for riding in the manner in which she did.  She had studied the field, knew her horse well and followed instructions from the Trainer as she interpreted them. Although settling at the rear, SINBIN crucially remained connected with the field. Mr Patterson’s initial dissatisfaction post-race was tempered by subsequent considerations. Not angered by being stuck in traffic, he conceded there were other factors as outlined above, that he hadn’t at the time considered.

The complexity of race dynamics leads to Riders having to make rapid decisions. Maybe with the benefit of hindsight, Ms Butler would have ridden more aggressively at the start, but her strategic choice to settle at the back appeared both reasonable and pragmatic to the Adjudicative Committee under the circumstances.

The severity of a six-week suspension, as outlined in the Penalty Guide, demands a high standard of proof. Following a thorough review of all evidence, the Adjudicative Committee found this standard had not been met.

Therefore, the charge against Ms Butler under Rule 636(1)(b) is dismissed.