NZ Metro TC 19 May 2023 – R9 – Leo O’Reilly

Summary of Facts:

Following the running of Race 9, the Respondent Leo O’Reilly admitted a breach of Whip Rule 869(2).

The particulars of the charge are that when driving CREED, he used his whip with more than a flicking motion in the run home.

Rule 869 provides that:

(2) No driver shall during any race use a whip in a manner in contravention of the Use of the Whip Regulations made by the Board.

Regulation 3.1 reads as follows;

3. USE OF THE WHIP

 3.1 A driver may only apply the whip in a wrist only flicking motion whilst holding a rein in each hand with the tip of the whip pointed forward in an action which does not engage the shoulder.

Stipendiary Steward Vinny Munro used available video footage to demonstrate the alleged breach. Mr Munro pointed out Mr O’Reilly draw his whip and use it with more than a wrist flicking motion on five to six occasions over the concluding stages of the race.

In response, the Respondent elected to make no submissions in regard to the breach.

Decision:

As Mr O’Reilly has admitted the breach, it is therefore found proved.

Submission For Penalty:

Mr Munro stated that Mr O’Reilly was warned regarding use of his whip in more than a wrist flicking motion at the Addington meeting on 2 March 2023 – 18 drives ago. He submitted that this breach was mid-level and with the Penalty Guide providing a starting point of a $300 for a mid range. Mr Munro submitted that a fine commensurate with a mid-level breach be considered as penalty.

The Respondent elected not to make any submissions on penalty

Reasons For Penalty:

After consideration of the evidence from all parties concerned and viewing the race films of the concluding stages of the race, the Adjudicative Committee agreed with the Stewards and also assessed the breach as mid-level.

The Penalty Guide provides a $300 fine as a starting point for an initial mid range breach of this Rule.

This Adjudicative Committee determined that there were no aggravating factors to consider, therefore no uplift in penalty was warranted. Taking all factors into consideration including the mid-level range of the breach, it was determined that a fine of $300 was an appropriate penalty in this case.

Conclusion:

The Respondent is fined the sum of $300.