Rotorua-BOP HC 13 August 2025 – R5 – Jack Taplin

BACKGROUND

Following the running of Race 5, the ‘SEEKA INSPIRATIONAL PEOPLE 1950’ an Information was lodged alleging a breach of Rule 638(3)(g)(i). The Information read as follows:

‘In that he struck his mount eight times prior to the 100m’

Rule 638(3)(g)(i) provides (g) a Rider must not (i) except as provided for in (iii)(A) and (iii)(B) of this sub rule, strike a horse with a whip more than 5 times prior to the 100-metre mark (other than in a slapping motion down the shoulder with the whip hand remaining on the reins);

Mr Taplin acknowledged that he understood the Rule, the nature of the charge and confirmed his admission of the breach.   Mr Taplin was assisted by Mr Noel Harris, Apprentice Mentor.

EVIDENCE

Using the available race film, Stewards identified the incident. Mr Taplin’s mount, racing against the rails, was under pressure from the 1000 metre mark. The Respondent is seen to strike his mount on eight occasions, from the top of the straight to the 100-metre mark. One further strike is noted inside the 100 metres. QUILL finished in third place.

The Respondent agreed with the count. By way of explanation, Mr Taplin acknowledged that the horse was under pressure, had responded to his ride and that he lost count of the number of strikes. Mr Harris reiterated this, conveying the Respondent’s action reflected his inexperience.

DECISION

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

SUBMISSIONS ON PENALTY

Senior Stipendiary Steward Mr Brady Jones, produced the Respondent’s record as it relates to any breach of this Rule, within the last six months. His record is clear to this point. It was conveyed that Mr Taplin has had some 82 race day rides. Stewards referred the Adjudicative Committee to the current NZTR Penalty Guide, which provides for a fine of $500 – first offence 3 additional strikes.

In relation to penalty, Mr Taplin said that he had nothing to add.  Mr Harris emphasised that there was no significant force involved in the Respondent’s action.

REASONS FOR PENALTY

The breach is clearly identified by film. After considering same, along with respective submissions, the Adjudicative Committee determined there was no compelling reason to depart from that starting point, as set out in the Penalty Guide. On that basis, the Respondent is fined $500.

CONCLUSION

Mr Taplin is fined $500.