Timaru HRC 19 November 2022 – R8 – Richard May

EVIDENCE:

Following the running of Race 8, the Respondent Mr May denied a breach of Rule 869 (3)(b); namely that “R May (JANARTY) drove carelessly rounding the first bend when shifting inwards when insufficiently clear of WEBBS REACTOR which was checked and lost its rightful racing position”

Rule 869(3)(b) provides:

No driver in any race shall drive carelessly.

Using available video footage, Stipendiary Steward Mr Renault identified the horses involved in the incident namely, JANARTY driven by Mr May and WEBBS REACTOR driven by Mr L O’Reilly. He said Mr May had attempted to take the lead at the winning post but was unsuccessful. He said Mr May then took hold of his horse and shifted inwards into the racing line of Mr O’Reilly, who had to check his horse strongly, surrendering his rightful position.

Mr Renault showed all available angles to demonstrate Mr May’s manoeuvre and said it is always a difficult one when the field is moving forward and you are easing backward, gaps close twice as fast. He said Mr May has simply not given Mr O’Reilly enough room, tightening him, causing the check.

Mr May said he thought initially there was enough room, but Mr O’Reilly’s horse was pulling which made it look worse than it really was, and that his own horse came back a bit fast. Mr May said as WEBBS REACTOR has finished a long last, it wouldn’t have made any difference if it had lost a position or not. He said he had steered off Mr O’Reilly when it became tight, and it wasn’t as though he had come in and knocked him down.

Reasons for Decision:

The Adjudicative Committee carefully considered all the evidence and video coverage. Mr May has, after failing to make the front, and as expected, looked to secure a run behind the leader, but has made an error of judgment resulting in Mr O’Reilly having to check out of his position.

Decision:

The charge is found proved.

Submission for Penalty:

Stipendiary Steward Mr Renault produced the Respondent’s record which indicated a clear record under the Rule, but said Mr May has been warned 4 times in relation to this Rule.  The Respondent has had 418 drives so far in the current season.

Mr Renault added that Stewards assessed the breach as low range, and therefore a suspension of 2 days would be an appropriate penalty.

The Respondent submitted he would like a 7-day deferment to any proposed suspension.

Reasons for Penalty:

The Penalty Guide provides a penalty starting point of a 10 drive suspension or a $500 fine.

After taking into account the submissions of both the Applicant and Respondent, noting the race film and the resultant impact on the affected runner, the Adjudicative Committee assessed the breach as low and adopted a 2-day suspension as the starting point.

The Adjudicative Committee found no significant reasons to depart from the Guidelines.

After evaluating all of the factors, the Adjudicative Committee determined a 2- day suspension to be an appropriate penalty in the circumstances of this case.

Conclusion:

The Respondent was granted a deferment, and his licence to drive in races is suspended, commencing after racing on 26 November 2022 up to and including 3 December 2022.