Wyndham HRC 21 February 2025 – R6 (heard 23 February 2025 at Cromwell) – Ben Waldron

BACKGROUND:

Following the running of Race 6, Mr Renault alleged under Rule 864(1) and (2)(a) and the Approved Gear Regulation (20) that Trainer Ben Waldron raced FRANCO CHAPLIN in unapproved gear, due to the nose flap protruding past the horse’s nose, in accordance with the Approved Gear Regulations.

Rule 864 provides:

(1)   No horse shall race in, or race with, any gear or with any appliance or device other than that from time to time approved by the Board.

(2)  Every driver, owner, trainer and assistant thereof of a horse shall with regard to that horse ensure that:-

        (a)   it races only in gear, appliances or devices previously approved by the Board.

The Approved Gear Regulation provides:

The following gear, devices or appliances are approved pursuant to the Rules of Harness Racing by the Board:

20. Nose Flap . . . (fitted so does not protrude past nose).

The hearing of this Information was opened and adjourned on 21 February 2025, the first day of the Wyndham Harness Racing Club’s two day meeting, to be heard on the second day of the meeting at Cromwell Racecourse on 23 February 2025.

At the start of the hearing, Mr Waldron confirmed that he did not admit a breach of the Rule. He also acknowledged that he was familiar with the Rule and Regulation, and the nature of the charge.

EVIDENCE

Stewards produced an image of the official photo finish of Race 6 at the Wyndham HRC meeting on 21 February 2025 and drew attention to the deadheat for 4th place between FRANCO CHAPLIN, to the inside of the track, and SHE’S A JEWEL, which finished wider out. The nose of SHE’S A JEWEL was clearly visible. Stewards submitted that the nose of FRANCO CHAPLIN was not visible, pointing on the photograph to a black section at or near the front of the horse’s head that included a nose flap known as a Hawaiian Skirt, Nose Veil.

Mr Renault read the relevant Rule and the Approved Gear Regulation, as above. He noted the requirement in the Approved Gear Regulation (No. 20) for a nose flap to be fitted so it does not protrude past the horse’s nose. Stewards submitted that a nose flap becomes unapproved when any part of it is positioned below (i.e. beyond) the nose.

FRANCO CHAPLIN wore a leather Hawaiian Skirt nose flap. This style of nose flap features a fringe designed to bounce up and down during the race on the bridge, and above the tip, of a horse’s nose.

Following the running of Race 6, Mr Renault said he watched the Judge study the official photo finish to try and determine the 4th and 5th placings. The horses concerned were FRANCO CHAPLIN and SHE’S A JEWEL, which had finished very close together. The Judge informed Mr Renault that FRANCO CHAPLIN was wearing a nose flap in a manner that meant he could not see the nose of the horse, even when using the zoom function to study a close-up of the photo finish.

Given these circumstances, the Judge said that he was unable to make a determination between 4th and 5th placings and would have to declare a deadheat for 4th place, Mr Renault said.

Stewards had subsequently viewed the race videos and brought the charge because they believed the use of an unapproved nose flap had compromised the finish of the race.

“We believe that (the nose flap) is in advance of the nose, it’s protruding past the nose, which has caused the photo finish to capture the actual flap, rather than the nose of the horse,” Mr Renault said.

Video footage from Race 6 was produced to show a close-up of FRANCO CHAPLIN (identified by saddlecloth No. 2) during the race. Stewards believed this footage illustrated that when the fringed end of the horse’s nose flap was fully in the downward position, it protruded past the nose of the horse. Mr Renault used slow motion frame-by-frame and freeze frame technology to demonstrate this.

Mr Renault said that at the time of the photo finish, the nose flap on FRANCO CHAPLIN was completely down. “And when it’s completely down, we say it actually is protruding past the nostril,” he said. “It’s only marginally, but it’s enough to affect that photo finish… You cannot see the horse’s nose when it (the nose flap) is flat. All you see is the nose flap.”

Stewards offered to call Judge Bruce Young as a witness.

Judge Bruce Young

With the assistance of the official photo finish for Race 6, Mr Young was invited to speak to how he arrived at his decision to declare a deadheat for 4th between FRANCO CHAPLIN and SHE’S A JEWEL.

Mr Young said he was unable to identify the nose of FRANCO CHAPLIN in the official photo. He said the horse’s nose was obscured by the nose flap it was wearing. He believed the nose flap was protruding past the horse’s nose. He said he took the nose flap into account when drawing a line between FRANCO CHAPLIN and SHE’S A JEWEL and deciding to declare a deadheat.

Mr Young said he believed the prominent black nub where he had drawn the line to determine the placing of FRANCO CHAPLIN was the horse’s nose flap. Asked by the Adjudicative Committee whether FRANCO CHAPLIN’s nose flap had compromised the result of the race, Mr Young said, “definitely.”

Mr Renault asked Mr Young to comment on what appeared on the photo finish to be a shadow at the base of FRANCO CHAPLIN’s head. “It is evidently quite clear to me that that shadow doesn’t play a part in making that determination of where I deemed to be the tip of that nose flap,” Mr Young said.

Mr Waldron had no questions for Mr Young.

Respondent Ben Waldron

Mr Waldron initially said he believed the photo finish problem had been caused by a shadow from the nose flap. He used the close-up video of FRANCO CHAPLIN in Race 6 to query what should be defined as the nose. “Is it the nostril, the airway, or is it where the lip is, the top lip of the horse?”

Mr Waldron did not believe he was in breach of the Rule and Approved Gear Regulation, but said he was happy take the nose flap “up another hole” so that it sat further up the bridge of the nose.

FRANCO CHAPLIN had worn the Hawaiian Skirt nose flap in the same setting (i.e. buckled to the same hole) in all of its race starts, he said.

The Adjudicative Committee invited the Respondent to examine the official photo finish. Using SHE’S A JEWEL as an example, the Adjudicative Committee pointed to the tip of the nose above and slightly in front the nostril and asked Mr Waldron if he agreed that this was the body part that counted when determining a photo finish.

Mr Waldron said horses were different and it depended on how a particular horse held its head. Pointing on the photo finish to the black section at or near the front of FRANCO CHAPLIN’s head, he said he believed the lip was part of this black section and had been the horse’s first body part to reach the finish line. He also submitted that part of the black section in question looked to him like a shadow, but added that it was “really hard to tell.”

“What passes the line first?” Mr Waldron asked. “Is it a bit of gear, or is it the horse’s nose?”

Reverting to the close-up video of FRANCO CHAPLIN and the movement up and down of the nose flap, Mr Waldron gave what appeared to be conflicting answers when asked if he agreed that the nose flap protruded beyond the tip of the horse’s nose. “No, I don’t agree it is,” Mr Waldron said. Later in the hearing, when again asked if he agreed that some of the nose flap, when at rest, protruded beyond the tip of the horse’s nose, Mr Waldron said, “Yeah, it’s.. but then we’re in a can of worms here, because what do we do with the gear?”

The Respondent produced the photo finish of a precedent case involving BETTOR OFF, a horse trained by Steve and Amanda Telfer. Mr Waldron said this example of the Hawaiian Skirt nose flap had “a stiff tassel” (fringe) that for the race in question had clearly protruded past the horse’s nose. Mr Waldron submitted the BETTOR OFF example was “quite a bit different to what we’re talking about here.”

Mr Waldron felt he had done all he could to make sure he was complying with the Rule and Regulation. He queried whether he would have to get a new nose flap, one that was less pliable than the one he had been using on FRANCO CHAPLIN, or pull the current gear higher up on the horse’s head.

When a nose flap is properly fitted in an approved manner, Mr Renault said what should be visible is the horse’s nose, with the nose flap situated slightly above it. Mr Waldron said, “that’s a hundred percent fine by me.” He added, “If we’d had this information… when the horse walked into the birdcage day one and someone said, ‘that could end up being an issue,’ the problem would have been solved back then. But no-one said anything. It’s never been a problem until just now.”

Summing up

Stewards submitted that this was a clear example of a nose flap protruding beyond a horse’s nose, which contravened the requirement contained in the Approved Gear Regulation. Mr Renault said this meant FRANCO CHAPLIN had raced in unapproved gear and the prominence of the nose flap in front of the nose, however slight, had compromised the finish. The Judge had said he could not find FRANCO CHAPLIN’s nose when assessing the official photo finish, Mr Renault said.

“This horse has finished 4th equal when it may have only ever finished 5th, if it wasn’t for that piece of gear,” Mr Renault said.

For comparative purposes, Stewards produced video images of a Hawaiian Skirt nose flap that was fitted in an approved fashion to a horse in Race 2 at the Wyndham meeting on 23 February 2025. The front edge of the nose flap was sitting above the tip of the horse’s nose, which was visible.

REASONS FOR DECISION

Trainers are required to fit only approved gear to their horses. The nose flap requirement outlined in the Approved Gear Regulation states that a nose flap must be fitted so that it does not protrude past the horse’s nose. A nose flap that does protrude past the horse’s nose is held to be unapproved gear and is in breach of Rule 864(1) and (2)(a) and the Approved Gear Regulation (20).

An example of a correctly-fitted nose flap produced by the Stewards in evidence assisted the Adjudicative Committee. It highlighted that a raceday Judge must be able to identify the nose of each and every runner when determining official placings. It is fundamental to declaring an official result that all industry participants can have confidence in.

The image of the official photo finish and the slow motion and freeze frame video evidence produced from Race 6 demonstrate to the clear satisfaction of the Adjudicative Committee that the nose of FRANCO CHAPLIN is not visible. The image of FRANCO CHAPLIN’s head in the photo finish is not clear, but Judge Bruce Young was satisfied he could see the front edge of the nose flap. Mr Young said the horse’s nose was obscured by the nose flap it was wearing. He believed the nose flap was protruding past the horse’s nose.

For the charge to be proved, the horse needs only to have been found to have raced in unapproved gear. The Adjudicative Committee is of the view that it is not required to make a specific finding as to the position of the nose flap in the official photo finish.

The Adjudicative Committee finds the video evidence from the race produced by Stewards to be unambiguous. A freeze frame showing FRANCO CHAPLIN’s nose flap in the fully downward position showed it protruded beyond the horse’s nose, albeit marginally. Taken together with Mr Young’s evidence and its own assessment of the photo finish, the Adjudicative Committee finds that the nose flap worn by FRANCO CHAPLIN did protrude past the nose of the horse and is in breach of Rule 864(1) and (2)(a) and the Approved Gear Regulation (20).

DECISION

The charge was found to be proved.

PENALTY SUBMISSIONS

Mr Renault said the Respondent had a clear record under this particular Rule. He referred to the RIB Harness Racing Penalty Guide, which provided a first breach starting point of a $400 fine for using unapproved gear.

Stewards submitted that the finish of the race had been affected. It had not been possible for the Judge to determine whether FRANCO CHAPLIN had finished in 4th or 5th place, Mr Renault said. He submitted this was an aggravating factor.

Stewards offered the guidance of the Telfer Decision dated 14 November 2024, in which the horse BETTOR OFF deadheated for first when wearing a Hawaiian Skirt nose flap which protruded past the horse’s nose. In that case, the Adjudicative Committee applied a 50 per cent uplift to the starting point of a $400 fine to reflect that the result of the race was involved as a consequence. The Training Partnership of Steve and Amanda Telfer was accordingly fined $600.

Mr Renault said this breach involved a lower placing and therefore less stakemoney. He added that the breach did have an effect on those who had invested in the First 4 bet type. Stewards believed that an uplift from the starting point was warranted, and that a fine of $500 to $600 was appropriate.

Mr Waldron said that would be a very tough fine for what he maintained was “a hairline thing that could have gone either way.”

REASONS FOR PENALTY

The Telfer Decision of 14 November last, which also involved a first breach of the Rule, provides helpful guidance in these somewhat rare circumstances. In that case, the horse wearing an unapproved nose flap deadheated for first place and the Adjudicative Committee took a starting point of a $400 fine. The consequential effect on the result of the race was found to be an aggravating factor that warranted a 50 per cent uplift from the starting point. The Training Partnership of Steve and Amanda Telfer was therefore fined $600.

This Adjudicative Committee takes a starting point of a $400 fine for using unapproved gear. Given that the breach on this occasion involves a deadheat for fourth place, rather than first place, the consistent and fair approach is to add to the starting point one-quarter of the uplift that applied in the Telfer Decision. This is a 12.5 percent uplift from the starting point of a $400 fine, which amounts to a $50 uplift.

The mitigating factor of the Respondent’s clear record under the Rule is not, by itself, enough to warrant a penalty discount. It is in part balanced by his frank evidence that FRANCO CHAPLIN had raced with the Hawaiian Skirt nose flap set in the same position in all 9 of its previous race starts. Mr Waldron said he had believed the setting used was meeting his obligations under the relevant Rule and the Approved Gear Regulation (20).

CONCLUSION

Trainer Ben Waldron is fined $450.