SEVEN DAYS (THE WEDNESDAY REPORT): THE WEEKLY REVIEW (MARCH 12 - MARCH 18) - PART A

By Graham Potter | Wednesday, March 19, 2014

HRO's news and commentary feature - SEVEN DAYS (THE WEDNESDAY REPORT) - provides a weekly review of racing activity, both on and off the track.

DID JACKSON MORRIS GET OFF LIGHTLY?

Jackson Morris must have been sweating on the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal’s (QCAT) legal decision regarding his ‘weighing in light’ case at Beaudesert on December 28.

In the end he got the result he was looking for when QCAT upheld his appeal and quashed both the guilty verdict and the sentence. This outcome was in stark contrast to the view held by both the race-day stewards, who found Morris culpable on the day and handed down a one month suspension, and the Appeals Board who endorsed the stewards finding.

This is how events unfolded.

Step 1:

Morris weighed in 620g lighter than Mishani Gladiator’s allocated weight in a handicap race at Beaudesert. Australian racing rules permits a 500g limit in this regard.

The stewards report on the day stated: ‘On returning to scale, jockey J. Morris, the rider of Mishani Gladiator, the provisional winner of the race, weighed in at 58.38 kg, which, allowing for the addition of an amount of a half-kilogram permitted under AR. 143(a), was less than the weight of 59 kg allocated to the horse. Stewards, acting under that rule, therefore disqualified Mishani Gladiator.

'At a subsequent inquiry J. Morris was found guilty of a charge under AR. 143(b) in that after weighing out on Mishani Gladiator at 59 kg, upon returning to scale he weighed in at 58.38 kg. J. Morris's licence to ride in races was suspended for a period of one calendar month, with the term of suspension to commence at midnight on Tuesday, 31 December 2013, and expire at midnight on Friday, 31 January 2014.’

Step 2:

Morris took his case to the Appeals Board who dismissed Morris’s appeal. That decision was explained by Chairman of the Appeal panel.

‘The tribunal has considered the matters raised, particularly by Mr Morris, the appellant in this matter, and we note that the evidence he has given both to the stewards and this tribunal, centres entirely upon the belief that he weighed out at 60 kilograms and was accredited with that weight prior to the race commencing. He handled all of the equipment and gave that to the trainer, who saddled the horse, and thereafter he completed the ride on the horse under some duress, and then when returning to the scales he weighed in at a weight significantly below that which he was supposed to.

‘There is no explanation given other than Mr Morris had drunk a number of glasses of water to facilitate reaching the 60 kilograms in weight, and he can explain nothing other than he had a significant heat reaction. He sweated very badly and drained, he said, significant weight from his body to achieve the reading that was represented on the scales on weighing in.

‘The position to that can well be attributed to some portion of heat, however, in circumstances where that is appropriate the stewards allow half a kilogram as a leeway weight to facilitate a jockey weighing in light in circumstances such as this. Notwithstanding that facilitation of one half kilogram, Mr Morris still failed to meet the required deadline.

‘The issues are whether or not there is a possible explanation other than sweat, and one cannot be afforded and one cannot be identified in regard to the evidence on the transcript and given to us here.
‘The offence is against Rule 143, which I think Mr Morris has already conceded is a rule of strict liability and as such there is no prospect of this tribunal being in a position to upset the finding of stewards as to the failure of Mr Morris to comply with Rule 143. As a result, the appeal against conviction remains and stays and his appeal is dismissed in that respect.

‘The issue of the penalty imposed is of some significance. Mr Morris claims that a period of four weeks is excessive for circumstances where what he did was nothing out of the ordinary. His explanation is that he sweated profusely during the race and subsequently and as a result it was that sweating that resulted in his failure to meet the requisite weight.
‘Having said that, one has to look at what precedents have been imposed by stewards in previous issues, and the two that have been imposed, both for weighing in light, identified a penalty imposition of a suspension of the licence for a period of one month.

‘This tribunal does not believe that there is any basis or reason that it should consider a reduction in that penalty and, in the circumstances, endorses the penalty imposed by the stewards and the appeal in respect to penalty is also dismissed.

‘Further right of appeal information: The appellant and the stewards may appeal to the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (QCAT) within 14 days of the date of this decision.’

Step 3:

And so on to QCAT who went against all that had gone before by upholding Morris’s appeal and setting aside both the verdict and the penalty in the case against him.

QCAT ruled the scales used at Beaudesert on that day were inaccurate and that even if they had been accurate no blame could be attributed to Morris for the discrepancy in weight as that, “given the extreme heat conditions on the particular day, the loss of 620 grams from the time that he weighed out could have been as a result of dehydration if the scales were accurate”.

This ruling, a legal decision, sets a legal precedent and as such is troubling. The words ‘could have’ in their summation moves the issue away from the clearly set parameters carefully written in the racing rules so that all parties know the criteria on which such issues will be judged with no discretion is allowed.

The QCAT ruling now opens up room for on-going argument that could defeat the whole object of the exercise of maintaining strict regulations in an area that is vital to racing’s integrity.

Just another unwanted complication of what should be an exact procedure.

*This whole procedure took seventy-five days to reach its latest conclusion! Which brings us to the timeframe it takes to resolve these matters … ah, but that’s another story.

**What are the implications when a rider is fined for not weighing in when he should have done so. Does that notation in the steward’s report mean they did weigh in after being reminded and fined … or did they not weight in al all? If the latter, how do we know their weight was correct?


RIDE NOT CULPABLE OR BLAMEWORTHY:

Damian Browne’s win on appeal against the guilty verdict and six week penalty handed down by stewards following their finding that he failed to take all reasonable and permissible measures to allow his mount to finish in the best position in the Kingtantes case did not shock anybody.

In fact the opposite was true as most people confidently predicted the final outcome. True, that majority had got it wrong initially when they thought that no charge would be laid against Browne by the stewards in the first place, but all that meant was that everybody had to go an extra round before seeing the essence of their argument summed up by retired Supreme Court judge Judge Bill Carter, who handed down the Racing Disciplinary Board appeal hearing’s final verdict on the Browne case.

“Our joint and unanimous view, given the nature of the standard of proof, is we can’t be comfortably satisfied to the required degree that the ride was culpable and blameworthy,’’ Judge Carter said.

It took just twenty minutes deliberation for the Racing Disciplinary Board to overturn the steward’s verdict and reinstate Browne’s unblemished record (over a period of twenty-six years) with regard to this most serious of rules, much to the obvious relief of the rider.

To my mind, the Browne case started with too many factors mitigating against any possible charge being upheld. The horse’s awkward action was reported immediately post race after it had just achieved its best career result. Additional investigation into betting sheets revealed nothing untoward while follow-up consultation showed the trainer to have no issue with the ride … which left us with the point to argue as to whether Browne’s acknowledged indecision (delayed decision) and alleged lack of vigour cost Kingtantes second place. (He was never going to win the race).

A ‘could have’ argument takes a lot of proving particularly when you are trying to label a rider for not giving a horse every chance.

Did Browne’s standing play a part in high profile nature of this story.

Of course it did! Again no surprise there … but don’t think that made any difference to the process.

Browne did not receive any favourable treatment because of his profile. The blow up in the press and on social media (all of which was substantial) meant nothing. Browne’s only advantage was having a lot of facts in his corner which, under good council, created enough doubt to counteract the charge he was facing.

Case closed.

* This result will come as a further blow to stewards who continually seem to find trouble at follow-up appeal hearings where they often fail to sustain a charge. If they are to do better they will have to pick their battles more carefully in future while at the same time finding better ways to waterproof their cases. I do wonder though, in this day and age with lawyers and loopholes dancing together in the wings, whether establishing the burden of proof is something that is almost becoming a ‘mission impossible’ for stewards. I’m not talking about any particular case. I am talking in general. If that becomes true, a thankless task will become a meaningless one …

*Jamie Dart who chaired the original steward’s hearing at which a charge was levelled at Browne and who defended the steward’s finding in the appeal hearing has moved on from the thoroughbred panel. He has been appointed Chief Steward for the greyhounds!


APPRENTICES ALLOWED THEIR MOMENT IN THE SUN, BUT ARE THEY REALLY BEING LEFT IN THE DARK

It is always good to bring apprentices from different parts of the country together in a scenario in which they can both interact and compete and can collectively showcase their talents in a race restricted to apprentice riders.

That show came to Queensland last Wednesday with nine apprentices putting their talents on show in a Class 3 Plate at Doomben, which was ultimately taken out by Chanelle O’Grady aboard Hopgarten who beat Crackerjet (Scott Westover) and Banchory Lass (Jye McNeil) into the minor placings to give the visiting riders a clean sweep in the contest.

All good there … perhaps it even allowed some glimpse into the future, however difficult it might be to define at this time, as the next generation in the riding ranks prepares to take the a step forward, but bringing apprentices into focus also raised some questions about the current situation confronting local apprentices.

And here the feeling wasn’t that fuzzy!

There seems to be a lot of confusion about what is happening at the Apprentice School in Queensland?

‘Not much’ seems to be the common belief … and that from people who are directly affected by its function.

That description does nobody any favours. It does not meet the essential requirements of such a department. It means apprentices are not getting the tuition they need and deserve (could it be true that apprentices are still having money docked from their income as payments for ‘courses’ they have not received).

That lack of education can have an on-going negative impact on the way that apprentices go about their business both in the saddle and on the ground and that, in turn, can adversely affect the image of racing.

We all know that Racing Queensland is currently caught in a financial head-lock, but some areas simply cannot be compromised by that and the Apprentices School falls into that category.

Perhaps Racing Queensland can step up and let everybody know what their plans are concerning this issue.

They do have plans, don’t they?

***************************************************************************************************

SHORTS:

While stewards might have suffered a high profile loss in the Browne case, HRO’s assertion remains that, contrary to any other suggestion, the stewards have picked up their game recently both in terms of the number of questions they are asking of trainers and riders and the scope of their vigilance. Ultimately, that can only be a good thing.

BJ Smith could not believe the testimony he was hearing in the steward’s room after a protest had been lodged against his winner Elusive Storm (Brooke Richardson). His frustration was evident when, after the verbal battle of the apprentice riders, who all put forward their viewpoint in the hearing was completed, Smith, in spite of being asked to direct his comments to the chairman of stewards, chose to speak directly to his rival riders. “Samuel Payne … there was no way in the world my runner came out three horses as you claimed and Anthony (Allen) you said you had to put the stick away the last fifty. Fifty! The incident was one or a couple of strides form the line. It was too close to the line to make any difference to the finish. I really don’t know we are here.” The protest was dismissed. (Doomben March 12 – Race 1).

Ruby Ride landed a back-to-back double with some aplomb when she partnered the Sel Andrew trained Hurricane Cassie ($2.50) and Macho Valentino ($5.50) to victory. The latter was saddled by Barrie Gill. (Doomben March 12 – Races 2 & 3).

Some droughts end with a flood and that was the case with the Robert Heathcote stable who scored a treble (in successive races) with Hopfgarten ($4.80), San Clemente ($3.80) and Vas De Torres ($6) after having had a very lean run in town. In the previous six weeks. The reigning Premiership winner currently holds down third place in the Trainers’ Premiership table behind Matthew Dunn and Tony Gollan who are still cutting at each other out in front. (Doomben March 12 – Races 4 - 6).

Tony Sears went one better than Heathcote when he sent out four back-to-back race winners … which is really an extraordinary achievement. All of Touch Of Bella ($2.70), Spinada ($11), Esther’s Caroline ($6) and Zaha’s Ace ($3.20) saluted on a highly successful Friday for the stable. Brooke Stower, a rising talent, was on two of Sears’ winners. (Toowoomba March 14 – Races 4 - 7).

Debates over track surfaces and track bias continue to plague local racing and last weekend was no exception. Both Gold Coast (the metropolitan meeting) and Eagle Farm left punters aghast at the ‘unfairness’ of it all. The present is enough of a worry. Of a more major concern is the fact that the magnitude of the problem seems to be growing. (Gold Coast & Eagle Farm March 15).

Noel Doyle has been associated with a few good horses in his time and he looks to have another one on his hands in the form of the filly Aimee. The daughter of Exceedingly Good, out of the Real Quiet mare Meadow Whisper (who was also trained by Doyle), scored a third straight victory in the $100 000 two-year-old feature at the Gold Coast to rev her earnings up to $133 000 from only five starts.

“She’s had to learn one or two things,” said Doyle, “and she has. She has taken that next step every time and got something out of each run and she has come forward very, very quickly. She is a great constitution filly. Her runs in the races don’t seem to hurt her at all. She is as tough as they come.” Doyle is currently looking to find the correct balancing act with Aimee’s race fitness. Ideally he is hoping to pick up another race with her before the carnival but he is also wants her ready for that challenge when it arrives. (Gold Coast March 15 – Race 4).

“That’s about as excited I’ve been about winning a race.” Those were the words of Tim Bell after he piloted the old-stager Ollie Vollie to victory in the $100 000 Carbine Club Gold Coast Stakes for his old boss Sue Grills. “I might not have given a victory salute before the line and cost myself some money but I sure felt like doing just that,” added Bell, who has a close history with both the eleven-year-old and trainer Sue Grills and her team who helped launch his career.

A beaming Grills just shrugged off a question about Ollie Vollie’s age (he is believed to be the oldest horse to secure a metropolitan stakes victory in Queensland). “He just loves being in work and going out to race,” said Grills. “You put him in the paddock and his head goes down. He just loves what he is doing.” (Gold Coast March 15 – Race 7).

Rocket To Glory has once again hung out badly in the home straight. When he did that in his previous start, which he won at Eagle Farm, both trainer Tony Gollan and jockey Bobby El-Issa joked that Rocket To Glory just wanted to go home (Gollan’s stables are on the home stretch at Eagle Farm) but this time stewards were not amused. El-Issa was reprimanded while stewards want a word with Gollan about Rocket To Glory’s racing manners. (Gold Coast March 15 – Race 7).

Larry Cassidy returned to action following a medically enforced layoff. During his time as a blog contributor to HRO Cassidy gave great insight to strict fitness and brutal weight maintenance regime a jockey as to follow to maximise his riding options and it will interesting to see how the enforced ‘freshen up’ impacts on the veteran. Chances are it has done him the world of good mentally and physically, but he will still need opportunities to come his way is he is to put that extra freshness to good use. (Eagle Farm March 15).

Ruby Ride has found to her cost that you can always think what you like but you can’t always say what you like. Ride was found guilty of a charge of improper conduct when, after weighing in, she used inappropriate language, including an expletive, towards an official. She is now $500 lighter in the pocket. (Eagle Farm March 15 – Race 3).

An interesting one: An inquiry opened into the circumstances in which jockey P. Holmes, rider of Dashing Conqueror, dropped his whip in the home straight. After taking initial evidence from P. Holmes, the inquiry was adjourned to enable stewards to further review the patrol films of the race and to analyse the betting on the event. (Toowoomba March 15 - Race 6).

Some rules are more straightforward than others. Any rider can get into trouble through ‘circumstances’ out on a track in a race where a myriad of variables are played out at speed. They can hardly throw their hands up though when caught out in the jockey’s room as Adrian Coombe and Wanderson D’Avila were at Townsville when stewards conducted an inspection of the Jockeys' rooms after race five, searching for any non-approved gear or electronic devices.

Both Coombe and D’Avila had mobile phones in their possession which, given integrity issues, is surely a serious breach of the rules. Two questions: When this happens, do stewards actually check the phone logs (do they in fact have the authority to do so) and, secondly, is a $200 fine a suitable punishment for this offence? (Townsville March 18).

More articles