Amberley Race 10 The Orange got squeezed

[Gammalite]

Here's One for The Galah and/or amateur forum Stewards.

How the hell did the Countries LEADING DRIVER get suspended for the incident in this race.?

The junior driver lass was caught wide and trying to push in after the start and put her wheel under his horses legs 😳.

The horse Blair was driving Light Me Up (the 2nd Fav) hits the wheel and is put out of the race. 

Blair gets Blamed ? how ?

the horse he was trailing (No2 Evidently)  at the post dropped to the inside soon after too, so he was very unlucky that didn't happen a fraction earlier 😆.

I would of been suspending the Junior Driver Harrison for sure if they had me ruling it lol 👍😂.

Here's what the blind stewards had to say . ..bit of BS lol 😋

LIGHT ME UP - broke racing into the first bend when racing to the inside of DON JUAN which shifted ground inwards with trailing runners being checked losing all chance and was retired from the race. Stewards questioned drivers B Orange (LIGHT ME UP) and R Harrison (DON JUAN) assisted by J Morrison, regarding LIGHT ME UP breaking and after considering their evidence Mr Orange was issued a charge under Rule 869(3)(b) alleging he drove carelessly when failing to concede his position. Mr Orange admitted the charge and after viewing the replays and hearing submissions on penalty the Adjudicative Committee suspended Mr Orange's driver's licence from the conclusion of racing on 9 February up to and including 16 February 2025 (4 days).

[Blackie]

"admitted the charge", case closed.

[Gammalite]

2 minutes ago, Blackie said:

"admitted the charge", case closed.

hahaha you should never admit anything to stewards Blackie.

Ya Just the blame the horse everytime, no matter what.

Although in this case Harrison was deliberately steering her horse inwards and it wasn't the horses fault that happened. 

Fancy sticking your wheel under Blairs legs in a race 😳🙄. He drives in a Lot of races and he'll remember you/her/it in the future . He'll light Them Up lol 😁 will be no favours given. 

[Brodie]

10 minutes ago, Gammalite said:

Here's One for The Galah and/or amateur forum Stewards.

How the hell did the Countries LEADING DRIVER get suspended for the incident in this race.?

The junior driver lass was caught wide and trying to push in after the start and put her wheel under his horses legs 😳.

The horse Blair was driving Light Me Up (the 2nd Fav) hits the wheel and is put out of the race. 

Blair gets Blamed ? how ?

the horse he was trailing (No2 Evidently)  at the post dropped to the inside soon after too, so he was very unlucky that didn't happen a fraction earlier 😆.

I would of been suspending the Junior Driver Harrison for sure if they had me ruling it lol 👍😂.

Here's what the blind stewards had to say . ..bit of BS lol 😋

LIGHT ME UP - broke racing into the first bend when racing to the inside of DON JUAN which shifted ground inwards with trailing runners being checked losing all chance and was retired from the race. Stewards questioned drivers B Orange (LIGHT ME UP) and R Harrison (DON JUAN) assisted by J Morrison, regarding LIGHT ME UP breaking and after considering their evidence Mr Orange was issued a charge under Rule 869(3)(b) alleging he drove carelessly when failing to concede his position. Mr Orange admitted the charge and after viewing the replays and hearing submissions on penalty the Adjudicative Committee suspended Mr Orange's driver's licence from the conclusion of racing on 9 February up to and including 16 February 2025 (4 days).

It is a bit confusing that Blair did admit the charge, but then who are we to question the leading driver in NZ?

Looking st the replay it did appear as if Blair was one off and had every right to maintain his ground?

Anyway gives Blair a bit of a break after a very busy driver patch!

Think the ones that backed Light MeUp were hard done by ?

 

[Gammalite]

6 minutes ago, Brodie said:

t is a bit confusing that Blair did admit the charge,

Here's a funny one I remember once. Took the blame for a junior that was out wide on a severely hanging in horse during the last quarter sprint up . I was trying to leave the fence from 3 back , and the horse in-between me and the hanging 3 wide horse ended up galloping ( with the driver giving us a great run-down on our breeding 😂, as he quickly dropped away ) Anyway . It was definitely the hanging horses fault ( or the driver not steering it properly)

Stewards decided I shouldn't be leaving the fence ( in the days of running rails, no passing lanes) so you Always pushed out at the quarter or around that point if possible. I say what ? stewards say you're knocking other runners over . well I wasn't the one hanging all over them , but anyway felt sorry for the junior. so got em' off.

Stewards say Gamma you want a week suspended or 200 fine? I say what again 🙄 lol. You gotta be joking, who has a spare 200 bucks while doing these horses. Stewards say righto see you in 2 weeks time then when you're back on track . 

 

[the galah]

I watched that and thought straight away mr orange would get a suspension.

The rule is ,if the horse outside him has an advantage/slightly ahead,then if it wants to push in then the driver on the inside must concede and go to the inside,or as normally happens,be restrained to race behind the horse moving in.

i've always thought that rule is not in the best interests of safety as many times you see drivers failing to concede their position one off the fence and consequently they break and then the horses behind them get checked.The thing is often the driver trying to maintain their position one off the fence can manoeuvre their position enough to get the advantage back and leave the horse 3 wide.

i've actually started a couple of topics on it previously,suggesting its not a good rule, giving examples of how interference occurs when both drivers think they are entitled to be in that one off position.

but as the rule stands currently(and has done for some time),mr orange was always going to be found guilty,or plead guilty like he did.

i've often wondered if the rule in australia is different as you hardly ever see it happen over there.

Edited yesterday at 03:33 AM by the galah

[Gammalite]

14 minutes ago, the galah said:

a couple of topics on it previously,suggesting its not a good rule, giving examples of how interference occurs when both drivers think they are entitled to be in that one off position.

but as the rule stands currently(and has done for some time),mr orange was always going to be found guilty,or plead guilty like he did.

Is hard to believe that is the rule.? 

Every race meeting has Some races with a train of the last few in single file trying to keep in the running line. Drop to the fence and you're virtually out of it . (in a short distance race)  

If caught 3 wide after an early burn after the start , and you didn't restrain out of the gate , you just have to drop back to last in the running line , then proceed up the inner if you feel like it. 

Not Barge in like R. Harrison tried to in race 10 , and skittled Blairs horse. and caused havoc in general . 

He (Mr Orange)  probably pleaded guilty so the lass could get another drive as, driving like that  ( that lack of respect for drivers in the running line already) , she sure won't get that many. 

[Gammalite]

39 minutes ago, the galah said:

,mr orange was always going to be found guilty,or plead guilty like he did.

Well before he gets a quick break from the race driving because of the Junior's actions,

I'll let him plead 'Guilty' to winning me a treble tonight .😉💰🍻

I've power-played for $10 at 48-1  = The Better Deal (race 2 special)  and Treacherous Baby (could sneak that feature Breeders Stakes in Race 5 being over 2600m ) from Marky's team ,   into KAWHI race 1 . 

Kawhi at $7 here ?  and won 2 of it's last 3 , where-as nothing else in the field with any real form?  .

Why can't it win again with Blair driving ?  it's a Mobile start too. AND No Junior misfits trying to push him down out of the running line either 😁👍. bring em' home Blair O o o 

 

[Brodie]

I was not aware of the rule that a horse 2 out has to concede to any horse that is 3 wide?

If that is the case seems diabolically wrong in this case surely?

So if that is the case why is it different when you can not push out from the fence or 2 wide line until after the 1000metre point??

Galah, you mist be right or why would Blair plead guilty, but it is very hard to believe it is the rule or it would be happening all the time you would think ??

Crazy!

[the galah]

 

5 hours ago, Gammalite said:

 

He (Mr Orange)  probably pleaded guilty so the lass could get another drive as, driving like that  ( that lack of respect for drivers in the running line already) , she sure won't get that many. 

i know it looked a bit dangerous the way her cart hit the legs of oranges horse,causing that horse to break,but the rule says shes allowed to manouvre her horse in like that.and mr orange should have just gone on the fence,even if it meant he effectively was diminishing his chances of placing.

That is why i've started a couple of topics on it in the past,saying its a silly rule because it can result in potential danger if a horse breaks,as horses being knocked around tend to panic,especially if their legs are hit.

1 hour ago, Brodie said:

I was not aware of the rule that a horse 2 out has to concede to any horse that is 3 wide?

If that is the case seems diabolically wrong in this case surely?

So if that is the case why is it different when you can not push out from the fence or 2 wide line until after the 1000metre point??

Galah, you mist be right or why would Blair plead guilty, but it is very hard to believe it is the rule or it would be happening all the time you would think ??

Crazy!

the rules been like that for decades.

i believe the reason you don't see drivers pushing in all the time is ,i think,drivers have their own standards of safety for themselves and others and their horses anddon't bother to do it. .

It can get dangerous when you have drivers who ,when being pushed in,actually believe their horses have a slight advantage so resist the driver outside and jostle,often relating in one breaking.

also,in years gone by,i'm aware of cases where the jostling has happened on the bend where the trackside coverage is difficult to say who was slightly in front of who,and the stipes have used the position of the carts to say the outside horses cart was in front of the inside horses cart,therefore that meant the outside horse was in the right.They said the size of the horses was irrelevant nor would they factor in the fact that the much bigger horse who was on the inside,and  was not only bigger,but had a cart with cart extensions on. 

In other words you can have one cart in front of another,but that doesn't necassarily mean the horse who's cart is in front actually has its head in front of the other,given the size of the horse and the length of the cart.So sometimes drivers had got blamed when they shouldn't have.

so,i agree with you,its not a good rule,if reducing interference is what they are trying to achieve.

Edited 18 hours ago by the galah

[Chief Stipe]

9 hours ago, the galah said:

know it looked a bit dangerous the way her cart hit the legs of oranges horse,causing that horse to break,but the rule says shes allowed to manouvre her horse in like that

Where is the rule that says she is allowed to knock the legs out from under another horse?

[the galah]

2 hours ago, Chief Stipe said:

Where is the rule that says she is allowed to knock the legs out from under another horse?

well,the easiest analogy would be to say,if your driving down a 3 lane highway in your car on the outer lane,next to someone in the middle lane,with no one on the inside lane. And you get even just a small portion of your car in front of the car to your inside,your deemed to have an advantage and you are fully entitled to manouvre into the middle lane in which the other car is in.if you wish.

You don't have to indicate.

as to the point you make,You can just do it,as long as you just don't veer in sharply.

You can continue to move in irrespective of whether the car inside you is still there as you make the manouvre.

legally if you clip the car to your inside and that car veers off the road and crashes,well its that drivers fault and he will get a ticket as the law says they would have seen you coming into their lane and therefore should have braked to let you in front of them or gone to the inside lane.

Like i have said, the driver in the inside car knows the law and should concede.Irrespective of whether he ends up following granny who he knows always drives slow.

Edited 6 hours ago by the galah

[Chief Stipe]

1 hour ago, the galah said:

well,the easiest analogy would be to say,if your driving down a 3 lane highway in your car on the outer lane,next to someone in the middle lane,with no one on the inside lane. And you get even just a small portion of your car in front of the car to your inside,your deemed to have an advantage and you are fully entitled to manouvre into the middle lane in which the other car is in.if you wish.

Are you serious?  There is no such road rule!  You can't post the Harness rule can you even post the Road Rule?  Good luck with your defence in court if the motorist on the inside is killed.  

A more accurate analogy would be the Starboard Rule in yacht racing.  A yacht on starboard has right of way however if the yacht on port does not give way then the boat on starboard must make every endeavour to stay clear.   Of course the starboard boat can loadge a protest BUT if there was a collision and they could have avoided it then they in the wrong.

The harness driver might have been entitled to be 2 out instead of 3 out because there was room on the rail but that doesn't mean they can blow the legs out from the horse inside them.  I could see @Gammalite placing his wheel along side the other horse and leaning in pushing the other horse in but even Gamma's wouldn't peg another horse by knocking its legs out from under it.

2 hours ago, the galah said:

as to the point you make,You can just do it,as long as you just don't veer in sharply.

Sorry what rule is that?

2 hours ago, the galah said:

legally if you clip the car to your inside and that car veers off the road and crashes,well its that drivers fault and he will get a ticket as the law says they would have seen you coming into their lane and therefore should have braked to let you in front of them or gone to the inside lane.

Wrong wrong wrong.  You weren't clear of the car when you decided to cross.  Again show us the road rule that says you can do what you suggest.  Good luck on the Auckland Motorway trying that trick!  Make sure the car beside you is smaller than yours when you do it.

2 hours ago, the galah said:

Like i have said, the driver in the inside car knows the law and should concede.Irrespective of whether he ends up following granny who he knows always drives slow.

I think @Rangatira is right perhaps BOAY should do mandatory drug and alcohol testing.

[Chief Stipe]

Just done you a favour @the galah and checked the road code.

• Before you pull in, you must check that you’re well clear of the vehicle you’ve just passed so you don’t cut them off.

From the Legislation (check 2.6(3):

Passing

2.6General requirements about passing other vehicles

(1)

A driver must not pass or attempt to pass another vehicle moving in the same direction unless—

(a)

the movement can be made with safety; and

(b)

the movement is made with due consideration for other users of the road; and

(c)

sufficient clear road is visible to the driver for the passing movement to be completed without impeding or being likely to impede any possible opposing traffic; and

(d)

until the passing movement is completed, the driver has a clear view of the road and any traffic on the road for at least 100 m in the direction in which the driver is travelling.

(2)

Subclause (1)(c) and (d) does not apply if the passing vehicle and the vehicle being passed are in different lanes and are, throughout the passing movement, either on a one-way road or on the same side of the centre line.

(3)

A driver must not, when passing another vehicle moving in the same direction, move into the line of passage of that vehicle until the manoeuvre can be made safely and without impeding the movement of that other vehicle.

Compare: SR 1976/227 r 8(3), (4)

[Rangatira]

10 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

Just done you a favour @the galah and checked the road code.

• Before you pull in, you must check that you’re well clear of the vehicle you’ve just passed so you don’t cut them off.

From the Legislation (check 2.6(3):

Passing

2.6General requirements about passing other vehicles

(1)

A driver must not pass or attempt to pass another vehicle moving in the same direction unless—

(a)

the movement can be made with safety; and

(b)

the movement is made with due consideration for other users of the road; and

(c)

sufficient clear road is visible to the driver for the passing movement to be completed without impeding or being likely to impede any possible opposing traffic; and

(d)

until the passing movement is completed, the driver has a clear view of the road and any traffic on the road for at least 100 m in the direction in which the driver is travelling.

(2)

Subclause (1)(c) and (d) does not apply if the passing vehicle and the vehicle being passed are in different lanes and are, throughout the passing movement, either on a one-way road or on the same side of the centre line.

(3)

A driver must not, when passing another vehicle moving in the same direction, move into the line of passage of that vehicle until the manoeuvre can be made safely and without impeding the movement of that other vehicle.

Compare: SR 1976/227 r 8(3), (4)

Are you allowed to exceed the speed limit while passing?

[Chief Stipe]

6 minutes ago, Rangatira said:

Are you allowed to exceed the speed limit while passing?

No.  But if you decide to pass a logging truck and trailer and it is going 95km/hr in a 100km/hr zone and you are driving a Mercedes AMG model I suggest you click the turbo switch and floor it.  Then when well clear and in front (suggest you don't try and knock the logging trucks wheels out) decelerate using those ABS brakes.  If there is a speed camera its software will be confused that you can go from 95 to 180 and back to 100 in 3 seconds.

PS:  If you do get caught dont get @the galah to defend you.

[Gammalite]

34 minutes ago, Rangatira said:

Are you allowed to exceed the speed limit while passing?

That is a great question . Often causes great angst among drivers , because on the state highways (if they are 100kph) as mostly are around Oz, the passing lanes that come up every 10-20 kms or so are filled with people flooring it to use the lane and get past the grey nomad caravans (that are everywhere) and get some 'Clear Air'. 

and they're going 120 kph + to do it and get past em'  .. Is it allowed ?  Seems they allow it ok. does get tight at times as the passing lane draws to an end lol 😁. I am a very safe driver and often have had to speed up in those sort of situations to get past large trucks and that.

Have never seen police radar at passing lanes . I think they would rather the overtaking happens there , than in the open sections where idiots pull out to .brave' the on-coming traffic at 120kph lol. 😉

16 hours ago, the galah said:

i believe the reason you don't see drivers pushing in all the time is ,i think,drivers have their own standards of safety for themselves and others and their horses anddon't bother to do it. .

 Rightly so too. There's been 1000's of races , and must say I can't remember another one quite like what Harrison did to Blair in this race. Not on in my opinion. and I think the general driving standard is Excellent throughout NZ and Oz and much better (and safer with marker line pegs) which helps drivers No end , in avoiding incidents like this Amberley Race 10 one. 

[the galah]

1 hour ago, Chief Stipe said:

Are you serious?  There is no such road rule!  You can't post the Harness rule can you even post the Road Rule?  Good luck with your defence in court if the motorist on the inside is killed.  

A more accurate analogy would be the Starboard Rule in yacht racing.  A yacht on starboard has right of way however if the yacht on port does not give way then the boat on starboard must make every endeavour to stay clear.   Of course the starboard boat can loadge a protest BUT if there was a collision and they could have avoided it then they in the wrong.

The harness driver might have been entitled to be 2 out instead of 3 out because there was room on the rail but that doesn't mean they can blow the legs out from the horse inside them.  I could see @Gammalite placing his wheel along side the other horse and leaning in pushing the other horse in but even Gamma's wouldn't peg another horse by knocking its legs out from under it.

Sorry what rule is that?

Wrong wrong wrong.  You weren't clear of the car when you decided to cross.  Again show us the road rule that says you can do what you suggest.  Good luck on the Auckland Motorway trying that trick!  Make sure the car beside you is smaller than yours when you do it.

I think @Rangatira is right perhaps BOAY should do mandatory drug and alcohol testing.

I don't know. 

i was using the harness rule and giving an example of imagining what could happen if a similar rule was applied to cars on a 3 lane highway. 

obviously that went straight between your ears and out the other side.

drug testing not required for bit of a yarn,like you suggest. For you , instead of a drug test,i would prescribe a lay down and taking of 3  panadol and 2 prozac if you see the galah has replied to one of your posts. 

Edited 2 hours ago by the galah