Can anyone explain this RIB decision - 23 Feb 2022 - Race 6

[Chief Stipe]

You only have to watch the first 400m to see what happened.  Jordan Crawford was charged with holding his line and not going down to the marker pegs and breaking his horse up HIGHVIEW ROCKN ROLL.

 

[Chief Stipe]

Hawera HRC 23 February 2022 – R6 – Jordan Crawford

ID: RIB7558

Respondent(s):
Jordan Crawford - Junior Driver

Applicant:
Mr A Dooley - Stipendiary Steward

Adjudicators:
Mr N McCutcheon

Persons Present:
Mr Dooley, Mr Crawford, Mr S Abernethy assisting Mr Crawford

Information Number:
A18253

Decision Type:
Adjudicative Decision

Charge:
Failed to Concede Position

Rule(s):
869(4)

Plea:
Admitted

Animal Name:
HIGHVIEW ROCKN ROLL

Race Number:
R6

Hearing Date:
23/02/2022

Hearing Location:
Hawera Racecourse

Outcome: Proved

Penalty: Junior Driver Jordan Crawford is fined $200

SUMMARY OF FACTS

Mr Crawford admitted a breach of Rule 869(4) in that he failed to concede his position to “OUR GRACIE” passing the 1600m which resulted in his horse “HIGHVIEW ROCKN ROLL” breaking and losing considerable ground.

Mr Crawford in the presence of Mr Abernethy said that he understood the Rule, charge and confirmed that he admitted the breach.

Mr Dooley showed film replays and said that “OUR GRACIE” had a clear advantage over “HIGHVIEW ROCKN ROLL”, but that Mr Crawford attempted to hold his line when he should have gone down to the marker pegs.  He added that as a consequence “HIGHVIEW ROCKN ROLL” galloped.

Mr Crawford and Mr Abernethy said that the films showed clearly what had happened.

DECISION

As the charge was admitted, together with the video evidence, it was found proved.

PENALTY SUBMISSIONS

Mr Dooley said that Mr Crawford is a Junior Driver with a clear record.

The Penalty Guide was referred to.

Mr Abernethy asked that his record and Junior Driver status be taken into account.

REASONS FOR PENALTY

All matters relating to penalty were addressed with a fine of $200 considered appropriate for the breach of Rule 869(4).

PENALTY

Mr Crawford was fined $200.

[Brodie]

7 hours ago, Chief Stipe said:

You only have to watch the first 400m to see what happened.  Jordan Crawford was charged with holding his line and not going down to the marker pegs and breaking his horse up HIGHVIEW ROCKN ROLL.

Why on earth did Jordan Crawford plead guilty to the charge????

Do not think he was given the right advice from Abernathy as I have no idea why he was charged in the first place by the Stipes????

From my viewing  of the video the driver of Our Gracie was totally at fault and not Jordan Crawford!

Why did Crawford have to move down to the rails???

 

Edited February 27, 2022 by Brodie

[Chief Stipe]

Are you not allowed to stay off the rail in the one out train when there is a space inside you?

[the galah]

16 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

Are you not allowed to stay off the rail in the one out train when there is a space inside you?

They have this strange rule where they say if a horse tries to push in early in a race then you just have to surrender and go on the fence.I think they say the outside horse only has to have a slight advantage to do that,but when you see it happen in the circumstances you have highlighted,it all looks rather messy.

In this case you had D ferguson doing the pushing in,and hes one of those drivers that loves to push and shove,even if he has only a slight advantage.Its no wonder the inside horse broke as its been known to break for no reason sometimes.

[Dougie]

Race 11 - WORKOUT LEARNERS PACE.

Driver J Murdoch (BIGGLES) admitted a charge under Rule 869(2) and the Whip & Rein Regulations in that he used his whip with more than a wrist flicking motion in the run home and the Adjudicative Committee imposed a fine of $350.   Has anyone ever seen this before.??.. $350 fine for John who hardly ever drives, yes he admitted it but an unqualified horse winning a workout and learning/being taught how to keep giving over the final 200m of a race ......... be curious to know how many warnings John has had for this previously.

[Chief Stipe]

32 minutes ago, the galah said:

In this case you had D ferguson doing the pushing in,and hes one of those drivers that loves to push and shove,even if he has only a slight advantage.Its no wonder the inside horse broke as its been known to break for no reason sometimes.

You could argue that Crawford DIDN'T break his horse the other driver did.

[JTeaz]

4 hours ago, Chief Stipe said:

Are you not allowed to stay off the rail in the one out train when there is a space inside you?

Utter Crap rule. Can't see why you have to concede anything in a race. Jordan very stiff here. Apparantly Ferguson was marginally in front of him so jordan was found to have to concede.

A rule made by people who have never been out there.

[Brodie]

It is BS!

Crawford should not pay any fine and appeal his decision to plead guilty!

Not sure why Sailesh would have advised Jordan Crawford to plead guilty, as I wouldve fought it without doubt!

There really are some stupid stupid rules in harness racing that make absolutely no sense and need CHANGING!!!!!

Come on HRNZ you need to wake up and not fine this young bloke for doing nothing wrong and sets a precedent for this crap in the future!!!

[Chief Stipe]

So why wasn't the driver of the horse in front of Crawford also charged?  He had space inside him.

[eljay]

Brodie - the penalties (especially for "minor" offences) are formulated so that if you say guilty (even if you not) and smile sweetly your punishment is smaller than if you fight the charge and of course if you appeal and lose you are dinged with a heavier penalty and also the RIB costs hearing the appeal.     In other words you cant win so it usually cheaper to say guilty and bite your tongue.  

[the galah]

4 hours ago, Chief Stipe said:

So why wasn't the driver of the horse in front of Crawford also charged?  He had space inside him.

But he had no one outside of him trying to direct him down to the pylons.

I think the thing about the crawford case was the rules say ferguson is entitled to ease crawford onto the pylons,but in reality because the advantage ferguson had over crawford was so small ,crawford probably thought he was entitled to stay where he was.

The rule in my view needs updating so as to make it clear the outside driver needs a greater advantage than what is currently being deemed as acceptable.

The other point i think people are making once they have viewed the video, is when you push a horse in,especially a trotter,in a way that ferguson did,then its often going to cause the inside horse to break,irrespective of whether the driver concedes his position.

[eljay]

14 hours ago, JTeaz said:

Utter Crap rule. Can't see why you have to concede anything in a race. Jordan very stiff here. Apparantly Ferguson was marginally in front of him so jordan was found to have to concede.

A rule made by people who have never been out there.

Don't forget mate in the run to the judge, you have to keep a straight line or they fine you!!!!

[Chief Stipe]

I just had a look at the rule under which Crawford was charged 869 (4).  It states:

Now I can't see how this rule applies at all to how Crawford drove his horse.  If anything the driver trying to push him in should have been charged.

I guess if you pleaded guilty you can't appeal but Crawford now has a black mark against his name that will mean any infringements in the near future will carry penalty weighted more because he has infringed in the past.  

Staying in the one out train when those leading it are going to improve their position is good proactive and competitive driving.  So what if a competitor is posted three wide!  Happens all the time in gallops and I'm surprised that Noel McCrutcheon adjudicated in this fashion.  I suspect that this is another charge initiated from the RIB "Bunker" i.e. someone sitting in a studio watching the video and applying a theoretical view of the rules.

[Chief Stipe]

1 hour ago, the galah said:

I think the thing about the crawford case was the rules say ferguson is entitled to ease crawford onto the pylons,but in reality because the advantage ferguson had over crawford was so small ,crawford probably thought he was entitled to stay where he was.

The rule in my view needs updating so as to make it clear the outside driver needs a greater advantage than what is currently being deemed as acceptable.

What rule says that?  Certainly the rule under which Crawford was charged doesn't say that.

[Harrison]

You’re allowed to push out & down in the first 400m of a race & in the last 1000m of the race.
 

Which many senior drivers do especially when they can do it to junior drivers who are Learning. If they have a nose advantage over you you’re meant to concede your position but in reality you are usually nose to nose and both trying as hard as you can to have that position. Which in the case of a Trotter can easily cause it to break. Certainly in most cases there’s no clear cut advantage so no one gets in trouble but if there is then you really just have to accept it. Even if you’re not happy about the rule. 

[Chief Stipe]

4 minutes ago, Harrison said:

You’re allowed to push out & down in the first 400m of a race & in the last 1000m of the race.
 

Which many senior drivers do especially when they can do it to junior drivers who are Learning. If they have a nose advantage over you you’re meant to concede your position but in reality you are usually nose to nose and both trying as hard as you can to have that position. Which in the case of a Trotter can easily cause it to break. Certainly in most cases there’s no clear cut advantage so no one gets in trouble but if there is then you really just have to accept it. Even if you’re not happy about the rule. 

But the rules don't actually state what you describe.  Certainly not the rule that Crawford was charged under.

[Nowornever]

1 hour ago, Chief Stipe said:

I just had a look at the rule under which Crawford was charged 869 (4).  It states:

Now I can't see how this rule applies at all to how Crawford drove his horse.  If anything the driver trying to push him in should have been charged.

I guess if you pleaded guilty you can't appeal but Crawford now has a black mark against his name that will mean any infringements in the near future will carry penalty weighted more because he has infringed in the past.  

Staying in the one out train when those leading it are going to improve their position is good proactive and competitive driving.  So what if a competitor is posted three wide!  Happens all the time in gallops and I'm surprised that Noel McCrutcheon adjudicated in this fashion.  I suspect that this is another charge initiated from the RIB "Bunker" i.e. someone sitting in a studio watching the video and applying a theoretical view of the rules.

Yes it is a shit rule and would D Ferguson have been charged if he was the one that galloped? If so then it is just a matter of trying your luck and hoping your horse is the one that does not gallop I guess. 

[Freda]

This is all a revelation to me.  To say I'm staggered is an understatement. 

[Chief Stipe]

10 minutes ago, Nowornever said:

Yes it is a shit rule and would D Ferguson have been charged if he was the one that galloped? If so then it is just a matter of trying your luck and hoping your horse is the one that does not gallop I guess. 

The horse galloped because the outside horse tried to push him down to the pegs.  Another 20 metres and there wouldn't have been a gap on the inside.  For the situation that was described in the judicial decision there ISN'T an applicable rule.  

What I do see is a trend where Drivers are just rolling over and not bothering to contest anything when charged.

[Chief Stipe]

6 minutes ago, Freda said:

This is all a revelation to me.  To say I'm staggered is an understatement. 

Yeah well @Freda if it was done in a gallops race Noel McCrutcheon would say well done to the Jockey holding his line!

[Harrison]

[Rangatira]

10 hours ago, Brodie said:

It is BS!

Crawford should not pay any fine and appeal his decision to plead guilty!

Not sure why Sailesh would have advised Jordan Crawford to plead guilty, as I wouldve fought it without doubt!

Should have got Poundy on the case not Sailesh

[Chief Stipe]

36 minutes ago, Harrison said:

Ok so they have made a Regulation that links to two sub-rules of 869 i.e. 869 (3) and (4) which are extremely vague.  So does "easing another runner down the track" mean you can push your wheel in front of the other sulky?  That aside how did the horse on the outside "not have clear passage during the race"?  Arguably it had "clear passage" just it was three wide!!!!

Geez a good bush lawyer could have had a field day arguing the case for Crawford!

[Brodie]

4 hours ago, eljay said:

Brodie - the penalties (especially for "minor" offences) are formulated so that if you say guilty (even if you not) and smile sweetly your punishment is smaller than if you fight the charge and of course if you appeal and lose you are dinged with a heavier penalty and also the RIB costs hearing the appeal.     In other words you cant win so it usually cheaper to say guilty and bite your tongue.  

Eljay, if you feel you are not guilty, then you should always plead not guilty.

To plead guilty to get a lesser sentence is BS, and that is why the country is in the shite  due to the citizens just accepting the BS that is being continually spewed out by the most incompetent unqualified Prime Minister in world history.

Never ever plead guilty to any charge when you are not guilty!!!

Are you saying that if you get charged with a serious crime e.g murder, you should plead guilty just to get a lesser jail time, even if you were innocent?

Abernathy shouldve fought the stupidest charge!!!!!