Stewards News

[Danno]

Consider this one of the most frustrating rules along with the COT now required.

Have thought that if I were in a 'bad' mood, I would contest a slow quarter fine on the basis of that as a driver, I am not allowed to carry a stopwatch, I cannot fit a speedometer to the sulky, and the by the time the light on the pole lights up, it is too late to remedy the situation.

They are basically saying to drivers that if you lead, don't keep anything in the tank. That is nearly chargeable under not giving your horse every possible chance! Another argument against being fined for a slow quarter!

Ditto
Ditto
and Ditto


Without any shadow of doubt the #1 dumbest rule we have,


#2 dumbest rule: can't bet on your own drive.


#3 dumbest rule: change of tactics.


I believe all three rules were instigated in order for a public servant to meet his/her annual KPI's.....there can be no other excuse.

[Messenger]

Correct me if I'm wrong but a 32 sec quarter is OK and equates to 45.25kmh. But a 32.6 not OK and (just to put in context) equates to 44.42kmh.

Junior driver... $100 fine.

Again correct me if wrong, but the lights on the poles at the quarters come on to show the slowest time acceptable BEFORE you get to them? So if you run a slow quarter all the light is doing is telling the driver they will get a fine?

I am thinking there must have been a gale blowing at Cranbourne last night or else the stewards would have collected a fortune in fines

http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-re...R221016&ms=vic

[Messenger]

An interesting one from Shep Stewards Report. David Moran was in trouble for looking around when he was in the death in Race 6 - it would seem you cannot make it known that you want to give up the death (or lead?)

he motioned by way of head movement as an indication to other runners to progress forward to obtain the position in advance of him in the one wide line. In assessing an appropriate penalty stewards took into account Mr Moran’s immediate admission of wrong doing and guilty plea to the charge. Stewards also assessed the need for drivers to have awareness that motioning to other drivers in this manner is totally inappropriate and would not be condoned. Mr Moran was advised that had stewards been satisfied of any collusion between himself and any other driver the penalty would be a significant period of disqualification.

http://www.harness.org.au/stewards-r...&fromstate=vic

http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-re...ic#SPC20101603


While the most interesting thing from Melton was the Supplementary Report in relation to post 82

Tabcorp Park Melton 8 October 2016 - Race 6 Previously Adjourned Inquiry

At Tabcorp Park Melton on 8 October 2016, HRV Stewards questioned driver Rodney Petroff regarding the driving tactics adopted on Stunning Grin in Race 6 the ‘VHRSC Classic’. After initially adjourning the inquiry, Stewards subsequently interviewed trainer Vince Vallelonga and Arthur Anastasiou owner of Stunning Grin regarding the driving tactics adopted on Stunning Grin. On 21 October 2016, Mr Vallelonga and Mr Petroff were questioned further regarding this matter and after Stewards directed both licensees to provide their mobile telephones for the purpose of being forensically examined in accordance with the Australian Rules of Harness Racing, the inquiry was again adjourned to a date to be determined, to enable Stewards to consider any further evidence of relevance that was obtained.

[Messenger]

I do not think I would have pleaded guilty to this one if I was Michael Quadra and copped an 8 week suspension! It makes it impossible to appeal the decision on the grounds that 'who says the posn behind the leader is more favourable to all horses compared to the death'. It is a fair whack - I can only think that the Stewards w/o saying it, were worried that he was there to work the favourite. This is the Stewards Report see R7

http://www.harness.org.au/stewards-r...&fromstate=vic

which includes

Mr Quadara failed to take both a reasonable and permissible opportunity to direct Major Charge into a position behind the leader Queen Of Kings, so as to afford Major Charge a more favourable position, rather than remain in a position outside the leader, where the mare over-raced prior to giving ground from passing the 400m to finish in 7th and last position beaten approximately 26 metres


There is no way he would have got that suspension if his horse had not faded. Even if you accept that he must take the sit behind the leader you would think that he could have argued that the way his horse was pulling it was a big ask or that he feared that it may not settle and could choke down

ps Anybody know what the Adjourned Inquiry is about for Egodan's win at Melton last night?

http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-re...ic#MXM05111604

[Messenger]

The adjourned Egodan inquiry is only about whip use

The interesting race in the stewards report was Josh Aiken getting 6 weeks.
I think he just made a split second decision to try a cute Gavin Lang type drive and it came unstuck

http://www.harness.org.au/stewards-r...&fromstate=vic

http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-re...ic#MXM05111609

[thepacingman]

The interesting race in the stewards report was Josh Aiken getting 6 weeks.
I think he just made a split second decision to try a cute Gavin Lang type drive and it came unstuck

A well said and very true comment that.

But young Aiken still has a fair way to go to match Lang's effort the night he drove Lombo Skyrider at Harold Park in a Derby heat all them years ago. It staggers me how he only got 12 weeks, should have been much longer. To this day it still counts as the worst drive I've ever seen. And no I'm not talking here through my pocket.

Just a pity there's no replay available anywhere. It truly needs to be seen to be believed.

http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-re...Q100502&ms=nsw

[Diablo]

Last race at Menangle last night. Bad Habbott being declared a non runner. Why? I'm totally baffled by this one.

[Messenger]

We await the stewards report Greg
Having now watched it, I can only wonder whether the starter missed something that caused BH to have to sprint to make the gate

[Sofoulis]

The failure of the policy is evidenced by the following horse:

1 October: draws 1, ambles out of the gate, 3 pegs
8 october: draws 1, ambles out of the gate, 3 pegs
15 October: draws 1, ambles out of the gate, ends up four fence, runs last (they do go sub 1.50)

22 October: draws 9, no change of tactics, hums out in 26.0, holds out the favourite, runs a record first half (53.6) for mares (I believe) and gets beat only 4metres, inquiry open but adjourned

19 November: draws 10, change of tactics: less aggressive, restrained and finishes 10th (they do go sub 1.51)
26 November: draws 2nd row, no change of tactics, held up for a run late and runs 8th

[perhaps the trainer/driver doesn't want to drive her out hard from Gate 1... next race is 3 December and she has drawn Gate 1, no change of tactics announced, so expect she will amble out of the gate like she has previously done from the gate, or like the latest announced tactics for her]

3 December: draws 1, no change of tactics, hums out to run 47.4 lead time (2300m), holds out the favourite, gets beat 23.4m, inquiry opened but adjourned...

(yes: the favourite posted in both races were trained/driven by the Trittons // no: i have no financial interest in the horses or in the races)

Either police it properly or get rid of it...

[aussiebreno]

The failure of the policy is evidenced by the following horse:

1 October: draws 1, ambles out of the gate, 3 pegs
8 october: draws 1, ambles out of the gate, 3 pegs
15 October: draws 1, ambles out of the gate, ends up four fence, runs last (they do go sub 1.50)

22 October: draws 9, no change of tactics, hums out in 26.0, holds out the favourite, runs a record first half (53.6) for mares (I believe) and gets beat only 4metres, inquiry open but adjourned

19 November: draws 10, change of tactics: less aggressive, restrained and finishes 10th (they do go sub 1.51)
26 November: draws 2nd row, no change of tactics, held up for a run late and runs 8th

[perhaps the trainer/driver doesn't want to drive her out hard from Gate 1... next race is 3 December and she has drawn Gate 1, no change of tactics announced, so expect she will amble out of the gate like she has previously done from the gate, or like the latest announced tactics for her]

3 December: draws 1, no change of tactics, hums out to run 47.4 lead time (2300m), holds out the favourite, gets beat 23.4m, inquiry opened but adjourned...

(yes: the favourite posted in both races were trained/driven by the Trittons // no: i have no financial interest in the horses or in the races)

Either police it properly or get rid of it...

Wouldn't QDT and inquiry adjourned on Oct 22 and Dec 3 be policing it?

Although it shouldn't need to be policed because it shouldn't be a rule.