RULING NUMBER COM TB 014(a)/2009
COMMISSION HEARING TORONTO, ONTARIO – NOVEMBER 18, 2009
IN THE MATTER OF THE RACING COMMISSION ACT S.O. 2000, c.20;
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL AND REQUEST FOR HEARING
OF JONATHAN JONES
REASONS FOR RULING
Overview
- Licensee Jonathon Jones appealed a ruling of the Thoroughbred Industry Appeal Board, Ruling No. TB 6041/09 wherein he was suspended for seven days for “failing to maintain his racing lane and did cause contact with the mount of Jockey Nathasha Shiota. An oral decision was rendered denying the appeal with written reasons to follow.
Background
Jonathon Jones was the jockey on the horse, Dashingalltheway, in the 6th race at Woodbine Racetrack on May 27, 2009.
The Stewards placed Dashingalltheway last from 5th place in the race for interference with the number 3 horse in the race, Go Boldly.
On May 29, 2009, the Stewards held a film review with Jones wherein he was suspended for fifteen calendar days commencing on June 3, 2009, for coming in with his horse and interfering with Go Boldly during the stretch run of the 6th race on May 27, 2009 at Woodbine.
The decision by the Stewards was made in accordance with TB Rules Nos. 9.14.01, 9.14.03, 9.25, 11. 07, 11.09.01, 11.09.03, 11.09.05, 11.12 and 11.14.
On May 29, 2009 the Stewards issued TB Ruling 5832/09. Two separate rulings were issued bearing the same number but the reasons for two rulings are irrelevant to the merits of the appeal. In that ruling, the Stewards referenced that as a result of Jones’ riding in a careless and unsafe manner, he placed a fellow rider in jeopardy as the horse, Go Boldly, clipped the heels of Jones’ horse, Dashingalltheway, with Ms. Sihota being spilled from her mount.
On May 30, 2009, Jones filed an appeal and was granted a stay. On August 26, 2009, the Thoroughbred Industry Appeal Board heard Mr. Jones’ appeal. That body reduced Mr. Jones’ suspension from fifteen days to seven days. Mr. Jones appealed that ruling and was granted a stay.
On November 18, 2009, a de novo hearing took place with Jennifer Friedman representing the Administration of the Ontario Racing Commission (ORC) and Robert King, Executive Director of the Jockeys’ Benefit Association, representing Mr. Jones as a friend. The parties agreed that Ms. Shiota, the jockey on the horse, Go Boldly, could testify via telephone from British Columbia, as a cost saving measure. It was agreed at the outset of the hearing that the appeal would be based on the original Stewards’ ruling.
Video replay of the race in question clearly showed Mr. Jones’ horse move off the rail during the stretch run thereby allowing Ms. Shiota the room to move up into the space created wherein she was head to head according to Steward Richard Grubb’s testimony. Jockey Chantal Sutherland supported this opinion stating that Ms. Sihota had established her position. Mr. Jones submitted that he could have given Ms. Sihota more room but wanted to win the race.
Jockey Sihota, who testified via a teleconference connection from British Columbia, stated that she saw a hole along the rail during the stretch run that was large enough for her to move her horse into and that she yelled to Jockey Jones as she moved to alert him of her presence. Mr. Jones whipped his horse right handed causing his horse to move back towards the rail. She was bumped twice before being spilled onto the track surface. She suffered two broken neck vertebrae, a skull fracture and arm damage. Her future riding career as a professional jockey is in jeopardy. The Stewards were unaware of the severity of her injuries at the time they issued their ruling against Mr. Jones.
There was no dispute, that once a jockey has established a position, “in there”, Mr. Jones had to respect her position. Steward Grubb submitted and was supported by Ms. Sutherland that, while the space was tight, such moves are a common occurrence at all racetracks. Her inexperience was a non factor according to Mr. Grubb in the incident.
Mr. Jones closing the hole ultimately resulted in the clipping of the heels of the two horses which resulted in Ms. Shiota being unseated. The action by Mr. Jones was unsafe and careless in the unanimous opinion of the Judges.
Mr. Jones claimed that he was not aware of Ms. Sihota coming up the rail nor did he hear her yell at him. He submitted Ms. Sihota first bumped into his horse before he made contact with her mount and he could not move to his right for fear of clipping heels with Ms. Sutherland’s horse that was on the other side of him.
Jockey Chantal Sutherland, rider of the horse on the right side of Mr. Jones’ horse during the stretch run, confirmed that Ms. Sihota had established her position, “she had a shoulder in”. She agreed that jockeys take a hole all the time but that the jockey needs to know their horse before doing it as one needs to be pulled through the hole by the horse. In this case, she submitted that was not the case, and the inexperience of Ms. Sihota led to the difficult position she found herself in which caused her spill. She herself would not have gone there she submitted.
Jockey Richard Dos Ramos, who did not ride in the race, opined that the spill was the fault of Ms. Sihota, claiming there was insufficient room for her horse, albeit from viewing the pan shot of the race. His testimony carried very little weight.
Issue
- Did Jockey Sihota have sufficient room to move her horse, Goingalltheway, up the rail along side Jockey Jones’ horse, Go Boldly, during the 6th race at Woodbine on May 27, 2009? Did Mr. Jones’ actions warrant the Stewards to find him in violation of TB Rules Nos. 9.25, 11.07 and 11.09.03?
Decision
- After carefully reviewing the testimony, the evidence and the documents, the Panel denies Mr. Jones appeal.
Reasons for Decision
It is clear, based on the evidence in the form of both the video replay and that of the testimony of Steward Grubb and Jockey Sutherland, that Ms. Sihota had room to move her horse, Dashingalltheway, into the hole created when Mr. Jones vacated that position during the stretch run of the 6th race at Woodbine on May 27. 2009.
On a balance of probabilities, it is reasonable to conclude that Jockey Jones interfered with Jockey Sihota and was responsible for her spill. Mr. Jones clearly closed the hole on Ms. Sihota, thus his actions created the unsafe environment both he and Ms. Sihota found themselves in. TB Rule No. 11.07 reads, “When clear, a horse may be taken to any part of the track, but if the horse swerves or is ridden to either side so as to interfere with, intimidate or impede any other horse, such horse may be disqualified. Mr. Jones was in violation of this rule.
TB Rule No. 9.25 reads, “Any jockey or apprentice jockey who, in the opinion of the Stewards, rides in an unsafe manner without due cause, may be subject to a penalty at the discretion of the Stewards”. TB Rule No. 11.09.03 reads, “For fouling, interference or careless riding, a rider may be fined or suspended, or both, by the Stewards according to the nature of the offence”.
Closing off the hole once he had allowed Ms. Sihota to gain position clearly represents a violation of both rules. Supporting this fact, Mr. Jones admitted that he could have moved over but he wanted to win the race. Such actions cannot and should not be allowed to go unpunished.
Undisputed evidence made it clear that Ms. Sihota had established her position and that jockeys make the type of move she made up along the rail during the stretch run on a regular basis, such as Jockey Borel made to win the 2009 Kentucky Derby. Her inexperience is irrelevant as is the opinions of both Mr. Jones and Ms. Sutherland in this regard.
Riders have an inherent responsibility to ensure their actions on the track do not put another rider in serious jeopardy in their attempt to finish the race in the best possible position. Riders also have a responsibility to knowingly not put themselves in a position that would put themselves or others riders at that same risk.
Penalty is to serve as both a deterrent and a sanction to those who commit a rule violation. In this case, given the circumstances, the penalty is appropriate. As Vice Chair Donnelly wrote in Wassilyn [2009] O.R.C.D No. 5 Ruling Number COM SB 001/2009 at para 45, “as the degree of culpability escalates, so must the penalty”. Had the Stewards been aware of the state of the injuries of Ms. Sihota, they might have had a different view as it relates to the 15-day suspension.
In Burningham, [2001] O.R.C.D. No. 30. Series No. COM TB 11/2001 Chair Sadinsky affirmed a penalty of 30 days for riding in an unsafe manner contrary to Rule 9.25 and Rule 11.09.03. The Panel supports the view of Chair Tanaka in Montpellier, [2005] O.R.C.D. No. 9 Series No. COM TB 012/2005 where she wrote at para 6, “we do not condone these deliberate actions which bring us so close to the line of a real accident”. The Panel is not suggesting Mr. Jones’ actions were deliberate as it relates to the spill but it recognizes intimidation can be a strategic part of race riding. The rider must know what the limits are and be prepared for the penalty should things go awry.
Licensees coming before a Panel of the Commission need to understand they have a responsibility to uphold and respect the oath they take before they give evidence. The issue is credibility, both as person and as a professional jockey. They do a disservice to themselves and to their profession to do otherwise.
DATED this 19th day of November 2009.
Rod Seiling
Chair