Feed on Posts or Comments 06 September 2010

Monthly ArchiveOctober 2008



Uncategorized Storm Again on 14 Oct 2008

Rahul Talukdar’s appeal dismissed

RACING APPEALS TRIBUNAL ‘REASONS FOR DECISION’
HIS HONOUR J.C. MCGUIRE PRESIDING
REASONS FOR DECISION
HIS HONOUR: Rahul Talukdar, a licensed jockey, was charged with a breach of AR 175(n) which states:
AR175(n) Any person who in their opinion commits or commissions an act of cruelty upon a horse, or is in possession or control of any article or thing which, in their opinion, has been made or modified to make it capable of inflicting cruelty upon a horse.
The details of the charge being that you, licensed jockey, Rahul Talukdar, did mistreat Miss Purrdy whilst riding that filly in exercise at Rosehill Gardens Training Centre at or around 7 am on Friday, 27 June 2008, such mistreatment being the forcible and the excessive use of your riding whip on the filly, resulting in Miss Purrdy sustaining injuries in the form of large welt marks to both left and right hindquarters.
He entered a plea of not guilty and a Stewards Inquiry was conducted into the alleged mistreatment of Miss Purrdy.
The Appellant represented himself and cross examined a number of witnesses. The Stewards found him guilty. They took into account his record and personal circumstances, and disqualified him for three months - ie from 5 July 2008 to 5 October 2008.
His appeal against that decision was dealt with by the Appeals Panel on 7 August 2008. The appeal was dismissed and the disqualification confirmed. The appeal to this Tribunal was on the grounds that there was lack of any conclusive evidence.
The evidence given at the two previous hearings disclose that the Appellant was employed by Tim Martin, the trainer of the two year old filly in question. It was undisputed that the filly was inexperienced, highly strung and difficult to ride.
On Friday 27 June 2008 at about 7.30 am, Jason Patrick, Mr Martin’s foreman, instructed the Appellant to engage the filly in normal slow morning work by way of trotting a lap and a half on the trotting track and then to work around the B track. He considered the Appellant a suitable rider for the filly.
Rochelle Bennett, a licensed stablehand with Mr Martin, observed the Appellant riding the filly. She described him as having an argument with the filly and that he kept hitting her with forceful hits with the whip for about half a lap.
Shortly after this she observed him to again hit the filly with his whip with sufficient force to leave welts. He was striking the filly on top of where he had already hit her.
She was asked, “Was the arm raised? Was there force behind it?” She replied, “Yes”. She had witnessed a number of forceful hits while the filly was on the B track and on a second occasion when it was on the way back to the stable.
Mr Martin was absent from the track. However, he was advised of the incident. He telephoned Rochelle, who told him “Oh he flogged her. I’d be surprised if he didn’t draw blood”. She went on to say, “I wouldn’t be surprised if they scab up”, because there were welts on top of the welts.
On the way back to the stables the filly flipped over and fell while proceeding through a tunnel. It sustained a cut to her head and injuries to her legs. No allegation of misconduct was raised arising out of this incident.
Des Fisher, a stablehand, observed the Appellant cantering past on the B track and observed him give “three backhanders with the whip behind the saddle”. When asked, “Was the filly hit forcibly, lightly?” he responded, “Oh not lightly, but he didn’t turn around and whack it hard. It was a backhander. It was certainly with the backhand and it was forceful enough. You could hear it, quite loud, yeah”.
He subsequently observed the cut on the head and the welt marks. He was of the opinion that the filly had been whipped more than three times. The Appellant, in response to his query, “What happened?” said she was giving him trouble and he was trying to teach her to go straight.
Mr Fisher had ridden the horse in training and he had never carried a whip on her.
Jason Patrick received reports from other riders prior to the Appellant returning with the filly. They stated, “Rahul was just flogging that horse out on the track. I don’t know what’s going through his head.”
He observed blood flowing from a gash behind her ear. He was asked:
“Q. And did she have any other injuries or welt marks that you observed?
A. I was that disgusted with what I saw, I had to walk away from it…”.Dr Allan Frogley, a veterinary surgeon, was regularly engaged by Mr Martin. On 27 June 2008 he attended Mr Martin’s Rosehill stable and examined Miss Purrdy. He gave the following account of his observations.
“Q. Tell me, what would you say about the filly when you observed her in respect to her general condition? Was she distressed, normal?
A. She’s a filly that I know quite well because I have been treating her previously for a wound to her front legislation and she had just recently recovered from that and when I arrived at the stable they immediately requested me to go and look at her. They said, ‘We think her head needs stitching. She’s suffered a laceration to her head.’ Now when I saw her in the stable she certainly did have - they’d already bandaged her front legs because she’d some abrasions on her legs as well. They’d cleaned those up and bandaged them, but she had a deep laceration to her poll, right by the base of her right ear. Now she had a rug on her at the time and I just immediately set about sedating her and then suturing the head wound and that came together quite nicely. I gave her some antibiotics and then I was instructed to pull the rug off and have a look at her because there was a concern that there may have been some other marks on her body and that’s when I noticed the welt marks on the left side of her hindquarter and there was at least two or three what I’d call welt marks, extending from the tuber cozae, along the hindquarter, from the flank backwards.
Q. Are you in a position to advise the inquiry as to the amount of ties this filly may have been hit with the whip?A. Well, they were welt marks. So, yes, she’s got to be hit with something with a considerable amount of force to create that type of mark. I mean the skin wasn’t broken, but what we mean by a welt mark is when you get sort of an oedemas line in the skin and oedemas is sort of bruising to the area.”
He examined the filly the next day and observed evidence of those welt marks. Their presence some 24 hours after his initial examination indicated to him that they were reasonably severe.
He described the marks as being “several long, wide elevations in the skin as a result of oedema or bruising that occurs at the site of the welt. They would have been probably a centimetre to 2 centimetres wide and probably 30 or so centimetres possibly long and they extend from the top of the flank of the horse at an oblique angle along the hindquarters on the left side, more substantial on the left hand side, but there was some evident on the right hand side.”
He agreed with the proposition that the whip had hit the same mark a number of times, because there was certainly considerable width to the welt marks that were on the flank.
“Q. Now when you say ‘reasonably severe’, any more severe than in a race?
A. Well, I have seen welt marks from a race. I’ve never seen welt marks on a horse at the track of a morning, but I have certainly at times examined horses post race for other reasons and seen the odd welt mark on a horse and, from my experience, they’ve certainly disappeared by the next day, but in this case, as I stated, they were still present the next day, which is why I concluded that they must have been reasonably severe.”
He did not expect to see such injuries after such work in any circumstances.
It was the effect of the Appellant’s account that on the occasion in question he had received no instructions with regard to the use of the whip. He had ridden her previously and was aware that she was an erratic filly.
He offered the explanations that from the time he started working the horse she was doing her own thing rather than responding to his instructions. He was only attempting to keep her straight and she was erratic.
When she was being passed by other horses she would make an effort to fall in on top of them and he had to pull her off.
He recalled that of the times he used the whip on the horse there was an instance of another horse passing and the filly “started to lay on top of her and that if he had not corrected it she would probably have fallen on top of her and, you know, like being looping through the fence kind of thing.” He had used the whip to correct her and that was it.
He had hit the filly when she was about to fall in to get her attention because “when a horse is not responding to you, you have to get its attention back”. He had to do something to prevent her from falling. He saw danger to the other rider and to the filly and that is why he used the whip on that occasion.
He had hit the filly because it was zigzagging or moving or falling off. He had attempted to use his feet to correct her to prevent her from falling in and out and for the most part that is what he did. The only time he used the whip was when he had to.
The Appellant did not dispute that he had used the whip on the filly and claimed that he had done so on four or five occasions. He did use it on the track back to the tunnel to prevent her from falling on the wall.
He had to use some amount of force to get some kind of response from the filly, but he did not use excessive force. The force that he used was definitely not worse than would be exerted in a race.
When a horse tried to pass him and the filly was about to lay in on her, there was an emergency situation and he had to react quickly. He had to use some amount of force to get his horse’s attention back to respond to his actions.
He observed welts on the horse but stated that horses do welt up. He stated that a welt mark was not out of the ordinary when a whip is used, “It is very natural”.
The Appellant agreed that Mr Martin, after observing him hit another horse a couple of months before, had ordered him not to carry a whip for a short period and he acceded to this direction.
The Appellant tendered a report from Peter Knight, equine veterinarian, who opined:
“There is no scientific evidence available that addresses the issues of the force required to raise welts on a horse’s skin, nor the duration for which the welts remain detectable.”
He referred to anecdotal support for the concept of thin skinned horses which develop welts after the application of minimal force, which may remain visible for prolonged periods.
There is no evidence to support the Appellant’s claim to the Tribunal that Dr Frogley did not observe the presence of the welts, nor is there material which would reinforce his submission that this was simply a case of exploitation, that Tim Martin owed him money, some $5000 to $6000 and had demanded payment of $3000 before the Appellant could leave his service. His submission to the Tribunal suggested that there was a conspiracy against him involving the false account by Dr Frogley.
He maintained that Tim Martin had chosen to make an example of him.
It is to be noted that he did not raise these matters before the Stewards Inquiry, nor did his barrister make these submissions to the Appeals Panel.
There was simply no evidentiary basis to support his claim that he was the innocent victim of a conspiracy.
With regard to the Appellant’s grounds of appeal to this Tribunal ie, “Lack of any conclusive evidence”, it is the firm view of this Tribunal that there is overwhelming conclusive evidence to establish the charge.
Under the Australian Rules of Racing there is a definition of cruelty:
“Cruelty includes any act or omission as a consequence of which a horse is mistreated.”
This Tribunal is comfortably satisfied that the Appellant gratuitously used excessive force against an inexperienced filly, albeit wayward, which was completely unnecessary and inappropriate.
Welt marks were observed by Dr Frogley on the day of the whipping and they remained present, to his observation, for a further 24 hours. Mr Martin observed those welt marks some 36 hours after their infliction. Such was the force accompanying the use of the whip and the frequency of blows with the whip that this Tribunal has no doubt that the filly was mistreated.
The Appellant has tendered a number of highly impressive references attesting to his competence, his good name and reputation. He was considered as somebody who displayed patience with unruly animals. He was highly commended as a person with the right temperament and horsemanship skills to work in the industry. The authors of the various testimonials expressed disbelief at the suggestion that he had demonstrated cruelty to a horse.
Despite these references, it is this Tribunal’s opinion that such was the seriousness of the Appellant’s conduct that the three month disqualification was appropriate. This was not a case of a heavy cut with a whip to control an errant horse. He struck that filly numerous times on two separate occasions employing grossly excessive force.
It is vital to the welfare and reputation of the horse racing industry that horses are treated with care and consideration. It is totally unacceptable to use excessive force, force which results in injury and no doubt distress to the horse.
It must be made plain to members of the public and to all of those associated with the care of horses either as riders, trainers, stablehands and the like that they are to be afforded care and consideration.
Those who would mistreat horses must be deterred by the imposition of salutary penalties.
The Appellant does not have a serious disciplinary history, albeit that he was reprimanded for excessive use of a whip on a horse, Bubble or Nothing.
The appeal is dismissed. The penalty is confirmed. The Appellant is to pay the appeal fee of $250 within fourteen days.

Comments (0)

Uncategorized Storm Again on 09 Oct 2008

Arc winner Zarkava’s future undecided

The connections of brilliant unbeaten three-year-old filly Zarkava have not yet made a decision on her future, except to confirm that she had a tough race in winning the Qatar Prix de l’Arc de Triomphe (Fr-G1) and will not race again this season.

Zarkava has won each of her seven career starts for owner-breeder the Aga Khan and trainer Alain de Royer-Dupre.

“Zarkava is fine but you can see she’s had a race and quite a hard one. She was a little tense [Monday] morning but ate up well when we got her back last night,” Royer-Dupre told Racing Post.

“She will not run again this year and there is no decision on whether the filly remains in training as a four-year-old. We will make a decision in four or five days because it is a big decision to make. We have to respect the filly and there is not much left for her to do. You can’t ask them to do too much in their lives.”

The three-year-old bay Zamindar filly won a pair of classic races in France this season, posting a three-length win in the Prix de Diane (Fr-G1) (French Oaks) and a two-length victory in the Poule d’Essai des Pouliches (Fr-G1) (French One Thousand Guineas). In seven career starts, her smallest margin of victory is two lengths.

Zarkava became the first female to win the Arc de Triomphe since Urban Sea (Miswaki) in 1993.

Courtesy: www.thoroughbredtimes.com 

Comments (0)

Uncategorized Storm Again on 06 Oct 2008

Zarkava sensational in Arc win

zar 

Zarkava gave the performance of the century when she rallied from near the back of the field to score an authoritative victory over Youmzain on Sunday in the $5,522,400 Qatar Prix de l’Arc de Triomphe (Fr-G1) at Longchamp.

The Aga Khan’s amazing filly, who was racing against males for the first time, trounced 15 opponents in the world’s richest turf race, which was run on a dull, drizzly day.

Zarkava was given a beautiful ride by Christophe Soumillon, and things did not go quite to plan as she hung a bit right after the start and was soon near the back of the field.

Soumillon kept his cool and was still in 12th place when the field of 16 entered the straight. The pair weaved their way through several foes and once in the clear, they surged through the final 200 meters to win by two lengths overGrand Prix de Saint-Cloud (Fr-G1) victor Youmzain, who also finished second in last year’s Arc.

Zarkava covered 2,400 meters (11.93 furlongs) in 2:28.80 on turf rated as good to soft.

Juddmonte Coronation Cup (Eng-G1) winner Solider of Fortune and German Group 2 winner It’s Gino finished in a dead heat for third. Prix du Jockey-Club (Fr-G1) (French Derby) winner Vision d’Etat, who entered the race undefeated, was fifth, and five-time Group 1 winner Duke of Marmalade finished seventh.

Zarkava is the first female to win the Arc since Urban Sea in 1993.

She is also the first horse to win from post position one since *Prince Royal II in 1964.

Zarkava made her male opponents look rather ordinary. The Zamindar filly is unbeaten in seven races, and she has never won by less than two lengths.

Once again, Soumillon did not have to use his whip during Zarkava’s run to the line. She won her fifth Group 1 race and her fourth this year, including the Prix de Diane (Fr-G1) (French Oaks) and Poule d’Essai des Pouliches (Fr-G1) (French One Thousand Guineas).

“That was really wonderful, and she did it so easily,” trainer Alain de Royer-Dupre said of Zarkava’s Arc victory. “We knew she was well, and she completely outclassed the others. It was really beautiful and a marvelous performance, and I saw that she was on tune in the paddock.

“We had no worries, and she is certainly the best horse I’ve ever trained.”

Royer-Dupre trained his first Arc winner in 2003 when Soumillon and Dalakhani again carried the colors of the Aga Khan, who also took the event in 2000 with John Oxx-trained Sinndar, who is the sire of Youmzain.

“It really doesn’t get much better than this, particularly when you are a breeder,” the Aga Khan said. “My family’s been breeding Thoroughbreds for the past 90 years and this was the ultimate prize.

“We worried about the draw before the race and didn’t give Soumillon any orders. We tried to make sure that she didn’t creep out of the stalls like she did in the [Qatar] Prix Vermeille (Fr-G1) [on September 14 at Longchamp in her previous start]. The filly won’t run again this season and we don’t know for the moment whether she will stay in training next year.”

Youmzain and jockey Richard Hills were putting in their best work at the finish.
 
“He had a little trouble finding a split but ran an exceptional race against an exceptional filly,” said owner Jabber Abdullah’s racing manager, Bruce Raymond. “He’s done everyone proud again.”

Irish-bred Zarkava is the first starter out of the unraced Kahyasi mare Zarkasha, a half sister to French Group 3 winner Zarkiya (Ire).

Courtesy: www.thoroughbredtimes.com 

Comments (0)

Uncategorized Storm Again on 04 Oct 2008

Two-year-olds steal the show at Headquarters

The second day of the

Newmarket’s Cambridgeshire Meeting resulted in three record- breaking performances, thanks to the strong north-westerly wind which blew the runners straight down the Rowley Mile.

 

The stars of the day were the juvenile Gr.1 winners Serious Attitude and Bushranger. The former landed the Gr.1 Cheveley Park Stakes to maintain her unbeaten record. A filly with surprising speed, given that her sire is Mtoto, she landed a Listed race at

Salisbury over six furlongs last month. Sold for next to nothing at Tattersalls October Yearling Sale Book Three last year, she was bred by Paddy Twomey. Her multiple Gr.1-winning sire Mtoto, now retired, has always been underrated, given that he has sired the likes of the Derby winner Shaamit, the Gr.1 Ascot Gold Cup winner Celeric and the leading National Hunt sire Presenting.

 

Serious Attitude, who attracted prices of between 10-1 and 20-1 for next year’s 1,000

Guineas, is now finished for the season, according to her trainer Rae Guest.

 

The Middle Park Stakes was won by Bushranger, who broke the track record in the process. This was a second Gr.1 win for the son of the late Danetime, who landed the

Prix Morny last time out. Bred by Tally-Ho Stud, he is a Goffs and Doncaster St Leger Sale graduate. His win was Johnny Murtagh’s 19th Gr.1 winner of the season and the Derrick Smith-owned colt received quotes of around 16-1 for next year’s 2,000

Guineas.

 

According to his trainer David Wachman, he could run again in either the Gr.1 Dewhurst Stakes or the Breeders’ Cup Juvenile.

 

The first to set a new record yesterday was Souter’s Sister. The daughter of Desert Style joined the long time leader Moonlife (Invincible Spirit) inside the final furlong and asserted close home. The filly, who was bred by John Cullinan was bought by Ross Doyle at

Doncaster, and was yet another good juvenile winner for the in-form Richard

Hannon.

 

The training performance of the day was surely that of Mike De Kock, who nursed

Eagle

Mountain back to health to win the Gr.3 Joel Stakes. The four-year-old son of Rock of Gibraltar suffered a pelvic injury before the Dubai Carnival earlier this year and had been off the track for 349 days. Yesterday he finished fast to break another track record in the process. Previously trained by Aidan O’Brien, he was second in the

Derby and third in the Irish Derby for his former handler.

 

Five-year-old Prince Flori was the comfortable winner of the Gr.3 Preis der Deutschen Einheit at Hoppegarten. The Stall Reni-owned son of Lando took the lead inside the final furlong and ran on well to win by a length and a half. This was his fifth Group victory and his second consecutive win at that level.

 

Courtesy: EBN

Comments (0)

Uncategorized Storm Again on 03 Oct 2008

Calcutta Derby stakes shoot up

By Goldie Boy

With Arktouros jumping into the Derby fray, as an additional entry, the purse for Sunday’s showpiece, the 2,000m Calcutta Monsoon Derby, is definitely going to be fatter. The additional entry will cost the Pesi Shroff-trained horse a whopping sum of Rs 3.6 lakh. Add to it the added money of Rs 15 lakh from the RCTC’s coffers, plus another Rs 1.5 lakh coming by way of the Sweepstakes, the Derby purse may come close to Rs 20 lakh.

This Derby is, in any case, going to be doubly rich, in view of RCTC having already made the Classic two-folds richer compared to the 2007 edition. The swollen purse has, in fact, attracted many outstation entries this year and the field is going to be amply represented from the western and the southern turf centers in the country.

Incidentally, Shroff had been camping in the city between Monday and Wednesday. Arktouros, apart he is likely to have three more runners in the Derby lineup – Agios Nikolaos, Apollotina and Colouful Lady. Add to the lineup, trainer Imtiaz Sait’s Ascriptive and Darius Byramji’s Safari. Then one sure to see the local aspirants like Lycia Falcon, Bountiful Talent and Storming Success in action, not to mention trainer Vijay Singh’s couple of wards who may be given lung openers before the winter season starts. The Derby field is, therefore, going to be 10-plus strong with a number of crack outstation jockeys lending the colours.

Comments (0)

« Previous Page