Bangalore |  Mysore |  Mumbai |  Pune |  Hyderabad |  Kolkata |  Delhi  
Indian Classics |  Profiles  |  Fixtures |  Video |  Archives |  Public Pulse |  In & Around |  Specials |  International |  Home  
Loading....
in   
 
News    Send comment   Send E-mail   Print the page

Martin Dwyer`s suspension restored to 56 days

  September 7 , 2013
   

Epsom and Indian Derby winning jockey Martin Dwyer`s suspension has been restored to the original 56 days by the Appeal Board of RWITC at its hearing at Pune on Saturday. The marathon meeting which went on for several hours, saw voting tied at 3-3 about giving punishment to the jockey but the casting vote of Chairman Adi Nariewala ensured that the punishment was brought back from eight months to the original 55 days.

The suspension of Martin following his ride on Ice Age who cut an erratic course and lost in a three horse photo finish was for not permitting the ``horse to run on merits``. The action of the RWITC Stewards had created a storm with the suspension widely perceived in the racing world as being against the principals of natural justice and fair play. The response was mixed in India but there were riots following the running of the race and the horse had been declared a non-starter. The horse had also bled during the race.

Following Martin`s appeal, the Appeal Board had remanded the matter back to Stewards for consideration of fresh evidence but last month, the Stewards who said they conducted a De Novo enquiry, enhanced the punishment to eight months without giving any fresh charge sheet or having any new evidence. The evidence in support of Martin had not been considered by the Stewards.

The Appeal Board on Saturday felt that the enhancement of punishment was not justifiable and reduced it back to the original 56 days. However opinion was divided as to whether Martin should be punished or not, whether the same had to be reduced significantly and the charge of not permitting the horse to run on merits to be dropped. Two of the members reportedly were for complete exoneration while one was for reduced punishment. Two others did not want any reduction. The Chairman suggested keeping the punishment at 55 days and voting was taken to resolve the deadlock. Three members voted for keeping the punishment at 55 days and the other three voted against the same. The Chairman`s casting vote thus ensured that Martin could not get the reprieve that he was looking for.

Martin`s suspension comes into effect from Monday and he has to put in an appeal to BHA to stay the punishment before BHA gives its verdict on the jockey`s appeal. On RWITC`s part, the club will be requesting BHA to reciprocate the ban though India is not a signatory to international regulations with regard to reciprocity. Last year, Richard Hughes had been suspended for 45 days for not following trainer`s instruction and BHA did not interfere with the punishment and allowed the punishment to stay. However, Martin`s case is different because of the circumstances surrounding the issue and that there were number of mitigating factors. There is not a single instance of any jockey in India having been suspended after the horse had bled during the race. Technically, the horse was not eligible to race under RWTC Rules of Racing as it had bled during workouts and such a horse is banned from racing for a month.

Two decades ago English jockey Kevin Darley had been suspended by RWITC but his punishment was not reciprocated by the Jockey Club of England. English jockeys were not allowed to ride in India for a number of years but the ban was later lifted. Incidentally Darley came back to ride Crack Regiment to victory in the Golconda Derby during his later part of his career. One has to wait and see what stand RIWTC would take if BHA does not reciprocate the punishment.

 
 
  Post your comments   E-mail   Print
Total Comments : 3
Posted by Capt. Jamshed J. Appoo on ( September 8 , 2013 )
It was really astonishing how well Mr. Adi Narielwalla planned out the whole appeal to hang Martin as basically he is a rubber stamp of Chairman Khushroo Dhunjibhoy. It clearly showed that he had come pre-planned with vindictiveness as was clearly displayed as the other three Appeal Board members who for the first time put in such strong dissents and have said in literal terms that the Appeal hearing was washy washy. How come they all went to court when their trainer`s syce/jamadar was caught live mixing water in the urine sample of their own horse. If such people are going to sit in the Appeal, what outcome can one expect. I really hope BHA does not reciprocate and throws this wrongful punishment into their Dustbin.
 
Posted by Mark castle on ( September 8 , 2013 )
Surely it was the trainers responsibility to ensure the horse was fit to run not the jockey to be blamed for the poor performance.
 
Posted by Suresh on ( September 9 , 2013 )
It`s time the byelaws of all Turf Clubs are amended to include a judicial member who is a retired judge to ensure fairness, proper appreciation of evidence and proper application of Rules.
 
Top
   
'


Live Results - Delhi, March 28 2024
 
Disclaimer: The views expressed in Reviews and Analysis depict the personal perspective of the authors only. The website does not subscribe to or endorse any of the same and is not responsible for adverse consequences. Every effort is made to provide accurate information, we are not responsible for any discrepancies that are beyond our control.
© 2008 Racing Pulse. All Rights Reserved. A Racingpulse Holdings Venture