A LOT OF FREE ADVICE

NZ Truth, Issue 1186, 23 August 1928, Page 12

A LOT OF FREE ADVICE

Is Trotting Conference Finding Really Inconsistent? (By "The Toff.'O CINED £25; to have it given back, and then have to pay it, and on top of doing the quarter of a hundred sterling, to sit m the stand until October 14, is J. Bryce's finish m the argument between Free Advice and Baron Bingen. '

THE New Zealand Trotting Conference dealt with the appeal of the New Brighton Trotting Club against-the decision of the Trotting Association, on Wednesday last. The facts of the case were as follow: On March 17 lasUFree Advice Deat Baron Bingen m the Eclipse Handicap at New Brighton. After the race, an inquiry was held, and the stewards reversed the Judge's^ placlngs and fined J. Bryce, driver of Free Advice, £25 for wilful interference. The Trotting Association directed the club to re-hear the case on the grounds of an assertion made by the appellants, Messrs. MeKendrick Bros., of Auckland, owners of Free Advice. The club reheard the case and adhered to its previous decision. •The Trotting Association then proceeded to hear the appeal of Me3srs. McKendrick Bros, against the decision of the-club, and decided to -reverse the pacings of the horses as made by the club, namely, that Free Advice was awarded first money and Baron Bingen was placed second. . They remitted the fine of £25 imposed on Bryce,-, and, m lieu .thereof, cautioned J. Bryce and J N. Clarke. (driver of Baron Bingen) for careless driving. The New Brighton Trotting Club then appealed to the New' Zealand Trotting Conference against the dccision of the Trotting Association and after examining the evidence and hearing representatives of the club and of the association, the Conference appeal Judges ruled that the charge of wilful interference against Bryce was a question of fact, and for that reason no appeal could be made against that nnQlngl , So J. Bryce has to pay the fine of £25 imposed by the club. And as the violation of rule 289 by J. Bryce was wilful, his license to

rid© and drive has been suspended by the Conference until midnight on Ootober 14, 1928. But the Conference judges awarded the race to Free Advice, thus upholding the action of the Trotting Assooiation> and haa directed the New Brighton Club to hold an inquiry into driving of J. N. Clarke, without knowledge of the inner working S Or perusing the evidence, the nndingg Of the Conference appeal judges seem inconsistent. Their action m suspending Bryce's license to ride or drive, suggests that they were satisfied that Bryce did wilfully interfere with Baron Bingen. That being so, it seems peculiar to award Free Advice the race, Too much is being made of the anomaly that such and such a violation of the rule 3 did not affect the result. whether it did or did not, the fact of a drlver (who is ag6nt for the owner) interfering with another driver or horse should cauge the horse he is driving to loB _ any pri ze-money it may have earned In boXlng, If a competitor, contravenefl the rules he loses the fight. In cr|cket, if a batsman puts his leg m front of the wicket and the ball hits it, he is out And ao \ ln aII other rts but racing and trotting do wilful offenders of the rules suffer an extreme penalty, ;' . ' '. 'n view of the instances quoted, one must feel that the New Brighton Club was generous m placing Free Advice second, when "er driver was found to have wilf""y interfered with Baron Bingen. The Conference appeal judges cviGently are of the opinion that Bryce's violation of certain rules was wilful. In view of that, it Is difficult to understand their decision m giving Free Advice the race.