DISQUALIFICATION REMOVED.

Auckland Star, Volume LXI, Issue 97, 26 April 1930, Page 19

DISQUALIFICATION REMOVED.

GUY BINGEN AND OWNER. The twelve months' disqualification imposed by the Invercargill Trotting Club on F. G. Taverner, owner of Guy Bingen, R. McKewen, rider and trainer, and the horse Guy Bingen has been removed by the board of the New Zealand Trotting Association. The board directed that the' appeals of Taverner and McKewen be allowed; that the disqualification imposed upon the owner, rider and horse v be removed; that the . club pay over the stake for the Takitimu Handicap to the owner of Guy Bingen; that the deposit fees be refunded in each case; and that the stakes be paid out according to the judge's original placings, which gave the horse first in the race. The matter was dealt with by the board in committee this week, and on resuming in open meeting it was reported that the board had considered the evidence taken by the Judicial Committee of the Invercargill Trotting Club and had heard both parties to the appeal. The stipendiary steward objected to first place being awarded to Guy Bingen in the Takitimu Handicap (one mile saddle), on the ground of inconsistent running, the horse having previously, been placed third in the Crescent Handicap (one mile and a half harness) on the same day, and relied upon the following facts: —The betting on the totalisator was _as follows: Crescent Handicap, 216 tickets out of a total of 3500; Takitimu Handicap, 10G3 tickets out of a total of 4987. In the Crescent Handicap, a 3.42 class, Guy Bingen was handicapped on 3.40, and the race was run in 3.31 1-5, and he was placed third, his actual time being 3.35. In the Takitimu Handicap he was on the limit in a 2.24 class, and won in 2.15. No other evidence, continued the report, was produced in support of the objection. In answer thereto McKewen stated that the Crescent Handicap was the first harness race in which the horse had started, and only his second start. Further, he was green in harness and inclined to run about a bit, and had always gone better in saddle. He had a bet of £5 each start. Taverner stated ' that he would like to'have seen his horse win each start, and invested £5 on him each time.

At the hearing of the appeal," consider-' able evidence was taken, after which it was decided that as additional evidence had been adduced which might have the effect of causing the association to alter the decision arrived at by the club, such additional evidence be forwarded to the club for further consideration. The club had replied that it saw no reason to alter its previous decision,, and it was, therefore, incumbent upon the association to decide the appeal. The exactwords of rule 336, under which the stewards acted, were: "If the stewards believe and are satisfied that the_ performance of such horse is inconsistent and unsatisfactory, they have power to disqualify sufcli horse or its owner, trainer, horseman; or any or all of them, as they think fit." .

"Under the rule," stated the board's report, "it has to be found that the performance of the horse was inconsistent and unsatisfactory, and while in this case the performances were inconsistent from a time point of view, there is ,110 evidence to support a finding that the performance of the horse was unsatisfactory, which implies moral blame. In the circumstances, in the absence of any evidence to throw blame for the inconsistency upon any person and of the performance being unsatisfactory, the disqualification cannot, in the opinion of the board, be supported."