Kapiti Coast HRC 20 January 2012 – R 8 (Instigating a Protest)
ID: JCA10624
Meet Title:
Kapiti Coast HRC - 20 January 2012
Meet Chair:
TUtikere
Meet Committee Member 1:
NMcCutcheon
Race Date:
2012/01/20
Race Number:
Race 8
Decision:
The proest was upheld and the amended placings were confirmed as:
1st - (1) CUP OF LIFE
2nd - (3) TIJUANA BROMAC
3rd - (5) GILTED
4th - (7) KAHUS LEGACY
5th - (8) DONEGAL FORTY SEVEN
The committee authorised the immedaite payment of dividends in accordance with its decision.
Facts:
Following the running of Race 8 (‘Mansell Memorial Kapiti Trot Supporters Mobile Pace 2000m’) S Wallis, Stipendiary Steward, filed Information A5492 instigating a protest against GILTED who finished 1st, alleging “ 1st placed GILTED ran into the passing lane, denying TIJUANA BROMAC a clear run to the finishing post in the passing lane”.
Rule 869(4A) states: “No horse shall during any race do anything which interferes or is likely to interfere with any other horse or its progress.”
Passing Lane Regulations state:
“1(a) ‘Passing Lane’ - For the purpose of these regulations “passing lane” shall mean an inward expansion of the racetrack on the inside of the straight immediately preceding the winning post…for the purpose of allowing a horse or horses in the last lap of any race to pass on the inside any horse on the running line.”
“4. In the last lap of any race the leading horse on the running line shall, upon entering the home straight, maintain as straight a course as possible parallel to the running line and allow the trailing horses full access to the expanded inside lane.”
The relevant rule and regulations were read and all parties confirmed they understood Rule869(4A) and Passing Lane Regulations 1(a) and 4.
The official placings were:
1st - (1) GILTED
2nd - (3) CUP OF LIFE
3rd - (5) TIJUANA BROMAC
4th - (7) KAHUS LEGACY
5th - (8) DONEGAL FORTY SEVEN
Submissions for Decision:
Using the head-on film, Mr Taumanu identified Mr Phelan’s drive (GILTED) at the front of the field and Ms Chilcott’s drive (TIJUANA BROMAC) in the one out and one back position as the field turns for home on the final occasion. Mr Taumanu also identified Mr Taylor’s drive (IMRACN), which was trailing GILTED, and had the first opportunity to access the passing lane as IMRACN was in the trail. The films identified IMRACN attempting to access the passing lane when it became available, but stipendiary stewards noted that as the horse was not making good progress, Mr Taylor elected to drop back, allowing TIJUANA BROMAC, which was positioned on the back of GILTED, to move into the passing lane.
Stewards submitted that Mr Phelan had allowed his horse to drift in, and consequently this had prevented Ms Chilcott from accessing the passing lane. Mr Taumanu stated that when the passing lane became available, Mr Phelan should have kept his own running line, instead of drifting into the passing lane, which resulted in insufficient room for TIJUANA BROMAC to gain access. Using the side-on film, Mr Taumanu also pointed out that Ms Chilcott appeared to have a “good hold” of her horse at the point when the passing lane became available, and that when she did attempt to improve her horse, there was nowhere for it to run.
Ms Chilcott stated that as she did not want to go out wide, due to a large number of runners spread across the track, she decided to wait for the passing lane to become available. When Mr Taylor did not access it, she indicated to the committee that her intention was to move into the lane, but by the time she went to do so, the passing lane had been closed as a result of Mr Phelan’s inwards movement. Ms Chilcott confirmed that her horse was “full of running” and under a hard hold as the field turned for home. She also pointed out on the film where she activated the pull-down blinds just before IMRACN started to tire, so that she was ready to move into the passing lane, but as she had been unable to enter the passing lane, TIJUANA BROMAC had ended up hard on Mr Phelan’s back at the finish. Ms Chilcott stated that she believed she was denied the chance to access the passing lane.
Mr Phelan acknowledged that his horse did drift down towards the end of the passing lane. He submitted that as he was 2½ lengths from TIJUANA BROMAC at the finish, he did not believe Ms Chilcott would have beaten the first two horses if access to the passing lane had been gained. Mr Phelan also pointed out that this was GILTED’s third start, and that consequently he did race a little greenly. In response to a question from the Chairman, Mr Phelan did not believe that he had taken the opportunity from Ms Chilcott to gain access to the passing lane, stating that she could have pushed his drive over without any trouble. He also believed that there was enough room for her to put TIJUANA BROMAC’s head into the passing lane; but not her whole cart. Mr Phelan did indicate that he had heard IMRACN drop back, but he did not believe there was anything else immediately behind him. He did acknowledge that he believed GILTED had moved “at least half a cart” into the passing lane, when it became available.
In response, Mr Wallis submitted that it was clear that GILTED had come down into the passing lane and had denied Ms Chilcott a fair run to the line as the regulations state he must do. Mr Wallis also used the side-on film to indicate that TIJUANA BROMAC was approximately ½ to 1 length behind Mr Phelan when the passing lane became available.
Mr Phelan did not wish to make any further comment.
Reasons for Decision:
After hearing all the evidence and reviewing the relevant films, the committee formed the view that TIJUANA BROMAC was full of running and travelling particularly well as the field turned for home on the final occasion. It was very clear from the films, and Mr Phelan’s own admission, that GILTED did move into the passing lane. The committee noted that the inwards distance of the movement into the passing lane by GILTED had been fairly significant, as a trailing horse could have clearly gained unimpeded access to the passing lane as soon as it became available. When TIJUANA BROMAC attempted to gain access, such access was no longer available as a direct result of GILTED’s inwards movement. Accordingly, the committee determined that the extent of GILTED’s inwards movement was more than the ½ cart submitted by Mr Phelan. This movement was such that it denied TIJUANA BROMAC the opportunity to improve, by being able to fully access the passing lane, which it was fully entitled to do. Therefore, the committee considered it appropriate to relegate GILTED immediately behind TIJUANA BROMAC.
JCA Decision Fields (raw)
Dmitry: This section contains all JCA fields migrated from the raw data.
Data from these fields should be mapped appropriately to display amongst the standard fields above; please make note of any values below that are missing in the above standard fields but should be there.
hearingid: 052e71252f4ce5fadc6fc2d2c1948bc6
informantnumber: A5492
horsename: GILTED
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: 19/01/2012
hearing_title: Kapiti Coast HRC 20 January 2012 - R 8 (Instigating a Protest)
charge:
facts:
Following the running of Race 8 (‘Mansell Memorial Kapiti Trot Supporters Mobile Pace 2000m’) S Wallis, Stipendiary Steward, filed Information A5492 instigating a protest against GILTED who finished 1st, alleging “ 1st placed GILTED ran into the passing lane, denying TIJUANA BROMAC a clear run to the finishing post in the passing lane”.
Rule 869(4A) states: “No horse shall during any race do anything which interferes or is likely to interfere with any other horse or its progress.”
Passing Lane Regulations state:
“1(a) ‘Passing Lane’ - For the purpose of these regulations “passing lane” shall mean an inward expansion of the racetrack on the inside of the straight immediately preceding the winning post…for the purpose of allowing a horse or horses in the last lap of any race to pass on the inside any horse on the running line.”
“4. In the last lap of any race the leading horse on the running line shall, upon entering the home straight, maintain as straight a course as possible parallel to the running line and allow the trailing horses full access to the expanded inside lane.”
The relevant rule and regulations were read and all parties confirmed they understood Rule869(4A) and Passing Lane Regulations 1(a) and 4.
The official placings were:
1st - (1) GILTED
2nd - (3) CUP OF LIFE
3rd - (5) TIJUANA BROMAC
4th - (7) KAHUS LEGACY
5th - (8) DONEGAL FORTY SEVEN
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
Using the head-on film, Mr Taumanu identified Mr Phelan’s drive (GILTED) at the front of the field and Ms Chilcott’s drive (TIJUANA BROMAC) in the one out and one back position as the field turns for home on the final occasion. Mr Taumanu also identified Mr Taylor’s drive (IMRACN), which was trailing GILTED, and had the first opportunity to access the passing lane as IMRACN was in the trail. The films identified IMRACN attempting to access the passing lane when it became available, but stipendiary stewards noted that as the horse was not making good progress, Mr Taylor elected to drop back, allowing TIJUANA BROMAC, which was positioned on the back of GILTED, to move into the passing lane.
Stewards submitted that Mr Phelan had allowed his horse to drift in, and consequently this had prevented Ms Chilcott from accessing the passing lane. Mr Taumanu stated that when the passing lane became available, Mr Phelan should have kept his own running line, instead of drifting into the passing lane, which resulted in insufficient room for TIJUANA BROMAC to gain access. Using the side-on film, Mr Taumanu also pointed out that Ms Chilcott appeared to have a “good hold” of her horse at the point when the passing lane became available, and that when she did attempt to improve her horse, there was nowhere for it to run.
Ms Chilcott stated that as she did not want to go out wide, due to a large number of runners spread across the track, she decided to wait for the passing lane to become available. When Mr Taylor did not access it, she indicated to the committee that her intention was to move into the lane, but by the time she went to do so, the passing lane had been closed as a result of Mr Phelan’s inwards movement. Ms Chilcott confirmed that her horse was “full of running” and under a hard hold as the field turned for home. She also pointed out on the film where she activated the pull-down blinds just before IMRACN started to tire, so that she was ready to move into the passing lane, but as she had been unable to enter the passing lane, TIJUANA BROMAC had ended up hard on Mr Phelan’s back at the finish. Ms Chilcott stated that she believed she was denied the chance to access the passing lane.
Mr Phelan acknowledged that his horse did drift down towards the end of the passing lane. He submitted that as he was 2½ lengths from TIJUANA BROMAC at the finish, he did not believe Ms Chilcott would have beaten the first two horses if access to the passing lane had been gained. Mr Phelan also pointed out that this was GILTED’s third start, and that consequently he did race a little greenly. In response to a question from the Chairman, Mr Phelan did not believe that he had taken the opportunity from Ms Chilcott to gain access to the passing lane, stating that she could have pushed his drive over without any trouble. He also believed that there was enough room for her to put TIJUANA BROMAC’s head into the passing lane; but not her whole cart. Mr Phelan did indicate that he had heard IMRACN drop back, but he did not believe there was anything else immediately behind him. He did acknowledge that he believed GILTED had moved “at least half a cart” into the passing lane, when it became available.
In response, Mr Wallis submitted that it was clear that GILTED had come down into the passing lane and had denied Ms Chilcott a fair run to the line as the regulations state he must do. Mr Wallis also used the side-on film to indicate that TIJUANA BROMAC was approximately ½ to 1 length behind Mr Phelan when the passing lane became available.
Mr Phelan did not wish to make any further comment.
reasonsfordecision:
After hearing all the evidence and reviewing the relevant films, the committee formed the view that TIJUANA BROMAC was full of running and travelling particularly well as the field turned for home on the final occasion. It was very clear from the films, and Mr Phelan’s own admission, that GILTED did move into the passing lane. The committee noted that the inwards distance of the movement into the passing lane by GILTED had been fairly significant, as a trailing horse could have clearly gained unimpeded access to the passing lane as soon as it became available. When TIJUANA BROMAC attempted to gain access, such access was no longer available as a direct result of GILTED’s inwards movement. Accordingly, the committee determined that the extent of GILTED’s inwards movement was more than the ½ cart submitted by Mr Phelan. This movement was such that it denied TIJUANA BROMAC the opportunity to improve, by being able to fully access the passing lane, which it was fully entitled to do. Therefore, the committee considered it appropriate to relegate GILTED immediately behind TIJUANA BROMAC.
Decision:
The proest was upheld and the amended placings were confirmed as:
1st - (1) CUP OF LIFE
2nd - (3) TIJUANA BROMAC
3rd - (5) GILTED
4th - (7) KAHUS LEGACY
5th - (8) DONEGAL FORTY SEVEN
The committee authorised the immedaite payment of dividends in accordance with its decision.
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Protest
Rules: Rule 869(4A) and Passing Lane Regulations 1(a) and 4
Informant: Mr S Wallis - Stipendiary Steward
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent: Ms N Chilcott - Driver of TIJUANA BROMAC, Mr E Phelan - Driver of GILTED, Mr T Taumanu - Stipendiary Steward, Ms G Ward - Observer
Respondent: Mr E Phelan - Dirver of GILTED
StipendSteward:
raceid: b2c87c8b8470f397756712dd6c384adc
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: Race 8
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: 6cb3402b6a8d482cb582ba35e7ea9c1c
meet_expapproval: approved
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 20/01/2012
meet_title: Kapiti Coast HRC - 20 January 2012
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km: [{"Comment": [], "MemberRole": "Chair ", "MemberID": "TUtikere", "Member": "", "OtherExpenses": "0", "KMs": "150", "Total": "93.0", "kmprice": 93.0, "Approved": "on"}]
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: kapiti-coast-hrc
meet_racingtype: harness-racing
meet_chair: TUtikere
meet_pm1: NMcCutcheon
meet_pm2: none
name: Kapiti Coast HRC