Taranaki RC 10 February 2012 – R 2 ( Instigating a Protest)
ID: JCA10923
Code:
Thoroughbred
Meet Title:
Taranaki RC - 10 February 2012
Meet Chair:
TUtikere
Meet Committee Member 1:
ISmith
Race Date:
2012/02/10
Race Number:
Race 2
Decision:
The protest was upheld and placings were confirmed as:
1st (5) MADONNA MIA
2nd (4) DELIRIUM
3rd (7) PERMISSION
4th (8) THELIONZSHADOW
5th (1) KONTIKI
6th (6) NEVIE
The committee authorised the immediate payment of dividends in accordance with its decision.
Facts:
Following the running of Race 2 (‘Vause Oil Productions Services Ltd 2YO’) A Sharrock (THELIONZSHADOW) who finished 5th filed Information A3078 instigating a protest against the connections of KONTIKI who finished 4th, alleging interference in the final straight.
Rule 642(1) states: If a placed horse or its Rider causes interference within the meaning of this Rule 642 to another placed horse, and the Judicial Committee is of the opinion that the horse so interfered with would have finished ahead of the first mentioned horse had such interference not occurred, they may place the first mentioned horse immediately after the horse interfered with.
The rule was read and all parties confirmed they understood Rule 642(1).
The provisional placings were:
1st (5) MADONNA MIA
2nd (4) DELIRIUM
3rd (7) PERMISSION
4th (1) KONTIKI
5th (8) THELIONZSHADOW
6th (6) NEVIE
The margin between 4th and 5th was a half a length.
Submissions for Decision:
Using the head-on film, Mr Sharrock pointed out that Jockey Turner had moved from a position of five-off the fence, to one of two-off the fence. Mr Sharrock submitted that based on the films, it was clear that KONTIKI took THELIONZSHADOW’s line, and continued to move across, giving Miss Johnston no option but to be dictated to by KONTIKI until the race was over. He also believed that the margin of half a length between fourth and fifth was minimal on this occasion and there was no doubt in his mind that had THELIONZSHADOW had a clear run to the line, the filly would have run fourth.
Miss Johnston agreed with Mr Sharrock and added that THELIONZSHADOW was racing in blinkers for the first time and as soon as KONTIKI began to cut across, THELIONZSHADOW got a fright and possibly overreacted. She submitted that KONTIKI had also taken a considerable amount of the inside running and she used the films to indicate KONTIKI’s movement was of a sharp, rather than gradual, nature. Miss Johnston indicated that she had originally sought to go to the outside of KONTIKI, but then elected to go to his inside as a result of his movement, and it was at this point that KONTIKI continued to take her rightful line through to the finish.
Mr McQuade, using the head-on film, submitted that two strides prior to his horse’s inwards movement, he queried why Miss Johnston would elect to go to the inside of KONTIKI, when it was clear that he was moving inwards. Mr McQuade also submitted that he did not have a lot to say as he acknowledged there was interference and if he were the connections of THELIONZSHADOW, he would be lodging a protest too. He submitted that there was sufficient interference and he was not going to argue against it.
Mr Turner agreed that there was interference, but submitted that he was about one length clear of THELIONZSHADOW, and that Miss Johnston could have elected to go to the outside of KONTIKI rather than the inside. He also believed that THELIONZSHADOW may have been racing greenly and was running inwards with KONTIKI. Mr Turner again agreed that bad interference had taken place.
For the Stipendiary Stewards, Mr Neal, using the head-on film, submitted that it was clear that KONTIKI was racing greenly and then moved outwards. He also believed that in light of this outwards movement, any attempt by Miss Johnston to go to the outside of KONTIKI would be futile, therefore she appeared to take an inside run and shortly after, established herself inside of the heels of KONTIKI. He also pointed out that Mr Turner continued to ride vigorously with the whip whilst moving inwards; this meant that Miss Johnston was then in a position to be dictated to by KONTIKI. Mr Neal submitted that Miss Johnston was held up for some time and was also unable to ride her horse out to the line. In the view of the stewards, it was submitted that the interference to Miss Johnston had been significant, that it had cost THELIONZSHADOW momentum, and with the margin of half a length between both runners at the finish the stewards believed this was a significant factor for consideration.
Reasons for Decision:
After hearing all the evidence and reviewing the relevant films, the committee considered the submissions relating to the alleged interference over the final stages. It was clear, based on the films, and in particular the head-on film, that Miss Johnston was dictated to over the concluding 150 metres of the race. It was apparent that Mr Turner’s mount was racing greenly, but the committee believed THELIONZSHADOW’s inwards movement was solely due to the dictation by KONTIKI within the final 150 metres.
It is clear to the committee that Miss Johnston had established THELIONZSHADOW to the inside of KONTIKI’s heels. It was from this point that she was entitled to ride her mount in an unhampered fashion. She was also entitled to her rightful line, a line with she was not able to avail herself of; due to KONTIKI’s continuous movement whilst still under a physical ride by Mr Turner. It was also apparent to the committee that a direct result of the dictation was a loss of THELIONZSHADOW’s momentum. We formed the view that the interference that occurred to THELIONZSHADOW was significant, preventing Miss Johnston from having a genuine opportunity to run to the line, and that the margin of half a length between both runners gave additional weight to the effect of the interference upon Mr Sharrock’s horse.
Consequently, it follows that had the interference not occurred we believe THELIONZSHADOW would have beaten KONTIKI. Therefore, the committee considered it appropriate to exercise its discretion to relegate KONTIKI behind THELIONZSHADOW.
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: 06f46a1bc3529d2f6fbfd48812ddf38f
informantnumber: A3078
horsename: KONTIKI
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: 02/02/2012
hearing_title: Taranaki RC 10 February 2012 - R 2 ( Instigating a Protest)
charge:
facts:
Following the running of Race 2 (‘Vause Oil Productions Services Ltd 2YO’) A Sharrock (THELIONZSHADOW) who finished 5th filed Information A3078 instigating a protest against the connections of KONTIKI who finished 4th, alleging interference in the final straight.
Rule 642(1) states: If a placed horse or its Rider causes interference within the meaning of this Rule 642 to another placed horse, and the Judicial Committee is of the opinion that the horse so interfered with would have finished ahead of the first mentioned horse had such interference not occurred, they may place the first mentioned horse immediately after the horse interfered with.
The rule was read and all parties confirmed they understood Rule 642(1).
The provisional placings were:
1st (5) MADONNA MIA
2nd (4) DELIRIUM
3rd (7) PERMISSION
4th (1) KONTIKI
5th (8) THELIONZSHADOW
6th (6) NEVIE
The margin between 4th and 5th was a half a length.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
Using the head-on film, Mr Sharrock pointed out that Jockey Turner had moved from a position of five-off the fence, to one of two-off the fence. Mr Sharrock submitted that based on the films, it was clear that KONTIKI took THELIONZSHADOW’s line, and continued to move across, giving Miss Johnston no option but to be dictated to by KONTIKI until the race was over. He also believed that the margin of half a length between fourth and fifth was minimal on this occasion and there was no doubt in his mind that had THELIONZSHADOW had a clear run to the line, the filly would have run fourth.
Miss Johnston agreed with Mr Sharrock and added that THELIONZSHADOW was racing in blinkers for the first time and as soon as KONTIKI began to cut across, THELIONZSHADOW got a fright and possibly overreacted. She submitted that KONTIKI had also taken a considerable amount of the inside running and she used the films to indicate KONTIKI’s movement was of a sharp, rather than gradual, nature. Miss Johnston indicated that she had originally sought to go to the outside of KONTIKI, but then elected to go to his inside as a result of his movement, and it was at this point that KONTIKI continued to take her rightful line through to the finish.
Mr McQuade, using the head-on film, submitted that two strides prior to his horse’s inwards movement, he queried why Miss Johnston would elect to go to the inside of KONTIKI, when it was clear that he was moving inwards. Mr McQuade also submitted that he did not have a lot to say as he acknowledged there was interference and if he were the connections of THELIONZSHADOW, he would be lodging a protest too. He submitted that there was sufficient interference and he was not going to argue against it.
Mr Turner agreed that there was interference, but submitted that he was about one length clear of THELIONZSHADOW, and that Miss Johnston could have elected to go to the outside of KONTIKI rather than the inside. He also believed that THELIONZSHADOW may have been racing greenly and was running inwards with KONTIKI. Mr Turner again agreed that bad interference had taken place.
For the Stipendiary Stewards, Mr Neal, using the head-on film, submitted that it was clear that KONTIKI was racing greenly and then moved outwards. He also believed that in light of this outwards movement, any attempt by Miss Johnston to go to the outside of KONTIKI would be futile, therefore she appeared to take an inside run and shortly after, established herself inside of the heels of KONTIKI. He also pointed out that Mr Turner continued to ride vigorously with the whip whilst moving inwards; this meant that Miss Johnston was then in a position to be dictated to by KONTIKI. Mr Neal submitted that Miss Johnston was held up for some time and was also unable to ride her horse out to the line. In the view of the stewards, it was submitted that the interference to Miss Johnston had been significant, that it had cost THELIONZSHADOW momentum, and with the margin of half a length between both runners at the finish the stewards believed this was a significant factor for consideration.
reasonsfordecision:
After hearing all the evidence and reviewing the relevant films, the committee considered the submissions relating to the alleged interference over the final stages. It was clear, based on the films, and in particular the head-on film, that Miss Johnston was dictated to over the concluding 150 metres of the race. It was apparent that Mr Turner’s mount was racing greenly, but the committee believed THELIONZSHADOW’s inwards movement was solely due to the dictation by KONTIKI within the final 150 metres.
It is clear to the committee that Miss Johnston had established THELIONZSHADOW to the inside of KONTIKI’s heels. It was from this point that she was entitled to ride her mount in an unhampered fashion. She was also entitled to her rightful line, a line with she was not able to avail herself of; due to KONTIKI’s continuous movement whilst still under a physical ride by Mr Turner. It was also apparent to the committee that a direct result of the dictation was a loss of THELIONZSHADOW’s momentum. We formed the view that the interference that occurred to THELIONZSHADOW was significant, preventing Miss Johnston from having a genuine opportunity to run to the line, and that the margin of half a length between both runners gave additional weight to the effect of the interference upon Mr Sharrock’s horse.
Consequently, it follows that had the interference not occurred we believe THELIONZSHADOW would have beaten KONTIKI. Therefore, the committee considered it appropriate to exercise its discretion to relegate KONTIKI behind THELIONZSHADOW.
Decision:
The protest was upheld and placings were confirmed as:
1st (5) MADONNA MIA
2nd (4) DELIRIUM
3rd (7) PERMISSION
4th (8) THELIONZSHADOW
5th (1) KONTIKI
6th (6) NEVIE
The committee authorised the immediate payment of dividends in accordance with its decision.
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Protest
Rules: Rule 642(1)
Informant: A Sharrock - Licensed Trainer of THELIONZSHADOW
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent: H McQuade - Representing the connections of KONTIKI, V Johnston - Licensed Rider of THELIONZSHADOW, P Turner - Licensed Rider of KONTIKI, Mr R Neal - Stipendiary Steward, A Sharrock - Licensed Trainer of THELIONZSHADOW
Respondent: K McQuade - Licensed Trainer of KONTIKI
StipendSteward:
raceid: 2af9b5cd728e4c806d58e09d672f7dca
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: Race 2
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: 67cf8e34438d990d8fb92164696f0a8d
meet_expapproval: approved
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 10/02/2012
meet_title: Taranaki RC - 10 February 2012
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km: [{"Comment": [], "MemberRole": "Chair ", "MemberID": "TUtikere", "Member": "", "OtherExpenses": "203.50", "KMs": "500", "Total": "513.5", "kmprice": 310.0, "Approved": "on"}]
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: taranaki-rc
meet_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
meet_chair: TUtikere
meet_pm1: ISmith
meet_pm2: none
name: Taranaki RC