Banks Peninsula RC 4 November 2012 – R 6 (Instigating a Protest)
ID: JCA11733
Code:
Thoroughbred
Meet Title:
Banks Peninsula RC - 4 November 2012
Meet Chair:
SChing
Meet Committee Member 1:
RMcKenzie
Race Date:
2012/11/04
Race Number:
R6
Decision:
The protest was dismissed. It was ordered that dividends and stakes be paid in accordance with the Judge’s placings as set out above.
Facts:
Following the running of Race 6, the Berkley Stud Three Year Old, an Information Instigating a Protest was filed by Apprentice Jockey Mr R Hutchings, alleging interference by1st placed horse “Sir Singo” (1), ridden by Mr C Johnson, to the 2nd placed “Kayleen” (6), ridden by Mr R Hutchings.
The Judge's placings in this race were as follows:
1st Sir Singo (1)
2nd Kayleen (6)
3rd Prince Ransom (2)
4th Percy Possam (4)
5th Alfie River(5)
6th Chapelle D’Or (7)
The Information reads as follows:
“That horse number 1, or its rider, placed 1st by the Judge, interfered with the chances of horse number 6, placed 2nd by the Judge, as detailed below;
‘Alleged interference near the 350m when “Kayleen”(R Hutchings) and “Sir Singo” (C Johnson) came together.’
Rule 642(1) provides as follows:
“If a placed horse or its Rider causes interference within the meaning of this Rule 642 to another 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 connections of “Sir Singo” were represented at this hearing by Mr M Pitman, the trainer, Mr C Johnson, the rider and Mr J Pitman, part owner. The connections of “Kayleen” were represented by Mr R Hutchings, the rider, Mr L Robinson, stable representative for the Jason Bridgman stable. All parties agreed that they understood the Rule and the nature of the protest.
Submissions for Decision:
Mr Hutchings gave evidence and used video coverage to show that near the 350m “Sir Singo” shifted outwards when attempting to take a gap directly in front of his horse, making firm contact with “Kayleen” which in turn made contact with “Hydraulic”. Mr Hutchings stated that this contact had unbalanced his horse for 4 to 5 strides and had cost him ½ to ¾ of a length and but for the interference suffered from “Sir Singo” his horse would have beaten “Sir Singo”. The official margin between 1st and 2nd was a ½ head. Mr Hutchings stated after a question from the Committee that ”Sir Singo” was a ½ neck back on Kayleen” when they made contact. Mr Robinson agreed with Mr Hutchings and stated that “Kayleen” was a small horse and had Mr Johnson not made contact and unbalanced “Kayleen” at the 350m “Kayleen” would have taken the gap she was entitled to and won the race. He believed “Kayleen” had stayed unbalanced for the remainder of the race.
Mr Johnson gave evidence that “Sir Singo” had not handled the bend into the straight and that both horses were racing side by side. He stated that he believed that “Kayleen” had shifted in as he was shifting out when they came together. He also stated that both horses were looking for clear running at the time of the incident.
Mr Pitman gave evidence that after both horses came together “Kayleen” lost very little ground whereas “Sir Singo” lost 1 to 1 ½ lengths in this incident. He also stated that “Sir Singo” was hunted back in and did not receive clear running until later in the straight. Mr Pitman stated that “Kayleen” had every opportunity to take the gap immediately ahead but was not going good enough to do so. He also stated that “Sir Singo” came from behind “Kayleen”, was forced back in, eventually gaining clear running and winning the race going away from “Kayleen” at the post.
Mr J Pitman, owner of “Sir Singo”, stated that in his opinion “Kayleen” had shifted in first and that “Sir Singo” had suffered more interference than “Kayleen” in this incident. “Sir Singo” had lost ground, was held up and came from behind “Kayleen” to beat that horse.
Stipendiary Steward, Mr J McLaughlin, in giving his interpretation of the incident stated that, there was no doubt interference did occur and whether that interference justified a change in placings, he would leave it up to the Committee to decide.
Reasons for Decision:
We carefully considered the evidence given and the video coverage of the incident. The video evidence was compelling with the side on, head on and home turn video replays showing both horses coming together at the 350m. It was clear from the video replays that “Sir Singo” was looking for clear running when making contact with “Kayleen”. Of note was Mr Hutchings' statement that “Sir Singo” was a ½ neck behind “Kayleen” when contact was made. Both horses were clearly unbalanced for several strides after coming together with “Sir Singo” being bounced back inwards behind other runners.”Kayleen” after being unbalanced for several strides, was able to be ridden to the line unimpeded. “Sir Singo” after being placed behind other runners initially, improved through the field to go on and win the race. After consideration of all evidence presented in conjunction with the official margin of ½ a head, the Committee was satisfied that interference had occurred to “Kayleen” near the 350m when making contact with “Sir Singo”. The Committee were not however satisfied that “Kayleen” would have beaten “Sir Singo” but for the interference suffered in this incident. The Committee therefore decided that the protest be dismissed.
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: 29abcf7a9d0e289a3c7306ca1abfeb5e
informantnumber: A5359
horsename: Sir Singo
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: 30/10/2012
hearing_title: Banks Peninsula RC 4 November 2012 - R 6 (Instigating a Protest)
charge:
facts:
Following the running of Race 6, the Berkley Stud Three Year Old, an Information Instigating a Protest was filed by Apprentice Jockey Mr R Hutchings, alleging interference by1st placed horse “Sir Singo” (1), ridden by Mr C Johnson, to the 2nd placed “Kayleen” (6), ridden by Mr R Hutchings.
The Judge's placings in this race were as follows:
1st Sir Singo (1)
2nd Kayleen (6)
3rd Prince Ransom (2)
4th Percy Possam (4)
5th Alfie River(5)
6th Chapelle D’Or (7)
The Information reads as follows:
“That horse number 1, or its rider, placed 1st by the Judge, interfered with the chances of horse number 6, placed 2nd by the Judge, as detailed below;
‘Alleged interference near the 350m when “Kayleen”(R Hutchings) and “Sir Singo” (C Johnson) came together.’
Rule 642(1) provides as follows:
“If a placed horse or its Rider causes interference within the meaning of this Rule 642 to another 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 connections of “Sir Singo” were represented at this hearing by Mr M Pitman, the trainer, Mr C Johnson, the rider and Mr J Pitman, part owner. The connections of “Kayleen” were represented by Mr R Hutchings, the rider, Mr L Robinson, stable representative for the Jason Bridgman stable. All parties agreed that they understood the Rule and the nature of the protest.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
Mr Hutchings gave evidence and used video coverage to show that near the 350m “Sir Singo” shifted outwards when attempting to take a gap directly in front of his horse, making firm contact with “Kayleen” which in turn made contact with “Hydraulic”. Mr Hutchings stated that this contact had unbalanced his horse for 4 to 5 strides and had cost him ½ to ¾ of a length and but for the interference suffered from “Sir Singo” his horse would have beaten “Sir Singo”. The official margin between 1st and 2nd was a ½ head. Mr Hutchings stated after a question from the Committee that ”Sir Singo” was a ½ neck back on Kayleen” when they made contact. Mr Robinson agreed with Mr Hutchings and stated that “Kayleen” was a small horse and had Mr Johnson not made contact and unbalanced “Kayleen” at the 350m “Kayleen” would have taken the gap she was entitled to and won the race. He believed “Kayleen” had stayed unbalanced for the remainder of the race.
Mr Johnson gave evidence that “Sir Singo” had not handled the bend into the straight and that both horses were racing side by side. He stated that he believed that “Kayleen” had shifted in as he was shifting out when they came together. He also stated that both horses were looking for clear running at the time of the incident.
Mr Pitman gave evidence that after both horses came together “Kayleen” lost very little ground whereas “Sir Singo” lost 1 to 1 ½ lengths in this incident. He also stated that “Sir Singo” was hunted back in and did not receive clear running until later in the straight. Mr Pitman stated that “Kayleen” had every opportunity to take the gap immediately ahead but was not going good enough to do so. He also stated that “Sir Singo” came from behind “Kayleen”, was forced back in, eventually gaining clear running and winning the race going away from “Kayleen” at the post.
Mr J Pitman, owner of “Sir Singo”, stated that in his opinion “Kayleen” had shifted in first and that “Sir Singo” had suffered more interference than “Kayleen” in this incident. “Sir Singo” had lost ground, was held up and came from behind “Kayleen” to beat that horse.
Stipendiary Steward, Mr J McLaughlin, in giving his interpretation of the incident stated that, there was no doubt interference did occur and whether that interference justified a change in placings, he would leave it up to the Committee to decide.
reasonsfordecision:
We carefully considered the evidence given and the video coverage of the incident. The video evidence was compelling with the side on, head on and home turn video replays showing both horses coming together at the 350m. It was clear from the video replays that “Sir Singo” was looking for clear running when making contact with “Kayleen”. Of note was Mr Hutchings' statement that “Sir Singo” was a ½ neck behind “Kayleen” when contact was made. Both horses were clearly unbalanced for several strides after coming together with “Sir Singo” being bounced back inwards behind other runners.”Kayleen” after being unbalanced for several strides, was able to be ridden to the line unimpeded. “Sir Singo” after being placed behind other runners initially, improved through the field to go on and win the race. After consideration of all evidence presented in conjunction with the official margin of ½ a head, the Committee was satisfied that interference had occurred to “Kayleen” near the 350m when making contact with “Sir Singo”. The Committee were not however satisfied that “Kayleen” would have beaten “Sir Singo” but for the interference suffered in this incident. The Committee therefore decided that the protest be dismissed.
Decision:
The protest was dismissed. It was ordered that dividends and stakes be paid in accordance with the Judge’s placings as set out above.
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Protest
Rules: 642(1)
Informant: Mr R Hutchings-Apprentice Jockey
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent: Mr L Robinson-Stable representative, Mr J Pitman-Owner
Respondent: Mr M Pitman-Trainer, Mr C Johnson-Jockey
StipendSteward:
raceid: 1e09fa0c9ec3601f0072267234b20f99
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: R6
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: 4266cc6b37cd2959fc005c1b818ec56c
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 04/11/2012
meet_title: Banks Peninsula RC - 4 November 2012
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: banks-peninsula-rc
meet_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
meet_chair: SChing
meet_pm1: RMcKenzie
meet_pm2: none
name: Banks Peninsula RC