Auckland RC 15 February 2020 – R 3 (instigating a protest) – Chair, Mr A Dooley
ID: JCA16125
Code:
Thoroughbred
Meet Title:
Auckland RC - 15 February 2020
Meet Chair:
ADooley
Meet Committee Member 1:
GJones
Race Date:
2020/02/15
Race Number:
R3
Decision:
The protest was dismissed and the Judge's placing’s shall stand.
The Committee authorised the payment of stakes and dividends in accordance with its decision.
Facts:
Following the running of race 3, an Information was filed Instigating a Protest pursuant to Rule 642(1). The Informant, Ms Thornton, Rider of TUNZAGUTZ, alleged that QUICK PREVIEW or its rider placed 1st by the Judge interfered with the chances of TUNZAGUTZ placed 2nd by the Judge.
The interference was alleged to have occurred in the final straight.
The Judge's placing was as follows:
1st No. 4 QUICK PREVIEW
2nd No. 11 TUNZAGUTZ
3rd No. 5 LOOKS LIKE
4th No. 2 THE BUZZ
The official margins between 1st and 2nd was a head.
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”.
For the purposes of Rule 642 “interference” is defined as:
(i) a horse crossing another horse without being at least its own length and one other clear length in front of such other horse at the time of crossing;
(ii) a horse jostling with another horse, unless it is proved that such jostling was caused by the fault of some other horse or Rider or that the horse or Rider jostled with was partly at fault; or
(iii) a horse itself, or its Rider, in any way interfering with another horse or the Rider of another horse in a Race, unless it is proved that such interference was caused by the fault of some other horse or Rider or that the horse or Rider interfered with was partly at fault.
Submissions for Decision:
At the commencement of the hearing the protest procedure was explained to all parties and the protest Rule was read aloud. All connections said they understood the Rule.
Ms Thornton identified that QUICK PREVIEW shifted out onto LOOKS LIKE who consequently made contact with her mount near the 100 metres. She said as a result of the contact she nearly displaced her iron and was unable to ride her mount out fully. She submitted that this cost her the winning of the race.
Mr Ralph said that the margin at the finish was “a bob of the head”. He added that he is an experienced track work rider and, in his opinion, any slight check can affect momentum.
Mr McKee submitted that there were two issues he wished to comment on initially. First, whether a rider’s foot has come out of an iron is irrelevant to this protest. Second, Mr Ralph’s opinion as a track work rider is also not relevant to this protest. Mr McKee went onto acknowledge that QUICK PREVIEW did shift out slightly. However, he said that TUNZAGUTZ had an uninterrupted run to the finish line and in his view shifting out does not equate to interference.
Mr Yanagida said that when his mount shifted out, he stopped riding forward and corrected the movement. He accepted that LOOKS LIKE was checked but noted that TUNZAGUTZ was laying in. He added that TUNZAGUTZ would not have beaten QUICK PREVIEW.
Mr Bosma submitted that Ms Thornton did not stop riding her mount and TUNZAGUTZ contributed to the incident by shifting in.
Mr Oatham on behalf of the Stewards said that QUICK PREVIEW did shift out onto LOOKS LIKE near the 100 metres. At the same time TUNZAGUTZ commenced to lay in and became slightly unbalanced. He said the Stewards were not comfortably satisfied that had the incident not occurred TUNZAGUTZ would have beaten QUICK PREVIEW.
Reasons for Decision:
The Committee carefully considered all of submissions presented and reviewed the video footage.
We found that QUICK PREVIEW did shift out near the 100 metres and as a result LOOKS LIKE was inconvenienced. In turn that runner made slight contact with TUNZAGUTZ for about two strides. Accordingly, there was minor indirect interference to TUNZAGUTZ. But we observed that TUNZAGUTZ was laying in near the 100 metres and contributed to the incident. We note that TUNZAGUTZ continued to lay in so for some distance when being ridden forward.
Having considered the impact of the outward shift by QUICK PREVIEW we conclude the interference was minimal. We were not of the opinion that TUNZAGUTZ would have beaten QUICK PREVIEW.
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: c01f2a30f414d4c0c312f13af38b7568
informantnumber: A13405
horsename: QUICK PREVIEW
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: 16/02/2020
hearing_title: Auckland RC 15 February 2020 - R 3 (instigating a protest) - Chair, Mr A Dooley
charge:
facts:
Following the running of race 3, an Information was filed Instigating a Protest pursuant to Rule 642(1). The Informant, Ms Thornton, Rider of TUNZAGUTZ, alleged that QUICK PREVIEW or its rider placed 1st by the Judge interfered with the chances of TUNZAGUTZ placed 2nd by the Judge.
The interference was alleged to have occurred in the final straight.
The Judge's placing was as follows:
1st No. 4 QUICK PREVIEW
2nd No. 11 TUNZAGUTZ
3rd No. 5 LOOKS LIKE
4th No. 2 THE BUZZ
The official margins between 1st and 2nd was a head.
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”.
For the purposes of Rule 642 “interference” is defined as:
(i) a horse crossing another horse without being at least its own length and one other clear length in front of such other horse at the time of crossing;
(ii) a horse jostling with another horse, unless it is proved that such jostling was caused by the fault of some other horse or Rider or that the horse or Rider jostled with was partly at fault; or
(iii) a horse itself, or its Rider, in any way interfering with another horse or the Rider of another horse in a Race, unless it is proved that such interference was caused by the fault of some other horse or Rider or that the horse or Rider interfered with was partly at fault.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
At the commencement of the hearing the protest procedure was explained to all parties and the protest Rule was read aloud. All connections said they understood the Rule.
Ms Thornton identified that QUICK PREVIEW shifted out onto LOOKS LIKE who consequently made contact with her mount near the 100 metres. She said as a result of the contact she nearly displaced her iron and was unable to ride her mount out fully. She submitted that this cost her the winning of the race.
Mr Ralph said that the margin at the finish was “a bob of the head”. He added that he is an experienced track work rider and, in his opinion, any slight check can affect momentum.
Mr McKee submitted that there were two issues he wished to comment on initially. First, whether a rider’s foot has come out of an iron is irrelevant to this protest. Second, Mr Ralph’s opinion as a track work rider is also not relevant to this protest. Mr McKee went onto acknowledge that QUICK PREVIEW did shift out slightly. However, he said that TUNZAGUTZ had an uninterrupted run to the finish line and in his view shifting out does not equate to interference.
Mr Yanagida said that when his mount shifted out, he stopped riding forward and corrected the movement. He accepted that LOOKS LIKE was checked but noted that TUNZAGUTZ was laying in. He added that TUNZAGUTZ would not have beaten QUICK PREVIEW.
Mr Bosma submitted that Ms Thornton did not stop riding her mount and TUNZAGUTZ contributed to the incident by shifting in.
Mr Oatham on behalf of the Stewards said that QUICK PREVIEW did shift out onto LOOKS LIKE near the 100 metres. At the same time TUNZAGUTZ commenced to lay in and became slightly unbalanced. He said the Stewards were not comfortably satisfied that had the incident not occurred TUNZAGUTZ would have beaten QUICK PREVIEW.
reasonsfordecision:
The Committee carefully considered all of submissions presented and reviewed the video footage.
We found that QUICK PREVIEW did shift out near the 100 metres and as a result LOOKS LIKE was inconvenienced. In turn that runner made slight contact with TUNZAGUTZ for about two strides. Accordingly, there was minor indirect interference to TUNZAGUTZ. But we observed that TUNZAGUTZ was laying in near the 100 metres and contributed to the incident. We note that TUNZAGUTZ continued to lay in so for some distance when being ridden forward.
Having considered the impact of the outward shift by QUICK PREVIEW we conclude the interference was minimal. We were not of the opinion that TUNZAGUTZ would have beaten QUICK PREVIEW.
Decision:
The protest was dismissed and the Judge's placing’s shall stand.
The Committee authorised the payment of stakes and dividends in accordance with its decision.
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Protest
Rules: 642(1)
Informant: Ms T Thornton - Rider of TUNZAGUTZ
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent: Mr T Yanagida - Rider of QUICK PREVIEW, Mr A Bosma - Manager of QUICK PREVIEW, Mr S Ralph - Trainer of TUNZAGUTZ, Mr N Harris - Apprentice Jockey Mentor, Mr J Oatham - Chief Stipendiary Steward
Respondent: Mr S McKee - Trainer of QUICK PREVIEW
StipendSteward:
raceid: 33133c059df62c5908aad429307ffb59
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: R3
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: a50d147bb9529cc215e81f30e722227c
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 15/02/2020
meet_title: Auckland RC - 15 February 2020
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: auckland-rc
meet_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
meet_chair: ADooley
meet_pm1: GJones
meet_pm2: none
name: Auckland RC