Greymouth JC 14 January 2012 – R 8 (instigating a protest)

hearingid: b74d26ce27017e2c1d6668768c1c4cf4

informantnumber: A5218

horsename: BIG RED AND ONE NITE STAND

hearing_racingtype:

startdate: no date provided

newcharge:

plea:

penaltyrequired:

decisiondate: 01/01/2012

hearing_title: Greymouth JC 14 January 2012 - R 8 (instigating a protest)

charge:

facts:

The Judge's call at the conclusion of Race 8 at the Greymouth Jockey Club's meeting, the "Greymouth Businesses Sprint Open Handicap 1100m" was as follows:

1st Big Red

2nd One Nite Stand

3rd Sub Prime

4th All Spice

5th Our Genes

The official margins were a neck between first and second, and head between second and third.

Mr Pitman, the trainer of Sub Prime and the informant in this protest hearing, alleged that Sub Prime had received interference from both Big Red and One Nite Stand  in the run for the winning post and that had it not been interference in the manner alleged that Sub Prime would have won the race.

Mr Pitman asked the hearing to view the video coverage. He pointed out that as the field turned for home that there was clear racing room for all horses (there being only five horses in the field), the first three horses in particular. Big Red, One Nite Stand and Sub Prime were all racing competitively and on even terms. However, in the last 75 - 50  metres of the race Big Red  moved inwards onto Sub Prime and One Nite Stand moved outwards with contact being made by both horse with Sub Prime. Jostling occurred. Mr Pitman said that as a result Ms Moore was prevented from riding her mount out to the winning post which "cost her the race". He said that Sub Prime was the only horse of the three that was running on a straight line and as a result of the buffetting that his horse was checked out of it with nowhere to go. He said that the horse is a noted fast finisher which loves wet ground. Ms Moore explained that she was trying to hold her line but was checked. She considered that Big Red brushed up against her for the longest but that Mr Walsh's mount came across quite severely.

Mr Callaway maintains that he stayed on his line and said that Sub Prime rolled out and pushed his horse sideways. He said that Mr Walsh's mount came out and didn't help by costing Mr Pitman's horse "a bit."

Mr Walsh agreed that there had been interference but that it was caused by Mr Callaway which rolled onto Sub Prime and which in turn caused his mount to turn "sideways". He said that by reference to markings on the grass that that he maintained a straight line. He placed all the blame on Big Red and said that he was severely inconvenienced as well.

Mr Walsh and Mr Callaway were asked to point out if Sub Prime did not maintain a straight line. Mr Walsh said that it was but was pushed off its line by Big Red.

Ms Moore confirmed that she had received pressure from both sides.

Mr Pitman pointed out that the "lines" on the track were of no assistance.

Mr Carston joined the hearing at a late stage and maintained that the reason for One Nite Stand  turning in was because One Nite Stand was put off balance by Sub Prime.

Mr Ray was asked to comment from the Stipendiary Stewards point of view. He submitted that the majority of the pressure came from the outside.

appealdecision:

isappeal:

submissionsfordecision:

Mr Pitman in summary said that that in his view his horse had clear racing room at the turn for home and that as a result of the horses on the inside and outside placing pressure on Sub Prime was a consequence,  "shut down" with nowhere to go.

reasonsfordecision:

In considering this protest we have to be sure in our opinion that, in terms of Rule 642 (1) that Sub Prime would have finished ahead of the horse or horses which caused interference.

We find as follows:

• Interference was caused to Sub Prime by having been "jostled" in terms of Rule 642 (2) (b) (ii);
• That jostling was inflicted by Big Red and by One Nite Stand;
• As a result of Sub Prime receiving such jostling, its rider was unable to ride the horse out to her full abilities and was effectively checked out of the finish;
• Having regard to the official margins of a neck and a head and the stage of the race at which the interference occurred, we have formed the opinion that Sub Prime would have finished ahead of the horses that caused interference to it. 

Decision:

The protest is upheld against both Big Red and One Nite Stand.

The placings are amended. The methodology for dealing with the amendment of the placings is as follows:

One Nite Stand is placed immediately after Sub Prime.

• This means that the placings are 1st Big Red, 2nd Sub Prime 3rd One Nite Stand
• Big Red is then placed immediately after Sub Prime
• The end result is that Sub Prime is 1st, Big Red 2nd, One Nite Stand 3rd
• The final amended placings are therefore

1st Horse no. 4 Sub Prime

2nd Horse no. 1 Big Red

3rd Horse no. 5 One Nite Stand

4th Horse no. 3 All Spice

5th Horse no. 2 Our Genes 

sumissionsforpenalty:

reasonsforpenalty:

penalty:

hearing_type: Protest

Rules: Rule 642 (1)

Informant: MR Pitman - Licensed Trainer

JockeysandTrainer:

Otherperson:

PersonPresent: Mr A Ray - Stipendiary Steward, Ms B Moore - Apprentice Jockey ("Sub Prime"

Respondent: DM Walsh - Licensed Jockey ("One Nite Stand"), L Callaway - Licensed Jockey ("Big Red")

StipendSteward:

raceid: f98b9b6aa22ef4a33a3b6b982b2c9462

race_expapproval:

racecancelled: 0

race_noreport: 0

race_emailed1: 0

race_emailed2: 0

race_title: R8

submittochair:

race_expappcomment:

race_km:

race_otherexp:

race_chair:

race_pm1:

race_pm2:

meetid: fbaea76531345f3072aa00d43eda9a92

meet_expapproval:

meet_noreport: 0

waitingforpublication: 0

meet_emailed1: 0

meet_emailed2: 0

meetdate: 14/01/2012

meet_title: Greymouth JC - 14 January 2012

meet_expappcomment:

meet_km:

meet_otherexp:

tracklocation: greymouth-jc

meet_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing

meet_chair: KHales

meet_pm1: RMcKenzie

meet_pm2: none

name: Greymouth JC