Tapanui RC 20 December 2020 – R 7 (instigating a protest) – Chair, Prof G Hall
ID: JCA17152
Code:
Thoroughbred
Meet Title:
Tapanui RC - 20 December 2020
Meet Chair:
GHall
Race Date:
2020/12/20
Race Number:
R 7
Decision:
The Committee has to be of the opinion that GALLANT BOY would have finished ahead of MIDNIGHT RUNNER had the interference not occurred. It is not. The protest is dismissed. The placings are as called by the Judge.
Stakes and dividends are to be paid accordingly.
Facts:
Following the running of Race 7, Mr Davidson, Stipendiary Steward, lodged a protest under r 642(1) against the 1st horse, MIDNIGHT RUNNER, alleging interference by that horse to the 2nd horse, GALLANT BOY, over the concluding stages.
The official placings were:
1st-4 MIDNIGHT RUNNER
2ND -1 GALLANT BOY
3RD-9 RIVERFALLS
4TH -5 SHAARA
5TH -3 FLYING SARDINE
The official margin between 1st and 2nd was a head (0.2L).
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”.
(2) For the purposes of Rules 637 and 642:
(a) “placed horse” shall be a horse placed by the Judge in accordance with Rule 641(3); and
(b) “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:
Miss Haley pointed out the relevant runners on the video replays and demonstrated that MIDNIGHT RUNNER shifted out some 4 to 5 horse widths in the straight.
Mr Davidson stated that Ms Wynne had attempted to straighten her horse, and, like Miss Haley, he thought Mr Beeharry was taken out some 4 to 5 horse widths. He said there was initially no contact, but GALLANT BOY was dictated out. He believed GALLANT BOY may have got ahead of MIDNIGHT RUNNER at about the 70 metres, but MIDNIGHT RUNNER had fought back to finish ahead of GALLANT BOY. If there was contact, it was very late and inside the final 50 to 70 metres.
Mr Beeharry said MIDNIGHT RUNNER shifting out had cost him the race. He would have won if MIDNIGHT RUNNER had gone straight. He said Ms Wynne was pushing his horse wider and he was hampered by this.
Mr Anderton said MIDNIGHT RUNNER had dictated GALLANT BOY’s line. He had been shifted from 2 off the fence to quite wide in the straight. He said that this had not helped GALLANT BOY. He acknowledged that Mr Beeharry had never had to stop riding and that MIDNIGHT RUNNER had come back in the final 50 metres, but GALLANT BOY had been forced out and had covered more ground.
Ms Wynne said MIDNIGHT RUNNER had shifted out in the straight under pressure. There was no contact with GALLANT BOY. She believed that that horse had every chance to get past but had not. She believed she was headed with 50 metres to go and MIDNIGHT RUNNER had gone to the line “strongly and hard” and had beaten GALLANT BOY as a consequence. When questioned, she said the horses might have brushed slightly near the post.
Mr Phillips said MIDNIGHT RUNNER had come back. Mr Beeharry had never stopped riding GALLANT BOY. MIDNIGHT RUNNER had finished the race the better of the two horses and had fought back to be a head in front of GALLANT BOY on the line.
Mr Davidson, Stipendiary Steward, summed up. He said there had been movement from MIDNIGHT RUNNER which had shifted 4 to 5 horse widths. GALLANT BOY had been dictated outwards as a consequence. The margin was a head, and the issue was whether GALLANT BOY would have won had this not occurred. There may have been a slight bump at the 70 metres. Mr Beeharry had never stopped riding at any point.
Reasons for Decision:
It is clear from the videos that MIDNIGHT RUNNER has shifted out 4 to 5 horse widths in the run up the straight and GALLANT BOY has been dictated wider on the track as a consequence. There may have been brief contact with GALLANT BOY at about the 70 metres, a light brushing, but the horse never became unbalanced as a consequence. Significantly, Mr Beeharry has been able to keep riding GALLANT BOY out to the line. GALLANT BOY briefly got in front of MIDNIGHT RUNNER, but MIDNIGHT RUNNER fought back, and that horse went to the line better than GALLANT BOY.
The margin is a head. The Committee is not satisfied that the interference (the dictating of the running line of GALLANT BOY) was severe enough to warrant a change of placings.
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: d32bf74866217ff6ba426e963e65e0bb
informantnumber: A11756
horsename: MIDNIGHT RUNNER
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: 22/12/2020
hearing_title: Tapanui RC 20 December 2020 - R 7 (instigating a protest) - Chair, Prof G Hall
charge:
facts:
Following the running of Race 7, Mr Davidson, Stipendiary Steward, lodged a protest under r 642(1) against the 1st horse, MIDNIGHT RUNNER, alleging interference by that horse to the 2nd horse, GALLANT BOY, over the concluding stages.
The official placings were:
1st-4 MIDNIGHT RUNNER
2ND -1 GALLANT BOY
3RD-9 RIVERFALLS
4TH -5 SHAARA
5TH -3 FLYING SARDINE
The official margin between 1st and 2nd was a head (0.2L).
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”.
(2) For the purposes of Rules 637 and 642:
(a) “placed horse” shall be a horse placed by the Judge in accordance with Rule 641(3); and
(b) “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:
Miss Haley pointed out the relevant runners on the video replays and demonstrated that MIDNIGHT RUNNER shifted out some 4 to 5 horse widths in the straight.
Mr Davidson stated that Ms Wynne had attempted to straighten her horse, and, like Miss Haley, he thought Mr Beeharry was taken out some 4 to 5 horse widths. He said there was initially no contact, but GALLANT BOY was dictated out. He believed GALLANT BOY may have got ahead of MIDNIGHT RUNNER at about the 70 metres, but MIDNIGHT RUNNER had fought back to finish ahead of GALLANT BOY. If there was contact, it was very late and inside the final 50 to 70 metres.
Mr Beeharry said MIDNIGHT RUNNER shifting out had cost him the race. He would have won if MIDNIGHT RUNNER had gone straight. He said Ms Wynne was pushing his horse wider and he was hampered by this.
Mr Anderton said MIDNIGHT RUNNER had dictated GALLANT BOY’s line. He had been shifted from 2 off the fence to quite wide in the straight. He said that this had not helped GALLANT BOY. He acknowledged that Mr Beeharry had never had to stop riding and that MIDNIGHT RUNNER had come back in the final 50 metres, but GALLANT BOY had been forced out and had covered more ground.
Ms Wynne said MIDNIGHT RUNNER had shifted out in the straight under pressure. There was no contact with GALLANT BOY. She believed that that horse had every chance to get past but had not. She believed she was headed with 50 metres to go and MIDNIGHT RUNNER had gone to the line “strongly and hard” and had beaten GALLANT BOY as a consequence. When questioned, she said the horses might have brushed slightly near the post.
Mr Phillips said MIDNIGHT RUNNER had come back. Mr Beeharry had never stopped riding GALLANT BOY. MIDNIGHT RUNNER had finished the race the better of the two horses and had fought back to be a head in front of GALLANT BOY on the line.
Mr Davidson, Stipendiary Steward, summed up. He said there had been movement from MIDNIGHT RUNNER which had shifted 4 to 5 horse widths. GALLANT BOY had been dictated outwards as a consequence. The margin was a head, and the issue was whether GALLANT BOY would have won had this not occurred. There may have been a slight bump at the 70 metres. Mr Beeharry had never stopped riding at any point.
reasonsfordecision:
It is clear from the videos that MIDNIGHT RUNNER has shifted out 4 to 5 horse widths in the run up the straight and GALLANT BOY has been dictated wider on the track as a consequence. There may have been brief contact with GALLANT BOY at about the 70 metres, a light brushing, but the horse never became unbalanced as a consequence. Significantly, Mr Beeharry has been able to keep riding GALLANT BOY out to the line. GALLANT BOY briefly got in front of MIDNIGHT RUNNER, but MIDNIGHT RUNNER fought back, and that horse went to the line better than GALLANT BOY.
The margin is a head. The Committee is not satisfied that the interference (the dictating of the running line of GALLANT BOY) was severe enough to warrant a change of placings.
Decision:
The Committee has to be of the opinion that GALLANT BOY would have finished ahead of MIDNIGHT RUNNER had the interference not occurred. It is not. The protest is dismissed. The placings are as called by the Judge.
Stakes and dividends are to be paid accordingly.
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Protest
Rules: 642(1)
Informant: Mr M Davidson - Stipendiary Steward
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent: Miss R Haley - Stipendiary Steward, Mr S Anderton - Co-trainer of GALLANT BOY, Mr R Beeharry - Rider of GALLANT BOY, Ms S Wynne - Rider of MIDNIGHT RUNNER
Respondent: Mr J Phillips - Licensed Trainer
StipendSteward:
raceid: 9806cf13782374761c32bf669c41c37b
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: R 7
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: 08ef420cfde8ac9f869954bd038c619f
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 20/12/2020
meet_title: Tapanui RC - 20 December 2020
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: tapanui-rc
meet_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
meet_chair: GHall
meet_pm1: none
meet_pm2: none
name: Tapanui RC