South Canterbury RC 24 November 2011 – R 2 (instigating a protest)
ID: JCA17404
Code:
Thoroughbred
Meet Title:
South Canterbury RC - 24 November 2011
Meet Chair:
JPhelan
Meet Committee Member 1:
JMillar
Race Date:
2011/11/24
Race Number:
R 2
Decision:
On resuming the hearing, we advised the parties of our reasons, as set out above, and that “POSH BEC” was relegated from 3rd to 4th place.
The amended places are as follows:
1st – SEMPER PLUS (8)
2nd – THE DEBT COLLECTOR (2)
3rd – KIMBERLEY COURTNEY (9)
4th – POSH BEC (7)
5th – SIR LUIS (6)
6th – SHOTOUTOFAGUN (1)
Payment of dividends was authorised accordingly.
Facts:
Following the running of Race 2, the D’Cash Rating 65 Dash, an Information Instigating a Protest was filed by Mr B D Court, the Trainer of “KIMBERLEY COURTNEY” (9) which finished 4th in the race, alleging interference by “POSH BEC” (7) which
finished 3rd in the race.
The Judges' official placings were as follows:
1st – SEMPER PLUS (8)
2nd – THE DEBT COLLECTOR (2)
3rd – POSH BEC (7)
4th – KIMBERLEY COURTNEY (9)
5th – SIR LUIS (6)
6th – SHOTOUTOFAGUN (1)
The information reads as follows:
“I, the abovenamed informant, allege that horse number (7) or its rider, placed 3rd by the judge, interfered with the chances of horse number (9), placed 4th by the judge – interference from the 250m to the 200m”.
Rule 642(1) reads as follows:
“(1) 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.”
Mr Court advised that he would represent the interests of “KIMBERLEY COURT”, and Mr Didham advised that he would represent the interests of “POSH BEC”.
Submissions for Decision:
Mr Court gave evidence that with about 250 metres to run, “KIMBERLEY COURTNEY” made a run between “POSH BEC” and “SIR LUIS”, which was on the running rail. There was ample room for this run, but after taking this gap, “POSH BEC” moved inwards, and “KIMBERLEY COURTNEY” was checked, had to be restrained, and lost its momentum. It was also Mr Court’s evidence, that after this check “KIMBERLEY COURTNEY” ran on strongly and finished a head behind the 3rd placed “POSH BEC”, and that, but for this interference, “KIMBERLEY COURT” would have finished ahead of “POSH BEC”.
It was established during the hearing, that Miss K Williams, the rider of “KIMBERLEY COURTNEY”, was injured and unable to attend the hearing.
Mr Didham gave evidence, and he did not dispute that there had been some interference to “KIMBERLEY COURTNEY” by “POSH BEC”. Mr Didham said that there was some slight movement by the inside horse (“SIR LUIS”), which could have contributed to the incident. It was Mr Didham’s belief, that after this incident, “KIMBERLEY COURTNEY” had plenty of time to “pick up” his horse and could not do so, and that it could not be shown that “KIMBERLEY COURTNEY would have beaten “POSH BEC”, but for the interference.
This was a protest by the connections of “KIMBERLEY COURTNEY” and the Stipendiary Stewards had been present during the hearing. Stipendiary Steward, Mr A Ray, was asked if he wanted to make submissions about the protest. Mr Ray said that there was interference and that it was significant that the margin between 3rd and 4th was a head.
We adjourned to consider our decision.
Reasons for Decision:
We carefully considered the evidence and the video coverage of this incident. We found that inside the final 250 metres of this race, a run became available for “KIMBERLEY COURTNEY”, between “SIR LUIS” (on the fence) and “POSH BEC”, which was racing on that horse’s outside. There was adequate room for this run, but on making it, “POSH BEC” moved inwards and “KIMBERLEY COURTNEY” had to be checked. We found that this check caused “KIMBERLEY COURTNEY” to lose its momentum, and after recovering, it was running on strongly at the finish, being beaten by a head. We reject Mr Didham’s evidence that there was movement outwards by “SIR LUIS”, which contributed to this incident.
We were satisfied that, but for this check, “KIMBERLEY COURTNEY” would have beaten “POSH BEC”. In coming to this decision, we took particular account of the margin of a head between 3rd and 4th. We decided that the protest should be upheld.
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: df9daa98697b3c08f966604a46f00b42
informantnumber: A5208
horsename: POSH BEC
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: 23/11/2011
hearing_title: South Canterbury RC 24 November 2011 - R 2 (instigating a protest)
charge:
facts:
Following the running of Race 2, the D’Cash Rating 65 Dash, an Information Instigating a Protest was filed by Mr B D Court, the Trainer of “KIMBERLEY COURTNEY” (9) which finished 4th in the race, alleging interference by “POSH BEC” (7) which
finished 3rd in the race.
The Judges' official placings were as follows:
1st – SEMPER PLUS (8)
2nd – THE DEBT COLLECTOR (2)
3rd – POSH BEC (7)
4th – KIMBERLEY COURTNEY (9)
5th – SIR LUIS (6)
6th – SHOTOUTOFAGUN (1)
The information reads as follows:
“I, the abovenamed informant, allege that horse number (7) or its rider, placed 3rd by the judge, interfered with the chances of horse number (9), placed 4th by the judge – interference from the 250m to the 200m”.
Rule 642(1) reads as follows:
“(1) 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.”
Mr Court advised that he would represent the interests of “KIMBERLEY COURT”, and Mr Didham advised that he would represent the interests of “POSH BEC”.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
Mr Court gave evidence that with about 250 metres to run, “KIMBERLEY COURTNEY” made a run between “POSH BEC” and “SIR LUIS”, which was on the running rail. There was ample room for this run, but after taking this gap, “POSH BEC” moved inwards, and “KIMBERLEY COURTNEY” was checked, had to be restrained, and lost its momentum. It was also Mr Court’s evidence, that after this check “KIMBERLEY COURTNEY” ran on strongly and finished a head behind the 3rd placed “POSH BEC”, and that, but for this interference, “KIMBERLEY COURT” would have finished ahead of “POSH BEC”.
It was established during the hearing, that Miss K Williams, the rider of “KIMBERLEY COURTNEY”, was injured and unable to attend the hearing.
Mr Didham gave evidence, and he did not dispute that there had been some interference to “KIMBERLEY COURTNEY” by “POSH BEC”. Mr Didham said that there was some slight movement by the inside horse (“SIR LUIS”), which could have contributed to the incident. It was Mr Didham’s belief, that after this incident, “KIMBERLEY COURTNEY” had plenty of time to “pick up” his horse and could not do so, and that it could not be shown that “KIMBERLEY COURTNEY would have beaten “POSH BEC”, but for the interference.
This was a protest by the connections of “KIMBERLEY COURTNEY” and the Stipendiary Stewards had been present during the hearing. Stipendiary Steward, Mr A Ray, was asked if he wanted to make submissions about the protest. Mr Ray said that there was interference and that it was significant that the margin between 3rd and 4th was a head.
We adjourned to consider our decision.
reasonsfordecision:
We carefully considered the evidence and the video coverage of this incident. We found that inside the final 250 metres of this race, a run became available for “KIMBERLEY COURTNEY”, between “SIR LUIS” (on the fence) and “POSH BEC”, which was racing on that horse’s outside. There was adequate room for this run, but on making it, “POSH BEC” moved inwards and “KIMBERLEY COURTNEY” had to be checked. We found that this check caused “KIMBERLEY COURTNEY” to lose its momentum, and after recovering, it was running on strongly at the finish, being beaten by a head. We reject Mr Didham’s evidence that there was movement outwards by “SIR LUIS”, which contributed to this incident.
We were satisfied that, but for this check, “KIMBERLEY COURTNEY” would have beaten “POSH BEC”. In coming to this decision, we took particular account of the margin of a head between 3rd and 4th. We decided that the protest should be upheld.
Decision:
On resuming the hearing, we advised the parties of our reasons, as set out above, and that “POSH BEC” was relegated from 3rd to 4th place.
The amended places are as follows:
1st – SEMPER PLUS (8)
2nd – THE DEBT COLLECTOR (2)
3rd – KIMBERLEY COURTNEY (9)
4th – POSH BEC (7)
5th – SIR LUIS (6)
6th – SHOTOUTOFAGUN (1)
Payment of dividends was authorised accordingly.
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Protest
Rules: 642(1)
Informant: Mr B D Court - Licensed Trainer
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent: Mr L G R Didham - Licensed Trainer of POSH BEC, Mr A Ray - Stipendiary Steward
Respondent: Mr S Muniandy - Apprentice Jockey
StipendSteward:
raceid: d4730e5c8d1a779f30ca00ccfd129c73
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: R 2
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: af9f801c65d5748d0725ad9359685caa
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 24/11/2011
meet_title: South Canterbury RC - 24 November 2011
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: south-canterbury-rc
meet_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
meet_chair: JPhelan
meet_pm1: JMillar
meet_pm2: none
name: South Canterbury RC