Canterbury JC – 24 January 2009 – Race 9

hearingid: 90f7e243d6c2c9452d277facfe35b570

informantnumber:

horsename:

hearing_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing

startdate: 24/01/2009

newcharge:

plea:

penaltyrequired:

decisiondate: no date provided

hearing_title: Canterbury JC - 24 January 2009 - Race 9

charge:

facts:

appealdecision:

isappeal:

submissionsfordecision:

reasonsfordecision:

Decision:

At the conclusion of Race 9 at the Canterbury Jockey Club’s meeting on Saturday 24 January 2009, the siren was sounded.  Mr Ching, Stipendiary Steward, requested a ruling pursuant to Rule 865A of the Rules of Racing as to “whether “Eel Win” was denied a fair start, due to the starting gate not opening with the others.”

At the conclusion of Race 9 at the Canterbury Jockey Club’s meeting on Saturday 24 January 2009, the siren was sounded.  Mr Ching, Stipendiary Steward, requested a ruling pursuant to Rule 865A of the Rules of Racing as to “whether “Eel Win” was denied a fair start, due to the starting gate not opening with the others.”

Rule 865A of the Rules of Racing, reads as follows:

“If, in the opinion of the Judicial Committee, a horse which does not finish in a dividend bearing position was prevented from taking an effective part in a race, owing to the mechanical failure of the starting stalls, or is denied a fair start and such occurrence materially prejudiced the chances of that horse (but not where the horse is slow away by its own accord), the Judicial Committee may declare such horse to be a non-starter, and may make such order regarding betting as provided for in the NZRB Betting Rules.”

At the start of the race, it was clear that there was a mechanical failure in that the gate for “Eel Win” did not open in conjunction with the remainder of the field.  “Eel Win” crashed its way out of the starting stalls.

“Eel Win’s” rider, Ms Kylie Williams, Licensed Jockey, said that in her opinion, this action on the part of the horse meant that she lost approximately half a length.  It was mid-field as the race commenced.

Ms Williams said that she called out for a false start (which obviously was not heard by the starter), and also observed that her horse did come out awkwardly off the gate. 

She ran on to finish in fourth position with the margins being half a head between first and second, a nose between second and third, a nose between third and fourth and half a neck between fourth and fifth. 

Mrs Pitman, as agent for the trainer, maintained that in the opinion of the owner of the horse, that this had “cost the horse the race”.

Thus it was suggested to us that the horse had been prevented from taking an effective part in the race or, in terms of the Rules, had its chances materially prejudiced.

We considered all of the evidence carefully.  We have taken careful note of the wording in Rule 865A.  We therefore asked a number of questions:

·         Was “Eel Win” denied from taking an effective part in the race owing to the mechanical failure of the starting stalls'  Having regard to the horse’s actions, and the fact that it did seem to start on terms with the remainder of the field, we did not consider that it was prevented from taking an effective part in the race. 

·         The next question that we considered was whether or not “Eel Win” was denied a fair start.  Having looked at all the video coverage, and having heard the oral evidence, it is possible that it may have been denied a fair start.

·         There is, however, a “second leg” to this part of the Rule, in that we need to consider whether or not “Eel Win’s” chances were materially prejudiced.

Having regard to the fact that the horse did start in a mid field position, and that it did finish in a stakes bearing position, then we cannot say for certain whether or not its chances were materially prejudiced.  Having regard to all of the evidence, we do not believe that we can say, in all of the circumstances, that we are satisfied that the horse should be declared a non-runner. 

Therefore, our ruling was that “Eel Win” was declared to be a runner, and accordingly, we confirmed all placings.

KG Hales

sumissionsforpenalty:

reasonsforpenalty:

penalty:

hearing_type: Old Hearing

Rules:

Informant:

JockeysandTrainer:

Otherperson:

PersonPresent:

Respondent:

StipendSteward:

raceid: 5405735b7f3a17401b838df52f7c61dd

race_expapproval:

racecancelled: 0

race_noreport: 0

race_emailed1: 0

race_emailed2: 0

race_title: Race 9

submittochair:

race_expappcomment:

race_km:

race_otherexp:

race_chair:

race_pm1:

race_pm2:

meetid: 29dcca2effb2fb4a7dd1693dc418cdea

meet_expapproval:

meet_noreport: 0

waitingforpublication: 0

meet_emailed1: 0

meet_emailed2: 0

meetdate: 24/01/2009

meet_title: Canterbury JC - 24 January 2009

meet_expappcomment:

meet_km:

meet_otherexp:

tracklocation: canterbury-jc

meet_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing

meet_chair:

meet_pm1:

meet_pm2:

name: Canterbury JC