Canterbury JC – 15 November 2008 – Race 5
ID: JCA22079
Code:
Thoroughbred
Hearing Type (Code):
thoroughbred-racing
Meet Title:
Canterbury JC - 15 November 2008
Race Date:
2008/11/15
Race Number:
Race 5
Decision:
As a result of an incident in Race 5 at the Canterbury Jockey Club’s meeting on Saturday 15th November 2008 near the 200 metre mark, Mr D Bradley, Licensed Jockey, the rider of “Mary Ellen” placed 6th, brought a protest pursuant to Rule 876(1) alleging that “Turf Fire” placed 5th caused interference to “Mary Ellen”.
As a result of an incident in Race 5 at the Canterbury Jockey Club’s meeting on Saturday 15th November 2008 near the 200 metre mark, Mr D Bradley, Licensed Jockey, the rider of “Mary Ellen” placed 6th, brought a protest pursuant to Rule 876(1) alleging that “Turf Fire” placed 5th caused interference to “Mary Ellen”.
----
Mr Bradley alleged that had it not been for the interference, that “Mary Ellen” would have finished ahead of “Turf Fire”.
----
Mr Bradley, with the assistance of the head on and side on camera views described to the hearing how a gap appeared in front of him between “Turf Fire” ridden by Ms K Williams and “Halobelle”, and that he then attempted to move into the gap. He said he was three quarters of a length into the gap. He said that Ms Williams’ mount then crowded him, and in the process his horse threw a shoe and he then had to go around behind “Turf Fire” to secure a clear run to the line.
----
In response Ms Williams said that she did not believe the gap was big enough for Bradley’s mount to come between herself and “Halobelle”, and that her horse’s hindquarters had shifted out and that it retaliated to the pressure caused by Mr Bradley’s mount as he was attempting to come in between them.
----
Mr George, in response to a question from the Chair said that, in his opinion, there was a gap for Mr Bradley to take and that Mr Bradley had taken ownership of the running line presented to him but he did not believe that “Halobelle” contributed to the incident.
----
Mr M Daly, the trainer of “Turf Fire” submitted that “Halobelle” did move outwards, and pointed out the movement by reference to the mowing strips on the track.
----
We have considered all of the submissions and the evidence put before us. In terms of Rule 876(1) we must be firstly satisfied that there was interference by “Turf Fire” to “Mary Ellen”, and we must then be satisfied that had it not been for that interference that “Mary Ellen” would have finished ahead of “Turf Fire”. There was some interference caused by “Turf Fire”, but we also believe that the incident was contributed to by “Halobelle”. Our interpretation of the video evidence is that there was some outward movement by “Halobelle”.
----
We have also considered the impact of the interference. The fact is that Mr Bradley was inconvenienced to a degree, but from the point of the inconvenience “Mary Ellen” did not make a significant gain on “Turf Fire” to suggest to us that had it not been for the interference, “Mary Ellen” would have finished ahead of “Turf Fire”.
----
Accordingly, the protest is dismissed and I reserve the right to edit this decision, which will be published on the Judicial Control Authority’s website.
----
--
--
………………………………
--KG Hales
ChairmanJCA 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: bf1f80c35cbca0f4d11d0daef5bcdf08
informantnumber:
horsename:
hearing_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
startdate: 15/11/2008
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: no date provided
hearing_title: Canterbury JC - 15 November 2008 - Race 5
charge:
facts:
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
reasonsfordecision:
Decision:
As a result of an incident in Race 5 at the Canterbury Jockey Club’s meeting on Saturday 15th November 2008 near the 200 metre mark, Mr D Bradley, Licensed Jockey, the rider of “Mary Ellen” placed 6th, brought a protest pursuant to Rule 876(1) alleging that “Turf Fire” placed 5th caused interference to “Mary Ellen”.
As a result of an incident in Race 5 at the Canterbury Jockey Club’s meeting on Saturday 15th November 2008 near the 200 metre mark, Mr D Bradley, Licensed Jockey, the rider of “Mary Ellen” placed 6th, brought a protest pursuant to Rule 876(1) alleging that “Turf Fire” placed 5th caused interference to “Mary Ellen”.
----
Mr Bradley alleged that had it not been for the interference, that “Mary Ellen” would have finished ahead of “Turf Fire”.
----
Mr Bradley, with the assistance of the head on and side on camera views described to the hearing how a gap appeared in front of him between “Turf Fire” ridden by Ms K Williams and “Halobelle”, and that he then attempted to move into the gap. He said he was three quarters of a length into the gap. He said that Ms Williams’ mount then crowded him, and in the process his horse threw a shoe and he then had to go around behind “Turf Fire” to secure a clear run to the line.
----
In response Ms Williams said that she did not believe the gap was big enough for Bradley’s mount to come between herself and “Halobelle”, and that her horse’s hindquarters had shifted out and that it retaliated to the pressure caused by Mr Bradley’s mount as he was attempting to come in between them.
----
Mr George, in response to a question from the Chair said that, in his opinion, there was a gap for Mr Bradley to take and that Mr Bradley had taken ownership of the running line presented to him but he did not believe that “Halobelle” contributed to the incident.
----
Mr M Daly, the trainer of “Turf Fire” submitted that “Halobelle” did move outwards, and pointed out the movement by reference to the mowing strips on the track.
----
We have considered all of the submissions and the evidence put before us. In terms of Rule 876(1) we must be firstly satisfied that there was interference by “Turf Fire” to “Mary Ellen”, and we must then be satisfied that had it not been for that interference that “Mary Ellen” would have finished ahead of “Turf Fire”. There was some interference caused by “Turf Fire”, but we also believe that the incident was contributed to by “Halobelle”. Our interpretation of the video evidence is that there was some outward movement by “Halobelle”.
----
We have also considered the impact of the interference. The fact is that Mr Bradley was inconvenienced to a degree, but from the point of the inconvenience “Mary Ellen” did not make a significant gain on “Turf Fire” to suggest to us that had it not been for the interference, “Mary Ellen” would have finished ahead of “Turf Fire”.
----
Accordingly, the protest is dismissed and I reserve the right to edit this decision, which will be published on the Judicial Control Authority’s website.
----
--
--
………………………………
--KG Hales
Chairmansumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Old Hearing
Rules: 876.1
Informant:
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: d04918432e34e6276d9be3ca1d1db1de
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: Race 5
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: 851181de7853a9cd91abf34e1863e441
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 15/11/2008
meet_title: Canterbury JC - 15 November 2008
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: canterbury-jc
meet_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
meet_chair:
meet_pm1:
meet_pm2:
name: Canterbury JC