Otago RC – 21 May 2006 – Race 11
ID: JCA22097
Code:
Thoroughbred
Hearing Type (Code):
thoroughbred-racing
Meet Title:
Otago RC - 21 May 2006
Race Date:
2006/05/21
Race Number:
Race 11
Decision:
After the running of race 11 Mr Ching, stipendiary steward, laid an information instigating a protest under rule 876(1) against the first placing of MALA STRANA on the grounds of interference
After the running of race 11 Mr Ching, stipendiary steward, laid an information instigating a protest under rule 876(1) against the first placing of MALA STRANA on the grounds of interference to the second placed horse LUCKY LAD over the concluding stages. The official margin between 1st and 2nd was a neck.
----Mr Ching first asked the rider of LUCKY LAD to tell the committee what had happened in the run home. Mr Moseley stated that there had been contact on 2 occasions between his horse and MALA STRANA. He said there had first been a brushing and then a bumping. He said he had been forced to stop riding on the 2nd occasion. He questioned whether the margin was indeed a neck and said he thought it was closer. Mr Ching confirmed it was a neck and the committee viewed a printout of the result that verified this.
----Mr Davidson, assistant stipendiary steward, then demonstrated the incident on both the side on and head on videos. He pointed out the 2 points of contact and that Mr Moseley was not able to use his whip on the 2nd occasion because of the contact. Mr Ching confirmed this and emphasised the margin at the finish was a neck.
----Mr Anderton, trainer of MALA STRANA, stated that LUCKY LAD had run out and that Mr Moseley had never had to stop riding his horse. He also emphasised that LUCKY LAD had nearly a head on his horse before the line and that MALA STRANA had fought back, going to the line strongly. He added he believed LUCKY LAD had had every opportunity to win the race but was not good enough on the day. Ms Williams, rider of MALA STRANA, said she also had to straighten her horse, stating that LUCKY LAD had come out and this had contributed to the brushing. Mr Matheson represented the owners of MALA STRANA and he emphasised that MALA STRANA had fought back when headed and had won.
----Mr Moseley in reply said that any movement from LUCKY LAD was in retaliation to movement from MALA STRANA and that it was after the 1st point of contact. In response to questioning by the Chairman, Mr Moseley said he did not believe his horse had ever put its head in front of MALA STRANA in the run to the line, although he accepted he had drawn up alongside her. He emphasised his horse was carrying more weight than MALA STRANA and that it had done well considering the 2 incidents. Mr Ching confirmed there were 2 points of contact, but that the 2nd was the more significant. He agreed the movement from LUCKY LAD was retaliation.
----While the horses did brush together briefly some 250 metres from the winning post, Mr Moseley never stopped riding at this stage and LUCKY LAD did not become unbalanced. We agree that the 2nd incident is the more significant. This was some 50 metres later. While there was outwards movement from LUCKY LAD, we accept that this was primarily in retaliation to the earlier brushing. LUCKY LAD did not have his momentum checked, but Mr Moseley was prevented from using the stick at a time when he was clearly about to use it on LUCKY LAD. He had to put his stick away briefly and consequently had to adjust his hands on the reins. Nonetheless, he continued to urge his horse and he almost immediately again had the necessary room to use his whip action. This he did to advantage in that LUCKY LAD drew a head in advance of MALA STRANA some 70 to 80 metres from the winning post. When MALA STRANA saw LUCKY LAD she rallied again and went to the line strongly with the official margin being a neck.
----We thus find that there was interference to the chances of LUCKY LAD and that the source of this interference was MALA STRANA. However, we have a discretion to exercise. The interference, as we have indicated, was at the lower end, and in the uninterrupted final run home over the last 150 metres LUCKY LAD, after making ground on MALA STRANA and briefly heading that horse, was passed by MALA STRANA which fought back strongly when aware of the presence of LUCKY LAD and had that horse covered at the line. In these circumstances we dismiss the protest and the placings are as called by the Judge.
------
G Hall Chairman
--G Acklin Member
--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: c2f8dde457ddbfd81b75dbe7384a2f6d
informantnumber:
horsename:
hearing_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
startdate: 21/05/2006
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: no date provided
hearing_title: Otago RC - 21 May 2006 - Race 11
charge:
facts:
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
reasonsfordecision:
Decision:
After the running of race 11 Mr Ching, stipendiary steward, laid an information instigating a protest under rule 876(1) against the first placing of MALA STRANA on the grounds of interference
After the running of race 11 Mr Ching, stipendiary steward, laid an information instigating a protest under rule 876(1) against the first placing of MALA STRANA on the grounds of interference to the second placed horse LUCKY LAD over the concluding stages. The official margin between 1st and 2nd was a neck.
----Mr Ching first asked the rider of LUCKY LAD to tell the committee what had happened in the run home. Mr Moseley stated that there had been contact on 2 occasions between his horse and MALA STRANA. He said there had first been a brushing and then a bumping. He said he had been forced to stop riding on the 2nd occasion. He questioned whether the margin was indeed a neck and said he thought it was closer. Mr Ching confirmed it was a neck and the committee viewed a printout of the result that verified this.
----Mr Davidson, assistant stipendiary steward, then demonstrated the incident on both the side on and head on videos. He pointed out the 2 points of contact and that Mr Moseley was not able to use his whip on the 2nd occasion because of the contact. Mr Ching confirmed this and emphasised the margin at the finish was a neck.
----Mr Anderton, trainer of MALA STRANA, stated that LUCKY LAD had run out and that Mr Moseley had never had to stop riding his horse. He also emphasised that LUCKY LAD had nearly a head on his horse before the line and that MALA STRANA had fought back, going to the line strongly. He added he believed LUCKY LAD had had every opportunity to win the race but was not good enough on the day. Ms Williams, rider of MALA STRANA, said she also had to straighten her horse, stating that LUCKY LAD had come out and this had contributed to the brushing. Mr Matheson represented the owners of MALA STRANA and he emphasised that MALA STRANA had fought back when headed and had won.
----Mr Moseley in reply said that any movement from LUCKY LAD was in retaliation to movement from MALA STRANA and that it was after the 1st point of contact. In response to questioning by the Chairman, Mr Moseley said he did not believe his horse had ever put its head in front of MALA STRANA in the run to the line, although he accepted he had drawn up alongside her. He emphasised his horse was carrying more weight than MALA STRANA and that it had done well considering the 2 incidents. Mr Ching confirmed there were 2 points of contact, but that the 2nd was the more significant. He agreed the movement from LUCKY LAD was retaliation.
----While the horses did brush together briefly some 250 metres from the winning post, Mr Moseley never stopped riding at this stage and LUCKY LAD did not become unbalanced. We agree that the 2nd incident is the more significant. This was some 50 metres later. While there was outwards movement from LUCKY LAD, we accept that this was primarily in retaliation to the earlier brushing. LUCKY LAD did not have his momentum checked, but Mr Moseley was prevented from using the stick at a time when he was clearly about to use it on LUCKY LAD. He had to put his stick away briefly and consequently had to adjust his hands on the reins. Nonetheless, he continued to urge his horse and he almost immediately again had the necessary room to use his whip action. This he did to advantage in that LUCKY LAD drew a head in advance of MALA STRANA some 70 to 80 metres from the winning post. When MALA STRANA saw LUCKY LAD she rallied again and went to the line strongly with the official margin being a neck.
----We thus find that there was interference to the chances of LUCKY LAD and that the source of this interference was MALA STRANA. However, we have a discretion to exercise. The interference, as we have indicated, was at the lower end, and in the uninterrupted final run home over the last 150 metres LUCKY LAD, after making ground on MALA STRANA and briefly heading that horse, was passed by MALA STRANA which fought back strongly when aware of the presence of LUCKY LAD and had that horse covered at the line. In these circumstances we dismiss the protest and the placings are as called by the Judge.
------
G Hall Chairman
--G Acklin Member
--sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Old Hearing
Rules: 876.1
Informant:
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: 6d50f7f2651912d4c3a5e72c59ad9725
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: Race 11
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: 53faa974d2c59e4064a06fbc2c6419a0
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 21/05/2006
meet_title: Otago RC - 21 May 2006
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: otago-rc
meet_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
meet_chair:
meet_pm1:
meet_pm2:
name: Otago RC