Otago RC – 7 November 2006 – Race 2
ID: JCA22931
Code:
Thoroughbred
Hearing Type (Code):
thoroughbred-racing
Meet Title:
Otago RC - 7 November 2006
Race Date:
2006/11/07
Race Number:
Race 2
Decision:
After the running of race 2 Mr Daly laid an information instigating a protest under rule 876(1) against the first placing of APOLOGIA on the grounds of interference to the 3rd placed horse HONOUR PROMISE with approximately 450 metres to race.
After the running of race 2 Mr Daly laid an information instigating a protest under rule 876(1) against the first placing of APOLOGIA on the grounds of interference to the 3rd placed horse HONOUR PROMISE with approximately 450 metres to race. The official margin between 1st and 2nd was a 1/2 length with a similar margin between 2nd and 3rd.
----Mr Daly, trainer of HONOUR PROMISE, demonstrated the incident on the back straight video and said that in his view with some 450 metres to run APOLOGIA, which was racing on the fence, came out a horse width and made contact with and took the line of HONOUR PROMISE. He stated Kylie Williams, the rider of HONOUR PROMISE, stood up for 3 strides and that the gap that had presented itself for HONOUR PROMISE, was taken by APOLOGIA. He said that the interference cost HONOUR PROMISE some 2 lengths. He demonstrated that HONOUR PROMISE had finished on strongly and said in his opinion HONOUR PROMISE would have finished 2nd, if not 1st, had interference not occurred. Ms Williams stated she was riding 1 off the fence when APOLOGIA pushed out and she was forced from 2 to 3 wide. She said she lost momentum as a consequence of being pushed and that APOLOGIA had got the gap she was going to take. She said it cost her 2 lengths and that HONOUR PROMISE had finished off the race in good fashion.
----Mr Anderton, represented Mr M Walker, trainer of APOLOGIA, who was not at the course. He stated that APOLOGIA had the acceleration to take the gap that presented itself and that HONOUR PROMISE was left flat-footed. He said any contact was minimal. HONOUR PROMISE had not lost 2 lengths and while that horse worked to the line okay, it had not been able to sprint when the others did. Mr B Hibberd, rider of APOLOGIA, stated Ms Williams had lost her whip some 5 to 6 strides short of the post and this may have cost her a better placing. Ms Williams replied she had continued to ride hands and heels and that this had had no affect on the result. Mr Daly confirmed this. Mr Hibberd also said any contact was after he had moved out and was contributed to by pressure from other horses. He said APOLOGIA had won easily, easing down at the line.
----Mr Ching, stipendiary steward, commented that Mr Hibberd had moved out and that contact had been made with the consequence HONOUR PROMISE became unbalanced and had been pushed off its true line of running. As to whether the interference warranted a change of placings, that was for the Committee to decide.
----We are satisfied that at about 450 metres from the finish Mr Hibberd was racing on the rail and pushed out as the horse in front of him was coming to the end of its run. In so doing Mr Hibberd moved into the line of HONOUR PROMISE with that horse being unbalanced for a stride or 2. There was also contact by way of brushing shortly thereafter.
----We satisfied interference was caused to HONOUR PROMISE and that APOLOGIA was responsible for this. In exercising our discretion and dismissing the protest we take account of the fact that the incident occurred shortly before the horses straightened for the run home, that the interference was of a minor nature, with HONOUR PROMISE becoming unbalanced for a stride or 2. While APOLOGIA obtained a run that might not have otherwise presented itself, Mr Anderton is also correct when he says that prior to the bump HONOUR PROMISE did not appear to be able to accelerate immediately and take the gap. We also agree there was general tightening at the time due in the main to CLAIR ROUGE having to ease at this point in the race. We are also satisfied each horse had every chance over the last 400 metres and that while HONOUR PROMISE ran on strongly, the interference did not cost the horse 2nd placing, with the margin between 2nd and 3rd being 1/2 a length. We do not believe Ms Williams' dropping of her whip near the winning post affected the result in this particular instance. In these circumstances, we dismiss the protest and the placings are as called by the Judge.
----
GG Hall G Acklin
--Chairman
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: f7d076a5ce5e1e863ef5735b72b15ea8
informantnumber:
horsename:
hearing_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
startdate: 07/11/2006
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: no date provided
hearing_title: Otago RC - 7 November 2006 - Race 2
charge:
facts:
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
reasonsfordecision:
Decision:
After the running of race 2 Mr Daly laid an information instigating a protest under rule 876(1) against the first placing of APOLOGIA on the grounds of interference to the 3rd placed horse HONOUR PROMISE with approximately 450 metres to race.
After the running of race 2 Mr Daly laid an information instigating a protest under rule 876(1) against the first placing of APOLOGIA on the grounds of interference to the 3rd placed horse HONOUR PROMISE with approximately 450 metres to race. The official margin between 1st and 2nd was a 1/2 length with a similar margin between 2nd and 3rd.
----Mr Daly, trainer of HONOUR PROMISE, demonstrated the incident on the back straight video and said that in his view with some 450 metres to run APOLOGIA, which was racing on the fence, came out a horse width and made contact with and took the line of HONOUR PROMISE. He stated Kylie Williams, the rider of HONOUR PROMISE, stood up for 3 strides and that the gap that had presented itself for HONOUR PROMISE, was taken by APOLOGIA. He said that the interference cost HONOUR PROMISE some 2 lengths. He demonstrated that HONOUR PROMISE had finished on strongly and said in his opinion HONOUR PROMISE would have finished 2nd, if not 1st, had interference not occurred. Ms Williams stated she was riding 1 off the fence when APOLOGIA pushed out and she was forced from 2 to 3 wide. She said she lost momentum as a consequence of being pushed and that APOLOGIA had got the gap she was going to take. She said it cost her 2 lengths and that HONOUR PROMISE had finished off the race in good fashion.
----Mr Anderton, represented Mr M Walker, trainer of APOLOGIA, who was not at the course. He stated that APOLOGIA had the acceleration to take the gap that presented itself and that HONOUR PROMISE was left flat-footed. He said any contact was minimal. HONOUR PROMISE had not lost 2 lengths and while that horse worked to the line okay, it had not been able to sprint when the others did. Mr B Hibberd, rider of APOLOGIA, stated Ms Williams had lost her whip some 5 to 6 strides short of the post and this may have cost her a better placing. Ms Williams replied she had continued to ride hands and heels and that this had had no affect on the result. Mr Daly confirmed this. Mr Hibberd also said any contact was after he had moved out and was contributed to by pressure from other horses. He said APOLOGIA had won easily, easing down at the line.
----Mr Ching, stipendiary steward, commented that Mr Hibberd had moved out and that contact had been made with the consequence HONOUR PROMISE became unbalanced and had been pushed off its true line of running. As to whether the interference warranted a change of placings, that was for the Committee to decide.
----We are satisfied that at about 450 metres from the finish Mr Hibberd was racing on the rail and pushed out as the horse in front of him was coming to the end of its run. In so doing Mr Hibberd moved into the line of HONOUR PROMISE with that horse being unbalanced for a stride or 2. There was also contact by way of brushing shortly thereafter.
----We satisfied interference was caused to HONOUR PROMISE and that APOLOGIA was responsible for this. In exercising our discretion and dismissing the protest we take account of the fact that the incident occurred shortly before the horses straightened for the run home, that the interference was of a minor nature, with HONOUR PROMISE becoming unbalanced for a stride or 2. While APOLOGIA obtained a run that might not have otherwise presented itself, Mr Anderton is also correct when he says that prior to the bump HONOUR PROMISE did not appear to be able to accelerate immediately and take the gap. We also agree there was general tightening at the time due in the main to CLAIR ROUGE having to ease at this point in the race. We are also satisfied each horse had every chance over the last 400 metres and that while HONOUR PROMISE ran on strongly, the interference did not cost the horse 2nd placing, with the margin between 2nd and 3rd being 1/2 a length. We do not believe Ms Williams' dropping of her whip near the winning post affected the result in this particular instance. In these circumstances, we dismiss the protest and the placings are as called by the Judge.
----
GG Hall G Acklin
--Chairman
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Old Hearing
Rules: 876.1
Informant:
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: 3a9a3aa5d4105c971e4ccfe053001481
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: Race 2
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: e5154ffd273531bdca606ffe8c68f836
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 07/11/2006
meet_title: Otago RC - 7 November 2006
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: otago-rc
meet_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
meet_chair:
meet_pm1:
meet_pm2:
name: Otago RC