Auckland RC – 1 January 2008 – Race 6
ID: JCA19370
Hearing Type (Code):
thoroughbred-racing
Decision: --------
Following the running of Race 6, the New Zealand Bloodstock Royal Stakes, Mr B. R. Jones, the rider of "Keffiya" (11), which finished 3rd in the race, and Mr B. J. McKeagg, the trainer of "Lanbrae" (9), which finished 4th in the race, protested against "Kaatoon" (8), trained by Mr R. A. James, which finished 2nd in the race.
--
DECISION AND REASONS:
----------Following the running of Race 6, the New Zealand Bloodstock Royal Stakes,
--Mr B. R. Jones, the rider of "Keffiya" (11), which finished 3rd in the race, and Mr B. J. McKeagg, the trainer of "Lanbrae" (9), which finished 4th in the race, protested against "Kaatoon" (8), trained by Mr R. A. James, which finished 2nd in the race.
--At the start of this hearing it was established that these protests arose from the same incident, and it was agreed that both protests should be heard together.
--The respective informations read as follows.
------"I allege that Kaatoon or its rider placed 2nd by the judge interfered with the chances of Keffiya placed 3rd by the judge. The interference occurred final 500 metres."
--"I allege that Kaatoon or its rider placed 2nd by the judge interfered with the chances of Lanbrae placed 4th by the judge. The interference occurred in the final straight."
--Rule 876(1) reads as follows.
--"(1) If, in the opinion of the Judicial Committee, a horse placed by the Judge or its rider has interfered with the chances of any other horse or horses placed by the Judge then, subject to sub-rule 2 hereof, the Judicial Committee may place such first-mentioned horse immediately after the horse or horses so interfered with.
--(2) The discretion to relegate any horse or horses under sub-rule 1 hereof shall be exercisable by the Judicial Committee only in the following circumstances, and not otherwise:
--- ------
- When the horse whose chances have been interfered with has been placed by the Judge in a dividend bearing position; or --
- When the relegation will result in the horse or horses whose chances have been interfered with gaining a dividend bearing position…."
- --
The protest came within the limitations provided for by Rule 876(2)(a) and (b).
--Mr B. R. Jones, the rider of "Keffiya", was accompanied by the trainer of the horse Mr L. A. O’Sullivan, and Mr O’Sullivan advised that he would represent the interests of the owners of the horse. Mr B. J. McKeagg, the trainer of "Lanbrae", was accompanied by its rider, Mr M. R. Du Plessis. Mr McKeagg advised that he would represent the interests of the owner of the horse.
--Mr R. A. James, the trainer of "Kaatoon", was accompanied by the rider of the horse, Mr G. A. McKeon. The part owner of "Kaatoon", Mr P. J. Walker, also attended the hearing.
--Mr Jones gave evidence and used video coverage to illustrate that his horse had been interfered with and pushed wide on the track after entering the home straight. Mr Jones pointed out the movement of "Kaatoon" as being the cause of outward movements by other horses which had resulted in the interference to his horse.
--Mr Du Plessis gave evidence along the same lines as Mr Jones. It was also this witness’s evidence that the cause of the interference was an outwards movement by "Kaatoon".
--Mr McKeon gave evidence in relation to "Kaatoon". He said that after entering the straight he had waited for a run, which eventually came. He also said that any movement from his horse was slight, and that he was not responsible for the flow on effects which occurred wider on the track.
--Mr James gave evidence and said that he believed the interference that affected the protesting horses was caused by a chain reaction. Mr James also pointed out the outwards movement of a horse on the inside of "Kaatoon" which he said made it difficult for "Kaatoon" to keep a straight line. It was also Mr James’ belief that the cause of the chain reaction was a very slight movement which had caused an over reaction by the outside horses.
--Chief Stipendiary Steward Mr George had been present throughout the hearing and in accordance with accepted practice he was asked if he wished to give evidence and call witnesses. Mr George said that in his view there were several matters which contributed to the later incidents. Mr George also said that this later interference could not be solely attributed to "Kaatoon".
--In particular Mr George said that he agreed with Mr James’ observations, and that there was a chain reaction commencing from the inside when a horse shifted out a horse and a half, and that "Kaatoon" then ran out and away from Noel Harris’s mount. It was Mr George’s view that both protests should be dismissed.
--We then adjourned to consider our decision. It was our view that the movement by "Kaatoon" was slight and that this movement had been caused by an outwards movement by a horse on its inside. The subsequent movements and interference was, we believed, a flow on effect from this initial slight movement by "Kaatoon". On returning to the Enquiry Room we advised that a full written decision would be given later, and we gave the following oral decision.
--"Having seen the video coverage of the incident, and having heard the evidence we are satisfied that there was a slight movement from "Kaatoon". However the flow on effect was not caused by that horse, and in this respect we agree with what the Stipendiary Stewards have said, and the protest is dismissed."
----
____________
--J. M. Phelan
--Chairman
--Decision Date: 01/01/2008
Publish Date: 01/01/2008
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: 46a084f05fe740653d03997b7acb23d7
informantnumber:
horsename:
hearing_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
startdate: 01/01/2008
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: no date provided
hearing_title: Auckland RC - 1 January 2008 - Race 6
charge:
facts:
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
reasonsfordecision:
Decision:
--------Following the running of Race 6, the New Zealand Bloodstock Royal Stakes, Mr B. R. Jones, the rider of "Keffiya" (11), which finished 3rd in the race, and Mr B. J. McKeagg, the trainer of "Lanbrae" (9), which finished 4th in the race, protested against "Kaatoon" (8), trained by Mr R. A. James, which finished 2nd in the race.
--
DECISION AND REASONS:
----------Following the running of Race 6, the New Zealand Bloodstock Royal Stakes,
--Mr B. R. Jones, the rider of "Keffiya" (11), which finished 3rd in the race, and Mr B. J. McKeagg, the trainer of "Lanbrae" (9), which finished 4th in the race, protested against "Kaatoon" (8), trained by Mr R. A. James, which finished 2nd in the race.
--At the start of this hearing it was established that these protests arose from the same incident, and it was agreed that both protests should be heard together.
--The respective informations read as follows.
------"I allege that Kaatoon or its rider placed 2nd by the judge interfered with the chances of Keffiya placed 3rd by the judge. The interference occurred final 500 metres."
--"I allege that Kaatoon or its rider placed 2nd by the judge interfered with the chances of Lanbrae placed 4th by the judge. The interference occurred in the final straight."
--Rule 876(1) reads as follows.
--"(1) If, in the opinion of the Judicial Committee, a horse placed by the Judge or its rider has interfered with the chances of any other horse or horses placed by the Judge then, subject to sub-rule 2 hereof, the Judicial Committee may place such first-mentioned horse immediately after the horse or horses so interfered with.
--(2) The discretion to relegate any horse or horses under sub-rule 1 hereof shall be exercisable by the Judicial Committee only in the following circumstances, and not otherwise:
--- ------
- --
- When the horse whose chances have been interfered with has been placed by the Judge in a dividend bearing position; or --
- When the relegation will result in the horse or horses whose chances have been interfered with gaining a dividend bearing position…."
Mr B. R. Jones, the rider of "Keffiya", was accompanied by the trainer of the horse Mr L. A. O’Sullivan, and Mr O’Sullivan advised that he would represent the interests of the owners of the horse. Mr B. J. McKeagg, the trainer of "Lanbrae", was accompanied by its rider, Mr M. R. Du Plessis. Mr McKeagg advised that he would represent the interests of the owner of the horse.
--Mr R. A. James, the trainer of "Kaatoon", was accompanied by the rider of the horse, Mr G. A. McKeon. The part owner of "Kaatoon", Mr P. J. Walker, also attended the hearing.
--Mr Jones gave evidence and used video coverage to illustrate that his horse had been interfered with and pushed wide on the track after entering the home straight. Mr Jones pointed out the movement of "Kaatoon" as being the cause of outward movements by other horses which had resulted in the interference to his horse.
--Mr Du Plessis gave evidence along the same lines as Mr Jones. It was also this witness’s evidence that the cause of the interference was an outwards movement by "Kaatoon".
--Mr McKeon gave evidence in relation to "Kaatoon". He said that after entering the straight he had waited for a run, which eventually came. He also said that any movement from his horse was slight, and that he was not responsible for the flow on effects which occurred wider on the track.
--Mr James gave evidence and said that he believed the interference that affected the protesting horses was caused by a chain reaction. Mr James also pointed out the outwards movement of a horse on the inside of "Kaatoon" which he said made it difficult for "Kaatoon" to keep a straight line. It was also Mr James’ belief that the cause of the chain reaction was a very slight movement which had caused an over reaction by the outside horses.
--Chief Stipendiary Steward Mr George had been present throughout the hearing and in accordance with accepted practice he was asked if he wished to give evidence and call witnesses. Mr George said that in his view there were several matters which contributed to the later incidents. Mr George also said that this later interference could not be solely attributed to "Kaatoon".
--In particular Mr George said that he agreed with Mr James’ observations, and that there was a chain reaction commencing from the inside when a horse shifted out a horse and a half, and that "Kaatoon" then ran out and away from Noel Harris’s mount. It was Mr George’s view that both protests should be dismissed.
--We then adjourned to consider our decision. It was our view that the movement by "Kaatoon" was slight and that this movement had been caused by an outwards movement by a horse on its inside. The subsequent movements and interference was, we believed, a flow on effect from this initial slight movement by "Kaatoon". On returning to the Enquiry Room we advised that a full written decision would be given later, and we gave the following oral decision.
--"Having seen the video coverage of the incident, and having heard the evidence we are satisfied that there was a slight movement from "Kaatoon". However the flow on effect was not caused by that horse, and in this respect we agree with what the Stipendiary Stewards have said, and the protest is dismissed."
----
____________
--J. M. Phelan
--Chairman
--sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Old Hearing
Rules: 876.2.a, 876.1
Informant:
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid:
race_expapproval:
racecancelled:
race_noreport:
race_emailed1:
race_emailed2:
race_title:
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid:
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport:
waitingforpublication:
meet_emailed1:
meet_emailed2:
meetdate: no date provided
meet_title:
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation:
meet_racingtype:
meet_chair:
meet_pm1:
meet_pm2:
name: