Auckland RC 16 June 2012 – R 8 (instigating a protest)
ID: JCA17004
Code:
Thoroughbred
Meet Title:
Auckland RC - 16 June 2012
Meet Chair:
ADooley
Meet Committee Member 1:
GTankard
Race Date:
2012/06/16
Race Number:
R 8
Decision:
Accordingly the protest is upheld and the placings are now:
1st No. 10 RAFA
2nd No. 3 GRAND ADMIRAL
3rd No. 4 CAPO
4th No. 1 CHILL BILL
In conclusion we order the payment of stakes and dividends.
Facts:
Following the running of Race 8 an information instigating a Protest was filed pursuant to Rule 642(1). The informant, Mr Williams, the trainer of the 3rd placed horse GRAND ADMIRAL, alleged that CAPO, placed 2nd by the judge, interfered with the chances of his horse inside the final 100 metres.
The judge's placing were as follows:
1st No. 10 RAFA
2nd No. 4 CAPO
3rd No. 3 GRAND ADMIRAL
4th No. 1 CHILL BILL
The official margin between 2nd and 3rd was a nose.
Submissions for Decision:
Mr Williams demonstrated on the video films that inside the final 50 metres he believed that GRAND ADMIRAL was impeded by CAPO on 2 occasions. He showed the committee on the head on film that Mr Innes, the rider of GRAND ADMIRAL, was bumped 2 or 3 times and he was forced to stop riding his mount out. He submitted that with the margin between the 2 runners being a nose it was significant for the placings to be changed as he stated that the interference had cost GRAND ADMIRAL more than the nose margin.
Mr Innes said it was clear on the films that Ms Collett, the rider of CAPO, forced his mount over extra ground and he said he was bumped on 2 occasions. This resulted in him having to stop riding his mount as Ms Collett was taking his rightful running line.
Mrs Murdoch conceded that CAPO did move out and make contact with GRAND ADMIRAL over the final 50 metres, however, she believed that it was very minor interference, which also resulted in her rider having to put the whip away.
Ms Collett believed that she came out a bit and was of the opinion that it did not have a great affect on the final result.
Mr Oatham when asked for his assessment submitted that it was clear that contact was made between the 2 runners over the final 40 metres. He believed that GRAND ADMIRAL was impeded by CAPO for 6 strides when CAPO shifted out 2 horse widths. He submitted that GRAND ADMIRAL lost more momentum than a nose and therefore said the protest should be upheld.
Mr Williams when given the opportunity to sum up advised the committee that Ms Collett used her whip in the left hand, where as Mr Innes was unable to use his whip in the right hand, due to CAPO moving into his running line.
Reasons for Decision:
The committee carefully considered all evidence and submissions presented and reviewed the video films. We established the following key points, CAPO does shift out approximately 3 horse widths and makes contact with GRAND ADMIRAL inside the final 50 metres. It was noticeable on the films that Mr Innes had to stop riding GRAND ADMIRAL forward with the whip due to the outward movement from CAPO. This outward movement clearly equates to more than the official margin of a nose at the finish.
For these reasons we are satisfied that GRAND ADMIRAL would have beaten CAPO had interference not occurred.
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: bfd824dd2b279eb00aab3f250c3bee46
informantnumber: A4513
horsename: CAPO
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: 15/06/2012
hearing_title: Auckland RC 16 June 2012 - R 8 (instigating a protest)
charge:
facts:
Following the running of Race 8 an information instigating a Protest was filed pursuant to Rule 642(1). The informant, Mr Williams, the trainer of the 3rd placed horse GRAND ADMIRAL, alleged that CAPO, placed 2nd by the judge, interfered with the chances of his horse inside the final 100 metres.
The judge's placing were as follows:
1st No. 10 RAFA
2nd No. 4 CAPO
3rd No. 3 GRAND ADMIRAL
4th No. 1 CHILL BILL
The official margin between 2nd and 3rd was a nose.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
Mr Williams demonstrated on the video films that inside the final 50 metres he believed that GRAND ADMIRAL was impeded by CAPO on 2 occasions. He showed the committee on the head on film that Mr Innes, the rider of GRAND ADMIRAL, was bumped 2 or 3 times and he was forced to stop riding his mount out. He submitted that with the margin between the 2 runners being a nose it was significant for the placings to be changed as he stated that the interference had cost GRAND ADMIRAL more than the nose margin.
Mr Innes said it was clear on the films that Ms Collett, the rider of CAPO, forced his mount over extra ground and he said he was bumped on 2 occasions. This resulted in him having to stop riding his mount as Ms Collett was taking his rightful running line.
Mrs Murdoch conceded that CAPO did move out and make contact with GRAND ADMIRAL over the final 50 metres, however, she believed that it was very minor interference, which also resulted in her rider having to put the whip away.
Ms Collett believed that she came out a bit and was of the opinion that it did not have a great affect on the final result.
Mr Oatham when asked for his assessment submitted that it was clear that contact was made between the 2 runners over the final 40 metres. He believed that GRAND ADMIRAL was impeded by CAPO for 6 strides when CAPO shifted out 2 horse widths. He submitted that GRAND ADMIRAL lost more momentum than a nose and therefore said the protest should be upheld.
Mr Williams when given the opportunity to sum up advised the committee that Ms Collett used her whip in the left hand, where as Mr Innes was unable to use his whip in the right hand, due to CAPO moving into his running line.
reasonsfordecision:
The committee carefully considered all evidence and submissions presented and reviewed the video films. We established the following key points, CAPO does shift out approximately 3 horse widths and makes contact with GRAND ADMIRAL inside the final 50 metres. It was noticeable on the films that Mr Innes had to stop riding GRAND ADMIRAL forward with the whip due to the outward movement from CAPO. This outward movement clearly equates to more than the official margin of a nose at the finish.
For these reasons we are satisfied that GRAND ADMIRAL would have beaten CAPO had interference not occurred.
Decision:
Accordingly the protest is upheld and the placings are now:
1st No. 10 RAFA
2nd No. 3 GRAND ADMIRAL
3rd No. 4 CAPO
4th No. 1 CHILL BILL
In conclusion we order the payment of stakes and dividends.
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Protest
Rules: 642(1)
Informant: Mr P Williams - Trainer of GRAND ADMIRAL
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent: Mr J Oatham - Stipendiary Steward, Mr L Innes - Rider of GRAND ADMIRAL, Ms A Collett - Rider of CAPO
Respondent: Mrs M Murdoch - Trainer of CAPO
StipendSteward:
raceid: 97ef3f66df02f17fe8a4cb9ec3401bca
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: R 8
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: cd40dc7af725a137d4c217133fa9c9b1
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 16/06/2012
meet_title: Auckland RC - 16 June 2012
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: auckland-rc
meet_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
meet_chair: ADooley
meet_pm1: GTankard
meet_pm2: none
name: Auckland RC