Auckland RC 29 November 2014 – R 5 (instigating a protest)
ID: JCA13295
Code:
Thoroughbred
Meet Title:
Auckland RC - 29 November 2014
Meet Chair:
ADooley
Meet Committee Member 1:
GJones
Race Date:
2014/11/29
Race Number:
R5
Decision:
Accordingly both protests were dismissed and the Judge's placings shall stand. In conclusion we order the payment of stakes and dividends.
Facts:
Following the running of Race 5, Swiss Deli 1400, the connections of both first place dead heaters instigated a protest against each other’s horse alleging interference in the final straight. This was filed pursuant to Rule 642(1).
Information A6862: The Informant, Mr Tiley, the Trainer of THE SHOW alleged that TALENTED KIRKY interfered with the chances of THE SHOW in the final straight.
Information A6861: The Informant, Mrs Carter, the Trainer of TALENTED KIRKY alleged that THE SHOW interfered with the chances of TALENTED KIRKY in the final straight.
Given the circumstances of the alleged interference and time constraints it was expedient that both Informations were heard together. All parties were agreeable to this process. None of the connections had any objection with Trackside recording the protest hearing.
The Judge's placing were as follows:
1st No. 3 THE SHOW
1st No. 8 TALENTED KIRKY
3rd No. 16 ZABELLE
4th No. 12 SONSY
The official margin at the finish was a dead heat.
Rule 642(1) states: “If a placed horse or its rider causes interference within the meaning of this rule 642 to another placed horse, and the Judicial Committee is of the opinion that the horse so interfered with would have finished ahead of the first mentioned horse had such interference not occurred, they may place the first mentioned horse immediately after the horse interfered with”.
All connections present acknowledged they understood the Rule which was read aloud by Mr Oatham.
Submissions for Decision:
Mrs Carter submitted that it was obvious TALENTED KIRKY did cross over at the 200 metre mark and make contact with THE SHOW. She said both riders did not stop riding but the final part of the race was important because THE SHOW moved out onto TALENTED KIRKY.
Mr Sweeney submitted that TALENTED KIRKY was racing greenly and drifted in making contact with THE SHOW in the final straight. He said towards the end of the race THE SHOW continued to bore out onto his mount. He believed this may have been the difference between an outright win and a dead heat.
Mr Tiley submitted that both parties have agreed that TALENTED KIRKY has drifted in onto THE SHOW and both riders continued to rider their mounts forward. He said TALENTED KIRKY clearly headed THE SHOW at the 100 meters. He said at this point TALENTED KIRKY impeded THE SHOW by shifting in and affecting THE SHOW’S momentum. In his opinion THE SHOW resented this and would have kept kicking if it hadn’t been for that interference. He believed it was significant THE SHOW had to come from behind TALENTED KIRKY after being headed.
Mr Bosson submitted that TALENTED KIRKY rolled in on his mount and contact occurred which hampered his progress. He said as a consequence THE SHOW resented the contact and took some time to wind up again. He added had this not occurred his mount would have continued to run straight and would have won the race.
Mr Oatham on behalf of the Stewards submitted that it was clear THE SHOW had the lead into the straight. He said at the 100 metre mark TALENTED KIRKY was in front and appeared to lay in making contact with THE SHOW. He said the Stewards' view is the contact was slight and they don’t see merit in the protest lodged by Mr Tiley.
Mr Oatham submitted on behalf of the protest lodged by Mrs Carter, over the final 100 metres THE SHOW did lay out onto TALENTED KIRKY shifting that horse out two and a half horse widths. He said notwithstanding that both riders were able to ride their mounts out with vigour. He submitted the Stewards' view is the protest did have some merit noting the dead heat margin at the finish.
In summing up Mrs Carter said that she agreed with the Stewards' view in that THE SHOW shifted TALENTED KIRKY further out on the track over the final stages.
In summing up Mr Tiley submitted that he disagreed with the Stewards' view and the contact made by TALENTED KIRKY onto THE SHOW was significant and he would have won but for being impeded.
Reasons for Decision:
Information A6862:
The Committee carefully considered all evidence and submissions presented and reviewed the video films at length. In relation to the protest lodged by Mr Tiley we established at the 200 metres THE SHOW and TALENTED KIRKY were racing on level terms. Near the 180 metres TALENTED KIRKY had a neck advantage over THE SHOW. We identified shortly after that point TALENTED KIRKY lay in when placed under pressure making contact with THE SHOW briefly. The films show that both horses continued to be ridden forward with vigour. The Committee considered this contact to be minor and insufficient grounds to justify an alteration to the placings.
Information A6861:
The Committee carefully considered all evidence and submissions presented and reviewed the video films at length. In relation to the protest lodged by Mrs Carter we established that over the final stages of the race THE SHOW has gradually shifted out approximately two horse widths and made slight contact with TALENTED KIRKY. It is significant that both riders were able to continue to ride their mounts out with vigour to the winning post. We were left with some doubt that TALENTED KIRKY did lose any momentum. We note that THE SHOW received the initial interference earlier in the straight from TALENTED KIRKY. The films support that THE SHOW has come from a neck behind TALENTED KIRKY to get back on level terms at the finish. The Committee is of the opinion that the gradual shift by THE SHOW onto TALENTED KIRKY over the final stages did not cost that horse the outright winning of the race.
Therefore we were not satisfied if such interference had not occurred TALENTED KIRKY would have beaten THE SHOW.
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: 5e346eb8efbe086de353686478c1bf4d
informantnumber: A6861 & A6862
horsename: TALENTED KIRKY / THE SHOW
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: 25/11/2014
hearing_title: Auckland RC 29 November 2014 - R 5 (instigating a protest)
charge:
facts:
Following the running of Race 5, Swiss Deli 1400, the connections of both first place dead heaters instigated a protest against each other’s horse alleging interference in the final straight. This was filed pursuant to Rule 642(1).
Information A6862: The Informant, Mr Tiley, the Trainer of THE SHOW alleged that TALENTED KIRKY interfered with the chances of THE SHOW in the final straight.
Information A6861: The Informant, Mrs Carter, the Trainer of TALENTED KIRKY alleged that THE SHOW interfered with the chances of TALENTED KIRKY in the final straight.
Given the circumstances of the alleged interference and time constraints it was expedient that both Informations were heard together. All parties were agreeable to this process. None of the connections had any objection with Trackside recording the protest hearing.
The Judge's placing were as follows:
1st No. 3 THE SHOW
1st No. 8 TALENTED KIRKY
3rd No. 16 ZABELLE
4th No. 12 SONSY
The official margin at the finish was a dead heat.
Rule 642(1) states: “If a placed horse or its rider causes interference within the meaning of this rule 642 to another placed horse, and the Judicial Committee is of the opinion that the horse so interfered with would have finished ahead of the first mentioned horse had such interference not occurred, they may place the first mentioned horse immediately after the horse interfered with”.
All connections present acknowledged they understood the Rule which was read aloud by Mr Oatham.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
Mrs Carter submitted that it was obvious TALENTED KIRKY did cross over at the 200 metre mark and make contact with THE SHOW. She said both riders did not stop riding but the final part of the race was important because THE SHOW moved out onto TALENTED KIRKY.
Mr Sweeney submitted that TALENTED KIRKY was racing greenly and drifted in making contact with THE SHOW in the final straight. He said towards the end of the race THE SHOW continued to bore out onto his mount. He believed this may have been the difference between an outright win and a dead heat.
Mr Tiley submitted that both parties have agreed that TALENTED KIRKY has drifted in onto THE SHOW and both riders continued to rider their mounts forward. He said TALENTED KIRKY clearly headed THE SHOW at the 100 meters. He said at this point TALENTED KIRKY impeded THE SHOW by shifting in and affecting THE SHOW’S momentum. In his opinion THE SHOW resented this and would have kept kicking if it hadn’t been for that interference. He believed it was significant THE SHOW had to come from behind TALENTED KIRKY after being headed.
Mr Bosson submitted that TALENTED KIRKY rolled in on his mount and contact occurred which hampered his progress. He said as a consequence THE SHOW resented the contact and took some time to wind up again. He added had this not occurred his mount would have continued to run straight and would have won the race.
Mr Oatham on behalf of the Stewards submitted that it was clear THE SHOW had the lead into the straight. He said at the 100 metre mark TALENTED KIRKY was in front and appeared to lay in making contact with THE SHOW. He said the Stewards' view is the contact was slight and they don’t see merit in the protest lodged by Mr Tiley.
Mr Oatham submitted on behalf of the protest lodged by Mrs Carter, over the final 100 metres THE SHOW did lay out onto TALENTED KIRKY shifting that horse out two and a half horse widths. He said notwithstanding that both riders were able to ride their mounts out with vigour. He submitted the Stewards' view is the protest did have some merit noting the dead heat margin at the finish.
In summing up Mrs Carter said that she agreed with the Stewards' view in that THE SHOW shifted TALENTED KIRKY further out on the track over the final stages.
In summing up Mr Tiley submitted that he disagreed with the Stewards' view and the contact made by TALENTED KIRKY onto THE SHOW was significant and he would have won but for being impeded.
reasonsfordecision:
Information A6862:
The Committee carefully considered all evidence and submissions presented and reviewed the video films at length. In relation to the protest lodged by Mr Tiley we established at the 200 metres THE SHOW and TALENTED KIRKY were racing on level terms. Near the 180 metres TALENTED KIRKY had a neck advantage over THE SHOW. We identified shortly after that point TALENTED KIRKY lay in when placed under pressure making contact with THE SHOW briefly. The films show that both horses continued to be ridden forward with vigour. The Committee considered this contact to be minor and insufficient grounds to justify an alteration to the placings.
Information A6861:
The Committee carefully considered all evidence and submissions presented and reviewed the video films at length. In relation to the protest lodged by Mrs Carter we established that over the final stages of the race THE SHOW has gradually shifted out approximately two horse widths and made slight contact with TALENTED KIRKY. It is significant that both riders were able to continue to ride their mounts out with vigour to the winning post. We were left with some doubt that TALENTED KIRKY did lose any momentum. We note that THE SHOW received the initial interference earlier in the straight from TALENTED KIRKY. The films support that THE SHOW has come from a neck behind TALENTED KIRKY to get back on level terms at the finish. The Committee is of the opinion that the gradual shift by THE SHOW onto TALENTED KIRKY over the final stages did not cost that horse the outright winning of the race.
Therefore we were not satisfied if such interference had not occurred TALENTED KIRKY would have beaten THE SHOW.
Decision:
Accordingly both protests were dismissed and the Judge's placings shall stand. In conclusion we order the payment of stakes and dividends.
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Protest
Rules: 642(1)
Informant: A6861- Mrs Carter - Trainer of TALENTED KIRKY, A6862 - Mr Tiley - Trainer of THE SHOW
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent: Mr O Bosson - Rider of THE SHOW, Mr M Sweeney - Rider of TALENTED KIRKY, Mr J Oatham - Senior Stipendiary Steward, Mr B Lichter - Journalist, Mr M Dillion - NZ Herald, Mr M Claydon - Trackside TV
Respondent: A6861 - Mr Tiley - Trainer of THE SHOW, A6862 - Mrs Carter - Trainer of TALENTED KIRKY
StipendSteward:
raceid: e53a7ecbfc0691516f51bf673f2b56df
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: R5
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: 75b3b44d55fb5d38d263246d0c9d8b99
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 29/11/2014
meet_title: Auckland RC - 29 November 2014
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: auckland-rc
meet_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
meet_chair: ADooley
meet_pm1: GJones
meet_pm2: none
name: Auckland RC