Archive Decision

This decision has been migrated from the JCA website. Information is accurate but formatting may differ from contemporary decisions. Please contact us for any further enquiries.

Auckland RC 4 March 2015 – R 6 (instigating a protest)

ID: JCA12780

Applicant:
Mr L Molloy - Trainer of CONSENSUS

Respondent(s):
Mr T Pike - Trainer of GIN SWING

Information Number:
A6885

Hearing Type:
Protest

Rules:
642(1)

Code:
Thoroughbred

Meet Title:
Auckland RC - 4 March 2015

Meet Chair:
ADooley

Meet Committee Member 1:
NMoffatt

Race Date:
2015/03/04

Race Number:
R6

Decision:

Accordingly, the protest is upheld and the amended placings are now:

1st No. 3 THEE AULD FLOOZIE
2nd No. 1 SAAVOYA
3rd No. 2 CHARMONT
4th No. 4 CONSENSUS
5th No. 7 GIN SWING

In conclusion we order the payment of stakes and dividends.

Facts:

Following the running of Race 6, McKee Family Sunline Vase (Group 3), an Information was filed Instigating a Protest pursuant to Rule 642(1). The Informant, Mr Molloy, alleged that GIN SWING placed 4th by the Judge interfered with the chances of his horse CONSENSUS placed 5th by the Judge.

The interference was alleged to have occurred rounding the final turn.

The Judge's placings were as follows:

1st No. 3 THEE AULD FLOOZIE
2nd No. 1 SAAVOYA
3rd No. 2 CHARMONT
4th No. 7 GIN SWING
5th No. 4 CONSENSUS

The official margin between 4th and 5th was a nose.

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.

Submissions for Decision:

Mr Molloy began by telling the Committee that it was a Group 3 race which was critical to CONSENSUS CV. He said it was not Mr McNab’s fault that GIN SWING was wayward and he was having difficulty with his mount rolling off the fence near the turn. He said this resulted in CONSENSUS being forced over a considerable amount of extra ground.

Ms Myers submitted that she went for a run when GIN SWING was hanging out and received a bump and had to take a hold off her mount. She noted the margin between the two horses at the finish was a nose.

Mr Pike submitted that it was not relevant that it was a Group 3 race. He conceded that GIN SWING had lay off the running rail but he did not believe that CONSENSUS received any interference. He identified on the film that over the final 200 metres GIN SWING was holding CONSENSUS in the run to the winning post.

Mr McNab submitted that he did not affect CONSENSUS'S momentum on the final turn. He said that THEE AULD FLOOZIE forced CONSENSUS wider on the track.

Mr Molloy reiterated that GIN SWING caused the interference. He identified that near the turn CONSENSUS was racing in a 3 wide position before being forced out to a 7 wide position. We note all the available video films were shown.

Mr Oatham on behalf of the Stewards submitted that CONSENSUS was forced to go wide on the turn when receiving indirect interference. He said this was caused by GIN SWING when it was clearly hanging out. He noted from that point both horses had a clear run to the finish line. He highlighted the margin was only a nose at the finish.

Reasons for Decision:

The Committee carefully considered all of the submissions and reviewed the video films several times. We established that rounding the final turn GIN SWING was noticeably hanging out away from the running rail. This resulted SAAVOYA, THEE AULD FLOOZIE and CONSENSUS being forced wider on the track. We note that prior to the incident CONSENSUS was racing in a 3 wide position before being carted out to a 7 wide position. We are satisfied that while there was no physical contact CONSENSUS was hampered by being forced over substantial extra ground. The interference was exacerbated with the incident occurring on a turn. Despite both horses having a clear run to the finish line from that point it is significant that there was only a nose margin between them at the finish. Taking into account the amount of extra ground that CONSENSUS was forced over it is our opinion that CONSENSUS would have beaten GIN SWING had such 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: 57cba9fb4c37f1663d4cf7aa51754d69


informantnumber: A6885


horsename: GIN SWING


hearing_racingtype:


startdate: no date provided


newcharge:


plea:


penaltyrequired:


decisiondate: 02/03/2015


hearing_title: Auckland RC 4 March 2015 - R 6 (instigating a protest)


charge:


facts:

Following the running of Race 6, McKee Family Sunline Vase (Group 3), an Information was filed Instigating a Protest pursuant to Rule 642(1). The Informant, Mr Molloy, alleged that GIN SWING placed 4th by the Judge interfered with the chances of his horse CONSENSUS placed 5th by the Judge.

The interference was alleged to have occurred rounding the final turn.

The Judge's placings were as follows:

1st No. 3 THEE AULD FLOOZIE
2nd No. 1 SAAVOYA
3rd No. 2 CHARMONT
4th No. 7 GIN SWING
5th No. 4 CONSENSUS

The official margin between 4th and 5th was a nose.

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.


appealdecision:


isappeal:


submissionsfordecision:

Mr Molloy began by telling the Committee that it was a Group 3 race which was critical to CONSENSUS CV. He said it was not Mr McNab’s fault that GIN SWING was wayward and he was having difficulty with his mount rolling off the fence near the turn. He said this resulted in CONSENSUS being forced over a considerable amount of extra ground.

Ms Myers submitted that she went for a run when GIN SWING was hanging out and received a bump and had to take a hold off her mount. She noted the margin between the two horses at the finish was a nose.

Mr Pike submitted that it was not relevant that it was a Group 3 race. He conceded that GIN SWING had lay off the running rail but he did not believe that CONSENSUS received any interference. He identified on the film that over the final 200 metres GIN SWING was holding CONSENSUS in the run to the winning post.

Mr McNab submitted that he did not affect CONSENSUS'S momentum on the final turn. He said that THEE AULD FLOOZIE forced CONSENSUS wider on the track.

Mr Molloy reiterated that GIN SWING caused the interference. He identified that near the turn CONSENSUS was racing in a 3 wide position before being forced out to a 7 wide position. We note all the available video films were shown.

Mr Oatham on behalf of the Stewards submitted that CONSENSUS was forced to go wide on the turn when receiving indirect interference. He said this was caused by GIN SWING when it was clearly hanging out. He noted from that point both horses had a clear run to the finish line. He highlighted the margin was only a nose at the finish.


reasonsfordecision:

The Committee carefully considered all of the submissions and reviewed the video films several times. We established that rounding the final turn GIN SWING was noticeably hanging out away from the running rail. This resulted SAAVOYA, THEE AULD FLOOZIE and CONSENSUS being forced wider on the track. We note that prior to the incident CONSENSUS was racing in a 3 wide position before being carted out to a 7 wide position. We are satisfied that while there was no physical contact CONSENSUS was hampered by being forced over substantial extra ground. The interference was exacerbated with the incident occurring on a turn. Despite both horses having a clear run to the finish line from that point it is significant that there was only a nose margin between them at the finish. Taking into account the amount of extra ground that CONSENSUS was forced over it is our opinion that CONSENSUS would have beaten GIN SWING had such interference not occurred.


Decision:

Accordingly, the protest is upheld and the amended placings are now:

1st No. 3 THEE AULD FLOOZIE
2nd No. 1 SAAVOYA
3rd No. 2 CHARMONT
4th No. 4 CONSENSUS
5th No. 7 GIN SWING

In conclusion we order the payment of stakes and dividends.


sumissionsforpenalty:


reasonsforpenalty:


penalty:


hearing_type: Protest


Rules: 642(1)


Informant: Mr L Molloy - Trainer of CONSENSUS


JockeysandTrainer:


Otherperson:


PersonPresent: Ms R Myers -Rider of CONSENSUS, Mr M McNab - Rider of GIN SWING, Mr J Oatham - Senior Stipendiary Steward


Respondent: Mr T Pike - Trainer of GIN SWING


StipendSteward:


raceid: 2b91a821e56ec5de9053cc64c9a72605


race_expapproval:


racecancelled: 0


race_noreport: 0


race_emailed1: 0


race_emailed2: 0


race_title: R6


submittochair:


race_expappcomment:


race_km:


race_otherexp:


race_chair:


race_pm1:


race_pm2:


meetid: b627e7ed43ce01b674df45caaeaa7173


meet_expapproval:


meet_noreport: 0


waitingforpublication: 0


meet_emailed1: 0


meet_emailed2: 0


meetdate: 04/03/2015


meet_title: Auckland RC - 4 March 2015


meet_expappcomment:


meet_km:


meet_otherexp:


tracklocation: auckland-rc


meet_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing


meet_chair: ADooley


meet_pm1: NMoffatt


meet_pm2: none


name: Auckland RC