Canterbury JC – 14 December 2006 –
ID: JCA21759
Hearing Type (Code):
thoroughbred-racing
Decision: --
Following the running of Race 6, the Dunstan Feeds Championship Qualifier, Mr M. R. Pitman, the trainer of "Ultramarine" (5) which finished 3rd, laid an information instigating a protest under Rule 876(1) against 2nd place being awarded to "Magnanimous"
--
DECISION AND REASONS:
--Following the running of Race 6, the Dunstan Feeds Championship Qualifier, Mr M. R. Pitman, the trainer of "Ultramarine" (5) which finished 3rd, laid an information instigating a protest under Rule 876(1) against 2nd place being awarded to "Magnanimous" (6) ridden by Mr P. Holmes.
----The information reads as follows.
------"I allege that Magnanimous or its rider placed 2nd by the judge interfered with the chances of Ultramarine placed 3rd by the judge. The interference occurred over the concluding stages."
--Rule 876(1) reads as follows.
--"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.
--Sub-rule 2 did not apply in this case.
----Mr Pitman was accompanied by the rider of "Ultramarine", Miss A. Mundy, and Mr Pitman also undertook to represent the interests of the owners of that horse. Mr Harris was accompanied by the rider of "Magnanimous", Mr P. Holmes, and he also advised that he would represent the interests of the owner of that horse.
--Video coverage of this incident showed that "Magnanimous" had moved inwards a short distance from the finish and had hampered "Ultramarine" for a stride or two. The margin at the finish was ? a neck. Miss Mundy said that "Magnanimous" had rolled in on her a short distance from the line, and that the margin (a ? neck) was so short that she believed that the interference had affected her chances.
--Mr Harris said that this incident took place very close to the winning post and that his horse had "forward momentum" at that time. Mr Harris did not accept that this incident had affected "Ultramarine's" chances.
--Stipendiary Steward Mr Ching had been present throughout the hearing and he exercised his right to give evidence in accordance with the Rules. Mr Ching said that there was some minor interference by "Magnanimous" to "Ultramarine" with a margin of ? a neck. Mr Ching said that a decision on whether this minor interference was sufficient to justify a change of places was up to the Committee.
--After the completion of the evidence we took time to consider our decision. After due consideration, and as the next race was about to start, we re-convened the hearing and advised the parties that this protest would be dismissed, and that full reasons for the decision would be put in writing and given later.
--Our reasons for this decision were that we were satisfied that there was very minor interference a few strides before the end of the race. After having seen the video coverage and hearing the evidence we were satisfied that the chances of "Magnanimous" were not affected by this interference, and that the protest should be dismissed.
--Note: This protest was heard at the same time as the protest by "Magnanimous" against "Centavo" (Information No. 30152). Both protests were dismissed at the same time.
--JM Phelan
--Chairman
------
--
--
Decision Date: 14/12/2006
Publish Date: 14/12/2006
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: b5e10458b12cc261f7fc5c44c6270595
informantnumber:
horsename:
hearing_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
startdate: 14/12/2006
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: no date provided
hearing_title: Canterbury JC - 14 December 2006 -
charge:
facts:
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
reasonsfordecision:
Decision:
--Following the running of Race 6, the Dunstan Feeds Championship Qualifier, Mr M. R. Pitman, the trainer of "Ultramarine" (5) which finished 3rd, laid an information instigating a protest under Rule 876(1) against 2nd place being awarded to "Magnanimous"
--
DECISION AND REASONS:
--Following the running of Race 6, the Dunstan Feeds Championship Qualifier, Mr M. R. Pitman, the trainer of "Ultramarine" (5) which finished 3rd, laid an information instigating a protest under Rule 876(1) against 2nd place being awarded to "Magnanimous" (6) ridden by Mr P. Holmes.
----The information reads as follows.
------"I allege that Magnanimous or its rider placed 2nd by the judge interfered with the chances of Ultramarine placed 3rd by the judge. The interference occurred over the concluding stages."
--Rule 876(1) reads as follows.
--"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.
--Sub-rule 2 did not apply in this case.
----Mr Pitman was accompanied by the rider of "Ultramarine", Miss A. Mundy, and Mr Pitman also undertook to represent the interests of the owners of that horse. Mr Harris was accompanied by the rider of "Magnanimous", Mr P. Holmes, and he also advised that he would represent the interests of the owner of that horse.
--Video coverage of this incident showed that "Magnanimous" had moved inwards a short distance from the finish and had hampered "Ultramarine" for a stride or two. The margin at the finish was ? a neck. Miss Mundy said that "Magnanimous" had rolled in on her a short distance from the line, and that the margin (a ? neck) was so short that she believed that the interference had affected her chances.
--Mr Harris said that this incident took place very close to the winning post and that his horse had "forward momentum" at that time. Mr Harris did not accept that this incident had affected "Ultramarine's" chances.
--Stipendiary Steward Mr Ching had been present throughout the hearing and he exercised his right to give evidence in accordance with the Rules. Mr Ching said that there was some minor interference by "Magnanimous" to "Ultramarine" with a margin of ? a neck. Mr Ching said that a decision on whether this minor interference was sufficient to justify a change of places was up to the Committee.
--After the completion of the evidence we took time to consider our decision. After due consideration, and as the next race was about to start, we re-convened the hearing and advised the parties that this protest would be dismissed, and that full reasons for the decision would be put in writing and given later.
--Our reasons for this decision were that we were satisfied that there was very minor interference a few strides before the end of the race. After having seen the video coverage and hearing the evidence we were satisfied that the chances of "Magnanimous" were not affected by this interference, and that the protest should be dismissed.
--Note:
This protest was heard at the same time as the protest by "Magnanimous" against "Centavo" (Information No. 30152). Both protests were dismissed at the same time.--JM Phelan
--Chairman
------
--
--
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Old Hearing
Rules: 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: