Canterbury JC – 5 August 2006 –

hearingid: e3e83fde1c32d64ee527165a1a562a42

informantnumber:

horsename:

hearing_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing

startdate: 05/08/2006

newcharge:

plea:

penaltyrequired:

decisiondate: no date provided

hearing_title: Canterbury JC - 5 August 2006 -

charge:

facts:

appealdecision:

isappeal:

submissionsfordecision:

reasonsfordecision:

Decision:

Hearing of information number 32155 filed under Rule 876(1) by Mr SC Ching alleging interference over the concluding stages of the race by "Delbrae" (CW Johnson) which was placed 2^nd by the judge, to "Eye of Horus" (RW Hannam) which was placed 3^rd by the Judge.

Hearing of information number 32155 filed under Rule 876(1) by Mr SC Ching alleging interference over the concluding stages of the race by "Delbrae" (CW Johnson) which was placed 2^nd by the judge, to "Eye of Horus" (RW Hannam) which was placed 3^rd by the Judge.

This inquiry concerns a protest following the running of Race 8 at the Canterbury Jockey Club's meeting on Saturday 5^th August 2006, the Aussie Brown Pharmacy's Winter Cup.

This protest was lodged by Mr SC Ching alleging that "Delbrae", or its rider, placed

2^nd by the judge, interfered with the chances of "Eye of Horus" and placed 3^rd by the judge. The interference is alleged to have occurred over the concluding stages of the race.

The official margin between second and third was one and a half lengths.

The Information was filed with the Registrar within the time prescribed under Rules 917 and 1105(4)(b).

Present during the hearing were Mr CW Johnson and Ms Robertson, the rider and trainer of "Delbrae", JR Watt and RW Hannam, the trainer and rider of "Eye of Horus", Mr L Radich from "Trackside" and Mr SC Ching, Stipendiary Steward.

The first issue that we must decide is whether there was interference to "Eye of Horus" by "Delbrae".

Mr Ching, showed the incident of which he complained using the head on and side on camera video films. "Delbrae", when under a hard ride, moved from approximately five horse widths off the running rail to about twelve widths on two occasions. The outward movements were quite pronounced and on each occasion, "Delbrae" came into quite firm contact with "Eye of Horus". On the second occasion, "Eye of Horus" received a significant check and Mr Hannam had to "stop riding" and according to him, he lost a lot of momentum. Mr Hannam told the enquiry that the video coverage was self-explanatory and demonstrated the interference which had occurred to his mount.

Mr CW Johnson, the rider of "Delbrae" agreed that he had moved outwards, but stated that he had trouble keeping a straight line. He did say that he had corrected the horse's line on each occasion.

The connections of "Delbrae" and "Eye of Horus" agreed with the statements and submissions that were made by the riders.

Mr Ching summarised, and said that there was contact on two occasions at about the 100 metre mark and at the 50 metre mark, which contact was firm and put "Eye of Horus" off line and off stride.

After considering the evidence submitted to the enquiry, we make the following findings.

"Delbrae" was running five horse widths off the running rail. When under the whip, and at about the 100 metre mark, it moved outwards quite sharply. Mr Johnson corrected his horse's line but not before "Delbrae" came into contact with "Eye of Horus". At about the 50 metre mark, "Delbrae" again moved out quite sharply to about twelve widths off the running rail. (It should be noted that Mr Johnson is a left handed whip.)

On each occasion that "Delbrae" moved out, firm contact was made with "Eye of Horus" which was put off its rightful running line and also put off stride.

The effect on "Eye of Horus" was quite significant. Its chances of finishing in a better position were clearly affected by the contact that was made with it on each occasion.

In terms of Rule 876(1) we find:

--

--

1. Interference was caused by "Delbrae" to "Eye of Horus";
--
--

--

2. That interference affected the chances of "Eye of Horus" finding in a better position.
--

Having concluded that "Delbrae" interfered with the chances of "Eye of Horus", we now have a discretion as to whether or not to relegate "Delbrae" behind "Eye of Horus". Relegation is not automatic. There must be a valid reason to exercise our discretion to relegate that outweighs any reason not to.

We are left in no doubt that our discretion should be exercised in favour of "Eye of Horus". Notwithstanding the margin of one and a half lengths between "Eye of Horus" and "Delbrae", the interference was of such severity that we are left with no other choice. But for the interference, "Eye of Horus" would, in our opinion, finished in a better place.

The official placings will now be:

First "Mikki Street"

Second "Eye of Horus"

Third "Delbrae"

Fourth "Be Jay Jay"

Fifth "Balmuse"

Sixth "Woodbury Lane"

The Registrar was directed forthwith to authorise the payment of all dividends in accordance with the amended placings.

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: