Hawkes Bay RI 5 April 2014 – R 8 (instigating a protest)
ID: JCA17675
Code:
Thoroughbred
Meet Title:
Hawkes Bay RI - 5 April 2014
Meet Chair:
NMoffatt
Meet Committee Member 1:
TCastles
Race Date:
2014/04/05
Race Number:
R 8
Decision:
Accordingly the protest was upheld and amended placings read:
1st HOTSPOT (9)
2nd SPEEDING (15)
3rd HESALLJAZZ (1)
4th HESTOLEMYROSES (12)
Dividends were directed to be paid accordingly.
Facts:
Following Race 8, The Desert Gold Club Sprint over 1400m, a protest was lodged pursuant to Rule 642(1) by Mr J Riddell alleging that horse number 12 (HESTOLEMYROSES) or its rider placed 2nd by the Judge interfered with the chances of horse number 1 (HESALLJAZZ) placed 4th by the JUDGE.
The information alleged interference over the final straight.
Judge's placings were:
1st HOTSPOT (9)
2nd HESTOLEMYROSES (12)
3rd SPEEDING (15)
4th HESALLJAZZ (1)
The official margins between 2nd and 3rd and 3rd and 4th were a long neck and a short head.
Submissions for Decision:
Mr Riddell told the committee that the interference to his horse occurred over a distance of 600 – 700 m. On the point of the turn HESTOLEMYROSES (R Smyth) was adjacent to the running rail and Mr Riddell on HEZALLJAZZ was alongside that runner one off the fence. Ms Smyth gradually came out taking the line of HESALLJAZZ for the whole length of the straight. In addition to forcing him out wider on the track Ms Smyth also hit Mr Riddell’s mount over the nose with her whip on approximately four occasions. Mr Riddell said he kept riding his mount out to prevent it dropping away however it was doing its best work at the finish. He said the interference definitely prevented him beating HESTOLEMYROSES.
Mr Sanders concurred with Mr Riddell and used the side on film to demonstrate at the 50 metre mark where HESALLJAZZ started coming back at the second placed horse. He described this as the horse “doing his very best work late”.
Mr Bambry said that the 4th horse (HEZALLJAZZ) was being ridden by one of the most vigorous riders in the country and the 2nd placed horse was being ridden by a 2kg claimer yet Mr Riddell still couldn’t get past. He said his horse kicked again under a soft ride and the margin at the finish proved that Mr Riddell would never have beaten HESTOLEMYROSES. Mr Bambry said there was no clear video evidence that proved HESALLJAZZ was hit over the nose and also that it was not making up any ground at the finish. Ms Smyth said Mr Riddell never had to stop riding his mount and questioned why, if he was going that well, he did not change ground and make a run on her inside. She said her horse was always travelling better.
For the Stewards Mr Goodwin said Mr Riddell was entitled to a clear run to the line but on this occasion he had been dictated outwards for some considerable distance. On the other hand Mr Riddell had 300m to try and get past Ms Smyth’s mount but had been unable to do so. He said it did appear that Ms Smyth had been holding her own at the finish.
Reasons for Decision:
In coming to a decision the committee carefully considered all of the evidence presented. We refer to Rule 642(1) which 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.
The video evidence was clear in showing that the 2nd placed horse HESTOLEMYROSES moved outwards and caused interference to the 4th placed horse HESALLJAZZ. The committee had to determine if that interference prevented the 4th placed horse from finishing ahead of the 2nd placed horse.
There were three main factors that persuaded us to uphold the protest. In the first instance we took into account the sustained outward movement by HESTOLEMYROSES which occurred over the entire length of the home straight. Mr Riddell was moved from a one off position near the rail on the bend to a position wide out in the middle of the track at the finish line.
The second factor was the contact of the whip across the nose of HESALLJAZZ. We believe the head on film showed where Ms Smyth did hit Mr Riddell’s horse across the face. HESALLJAZZ could be seen to hesitate at the stages of the race where Mr Riddell alleged the whip contact occurred.
Finally we looked very closely at the concluding stages of the race to determine if in fact Mr Riddell was making up any ground on the 2nd placed horse. The rear view was helpful in showing how the two horses involved were very close together for most of the length of the straight but at approximately the 50m, when Ms Smyth made an attempt to straighten HESTOLEMYROSES, space opened up between the two runners. Switching to the side on film at this point it was our opinion that HESALLJAZZ, finally free of interference, did begin to make ground on Ms Smyth’s mount. Up to that point Mr Riddell had been denied the opportunity to improve past the other horse due to being dictated outwards.
Each individual factor on its own would not be enough to consider relegation however in totality, along with the margins at the finish, it was our opinion that the protest be upheld.
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: dea910ae39ffd18a71d8be07c8bf9a85
informantnumber: A4030
horsename: HESTOLEMYROSES
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: 07/04/2014
hearing_title: Hawkes Bay RI 5 April 2014 - R 8 (instigating a protest)
charge:
facts:
Following Race 8, The Desert Gold Club Sprint over 1400m, a protest was lodged pursuant to Rule 642(1) by Mr J Riddell alleging that horse number 12 (HESTOLEMYROSES) or its rider placed 2nd by the Judge interfered with the chances of horse number 1 (HESALLJAZZ) placed 4th by the JUDGE.
The information alleged interference over the final straight.
Judge's placings were:
1st HOTSPOT (9)
2nd HESTOLEMYROSES (12)
3rd SPEEDING (15)
4th HESALLJAZZ (1)
The official margins between 2nd and 3rd and 3rd and 4th were a long neck and a short head.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
Mr Riddell told the committee that the interference to his horse occurred over a distance of 600 – 700 m. On the point of the turn HESTOLEMYROSES (R Smyth) was adjacent to the running rail and Mr Riddell on HEZALLJAZZ was alongside that runner one off the fence. Ms Smyth gradually came out taking the line of HESALLJAZZ for the whole length of the straight. In addition to forcing him out wider on the track Ms Smyth also hit Mr Riddell’s mount over the nose with her whip on approximately four occasions. Mr Riddell said he kept riding his mount out to prevent it dropping away however it was doing its best work at the finish. He said the interference definitely prevented him beating HESTOLEMYROSES.
Mr Sanders concurred with Mr Riddell and used the side on film to demonstrate at the 50 metre mark where HESALLJAZZ started coming back at the second placed horse. He described this as the horse “doing his very best work late”.
Mr Bambry said that the 4th horse (HEZALLJAZZ) was being ridden by one of the most vigorous riders in the country and the 2nd placed horse was being ridden by a 2kg claimer yet Mr Riddell still couldn’t get past. He said his horse kicked again under a soft ride and the margin at the finish proved that Mr Riddell would never have beaten HESTOLEMYROSES. Mr Bambry said there was no clear video evidence that proved HESALLJAZZ was hit over the nose and also that it was not making up any ground at the finish. Ms Smyth said Mr Riddell never had to stop riding his mount and questioned why, if he was going that well, he did not change ground and make a run on her inside. She said her horse was always travelling better.
For the Stewards Mr Goodwin said Mr Riddell was entitled to a clear run to the line but on this occasion he had been dictated outwards for some considerable distance. On the other hand Mr Riddell had 300m to try and get past Ms Smyth’s mount but had been unable to do so. He said it did appear that Ms Smyth had been holding her own at the finish.
reasonsfordecision:
In coming to a decision the committee carefully considered all of the evidence presented. We refer to Rule 642(1) which 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.
The video evidence was clear in showing that the 2nd placed horse HESTOLEMYROSES moved outwards and caused interference to the 4th placed horse HESALLJAZZ. The committee had to determine if that interference prevented the 4th placed horse from finishing ahead of the 2nd placed horse.
There were three main factors that persuaded us to uphold the protest. In the first instance we took into account the sustained outward movement by HESTOLEMYROSES which occurred over the entire length of the home straight. Mr Riddell was moved from a one off position near the rail on the bend to a position wide out in the middle of the track at the finish line.
The second factor was the contact of the whip across the nose of HESALLJAZZ. We believe the head on film showed where Ms Smyth did hit Mr Riddell’s horse across the face. HESALLJAZZ could be seen to hesitate at the stages of the race where Mr Riddell alleged the whip contact occurred.
Finally we looked very closely at the concluding stages of the race to determine if in fact Mr Riddell was making up any ground on the 2nd placed horse. The rear view was helpful in showing how the two horses involved were very close together for most of the length of the straight but at approximately the 50m, when Ms Smyth made an attempt to straighten HESTOLEMYROSES, space opened up between the two runners. Switching to the side on film at this point it was our opinion that HESALLJAZZ, finally free of interference, did begin to make ground on Ms Smyth’s mount. Up to that point Mr Riddell had been denied the opportunity to improve past the other horse due to being dictated outwards.
Each individual factor on its own would not be enough to consider relegation however in totality, along with the margins at the finish, it was our opinion that the protest be upheld.
Decision:
Accordingly the protest was upheld and amended placings read:
1st HOTSPOT (9)
2nd SPEEDING (15)
3rd HESALLJAZZ (1)
4th HESTOLEMYROSES (12)
Dividends were directed to be paid accordingly.
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Protest
Rules: 642(1)
Informant: Mr J Riddell - Rider of HESALLJAZZ
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent: Mr N Goodwin - Stipendiary Steward, Mr M Sanders - Representing HESALLJAZZ, Mr C Russell - Owner HESALLJAZZ, Mr K Russell - Owner HESALLJAZZ, Mr T Bambry - Trainer HESTOLEMYROSES
Respondent: Ms R Smyth - Rider of HESTOLEMYROSES
StipendSteward:
raceid: c6ac97eda1cb6fca65ce6a0572abb625
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: ae4743ead181aaf90b6e546769c10ef6
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 05/04/2014
meet_title: Hawkes Bay RI - 5 April 2014
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: hawkes-bay-ri
meet_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
meet_chair: NMoffatt
meet_pm1: TCastles
meet_pm2: none
name: Hawkes Bay RI