HR Waikato 22 AUGUST 2013 – R 8 (instigating a protest)
ID: JCA12282
Meet Title:
Cambridge HRC - 22 August 2013
Meet Chair:
AGodsalve
Meet Committee Member 1:
BScott
Race Date:
2013/08/22
Race Number:
R8
Decision:
The protest was dismissed.
It was ordered that the Judges placings would stand and that dividends and stakes be paid accordingly.
Facts:
Following the running of Race 8, the LIS MARA@NEVELE R STUD JUNIOR DRIVERS MOBILE PACE, an Information instigating a protest was filed by Stipendiary Steward Mr JM Muirhead on behalf of the connections of RANDALSTOWN which finished 3rd, against SPLENDID BET placed 1st by the Judge, on the grounds that SPLENDID BET shifted ground inwards inside the last 40m checking RANDALSTOWN and affecting its chance.
Mr S Phelan was present at the hearing representing the trainer of SPLENDID BET (Mr T Herlihy) and to assist its driver Mr T Cameron.
The protest was contested.
Rule 869 (8) states:
The Judicial Committee may in addition to any other penalty which may be imposed pursuant to Rule 1003 thereof place any horse which:
(a) May have gained an advantage by any conduct or interference prohibited by any preceding provision of this Rule and/or
(b) May have interfered with,or whose horseman may have interfered with,the progress or chance of any horse or horses-
Immediately after any horse from which it may have gained an advantage or whose chances or progress may have been affected thereby.
Rule 869 (4) states :
No horseman shall during any race do anything which interferes or is likely to interfere with his own horse and/or any other horse or its progress.
The Judges placing were:
1st - 9 Splendid Bet
2nd - 7 Cullies Delight
3rd - 8 Randalstown
4th - 4 Spook
The official margin between 1st and 2nd was 1 length, with a further ¾ length between the 2nd and 3rd horses.
Submissions for Decision:
Mr Muirhead demonstrated the alleged incident using the head-on and side-on films available.
He identified the winning horse SPLENDID BET, driven by Mr Cameron, as being 4 horses wide in the home straight. RANDALSTOWN, driven by Mr MacKinnon, was on its inside. Both horses were clearly running on while the leading horse with approximately 40-50m to run, CULLIES DELIGHT was being driven out.
Mr Muirhead alleged that at a point about 40m from the finish, Mr MacKinnon on RANDALSTOWN was forced to take severe corrective action as a result of SPLENDID BET running in checking both RANDALSTOWN and CULLIES DELIGHT inside it. He stated that the finishing margin between 1st and 2nd was 1 length, and there was ¾ length between the 2nd and 3rd horses. He said that the Stewards felt that the 3rd horse RANDALSTOWN would have finished in a better position if that interference had not taken place.
Mr MacKinnon told the Committee that his horse RANDALSTOWN had been parked 3 wide since about the 900m mark. He added that the horse had momentum as it approached the finish and he had to take evasive action when the horse on his outer-SPLENDID BET-had run inwards onto him.
In response to a question from the Committee, Mr MacKinnon said that his horse had done a lot of work in the latter part of the race and while he could not be certain he felt that he could ‘possibly’ have finished 2nd if he had not been checked 30-40m from the finish.
Mr Z Butcher, assisting Mr MacKinnon, said that the horse RANDALSTOWN may have over-reacted to the inwards movement from SPLENDID BET. He said that Mr Cameron had corrected SPLENDID BET and that in his opinion that horse had only run in a ‘wee bit’,and it appeared to him that SPLENDID BET had the better of RANDALSTOWN when this incident occurred. He said it was too close to the line to say if RANDALSTOWN would have finished 2nd.
Mr T Hall, trainer of RANDALSTOWN, said that his horse was gaining momentum at the time the incident took place but as it was close to the finish it was hard to say if it affected his horse.
Mr T Cameron, driver of SPLENDID BET, said it was obvious that his horse had run in, but he felt that the other horse had over-reacted and that he had straightened his runner immediately. He did not believe his horse had affected RANDALSTOWN's chances.
Mr S Phelan, appearing for trainer Mr T Herlihy, said that although there was movement from SPLENDID BET it was really late in the race, and that as the other horse (RANDALSTOWN) had ‘peaked’ it was never going to run 2nd and the interference had made no difference to the finishing positions.
In summary Mr Muirhead stated that the Stewards felt it was clear that RANDALSTOWN was gaining on CULLIES DELIGHT towards the finish and that Mr MacKinnon was clearly unable to drive the horse out in the final stages as he had to ‘grab hold of’ his horse.
Reasons for Decision:
It was clear to the Committee that there was inwards movement from SPLENDID BET at about the 40m mark, however Mr Cameron had corrected the horse immediately. It was also clear that SPLENDID BET was finishing stronger than RANDALSTOWN who may also have over-reacted to the pressure from outside it.
The Committee felt that given the proximity of the finishing post at the time, the chances of RANDALSTOWN were not affected by the movement of SPLENDID BET.
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: 49485070194ab13c958bd64bb02c859b
informantnumber: 3952
horsename: SPLENDID BET
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: 19/08/2013
hearing_title: HR Waikato 22 AUGUST 2013 - R 8 (instigating a protest)
charge:
facts:
Following the running of Race 8, the LIS MARA@NEVELE R STUD JUNIOR DRIVERS MOBILE PACE, an Information instigating a protest was filed by Stipendiary Steward Mr JM Muirhead on behalf of the connections of RANDALSTOWN which finished 3rd, against SPLENDID BET placed 1st by the Judge, on the grounds that SPLENDID BET shifted ground inwards inside the last 40m checking RANDALSTOWN and affecting its chance.
Mr S Phelan was present at the hearing representing the trainer of SPLENDID BET (Mr T Herlihy) and to assist its driver Mr T Cameron.
The protest was contested.
Rule 869 (8) states:
The Judicial Committee may in addition to any other penalty which may be imposed pursuant to Rule 1003 thereof place any horse which:
(a) May have gained an advantage by any conduct or interference prohibited by any preceding provision of this Rule and/or
(b) May have interfered with,or whose horseman may have interfered with,the progress or chance of any horse or horses-
Immediately after any horse from which it may have gained an advantage or whose chances or progress may have been affected thereby.
Rule 869 (4) states :
No horseman shall during any race do anything which interferes or is likely to interfere with his own horse and/or any other horse or its progress.
The Judges placing were:
1st - 9 Splendid Bet
2nd - 7 Cullies Delight
3rd - 8 Randalstown
4th - 4 Spook
The official margin between 1st and 2nd was 1 length, with a further ¾ length between the 2nd and 3rd horses.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
Mr Muirhead demonstrated the alleged incident using the head-on and side-on films available.
He identified the winning horse SPLENDID BET, driven by Mr Cameron, as being 4 horses wide in the home straight. RANDALSTOWN, driven by Mr MacKinnon, was on its inside. Both horses were clearly running on while the leading horse with approximately 40-50m to run, CULLIES DELIGHT was being driven out.
Mr Muirhead alleged that at a point about 40m from the finish, Mr MacKinnon on RANDALSTOWN was forced to take severe corrective action as a result of SPLENDID BET running in checking both RANDALSTOWN and CULLIES DELIGHT inside it. He stated that the finishing margin between 1st and 2nd was 1 length, and there was ¾ length between the 2nd and 3rd horses. He said that the Stewards felt that the 3rd horse RANDALSTOWN would have finished in a better position if that interference had not taken place.
Mr MacKinnon told the Committee that his horse RANDALSTOWN had been parked 3 wide since about the 900m mark. He added that the horse had momentum as it approached the finish and he had to take evasive action when the horse on his outer-SPLENDID BET-had run inwards onto him.
In response to a question from the Committee, Mr MacKinnon said that his horse had done a lot of work in the latter part of the race and while he could not be certain he felt that he could ‘possibly’ have finished 2nd if he had not been checked 30-40m from the finish.
Mr Z Butcher, assisting Mr MacKinnon, said that the horse RANDALSTOWN may have over-reacted to the inwards movement from SPLENDID BET. He said that Mr Cameron had corrected SPLENDID BET and that in his opinion that horse had only run in a ‘wee bit’,and it appeared to him that SPLENDID BET had the better of RANDALSTOWN when this incident occurred. He said it was too close to the line to say if RANDALSTOWN would have finished 2nd.
Mr T Hall, trainer of RANDALSTOWN, said that his horse was gaining momentum at the time the incident took place but as it was close to the finish it was hard to say if it affected his horse.
Mr T Cameron, driver of SPLENDID BET, said it was obvious that his horse had run in, but he felt that the other horse had over-reacted and that he had straightened his runner immediately. He did not believe his horse had affected RANDALSTOWN's chances.
Mr S Phelan, appearing for trainer Mr T Herlihy, said that although there was movement from SPLENDID BET it was really late in the race, and that as the other horse (RANDALSTOWN) had ‘peaked’ it was never going to run 2nd and the interference had made no difference to the finishing positions.
In summary Mr Muirhead stated that the Stewards felt it was clear that RANDALSTOWN was gaining on CULLIES DELIGHT towards the finish and that Mr MacKinnon was clearly unable to drive the horse out in the final stages as he had to ‘grab hold of’ his horse.
reasonsfordecision:
It was clear to the Committee that there was inwards movement from SPLENDID BET at about the 40m mark, however Mr Cameron had corrected the horse immediately. It was also clear that SPLENDID BET was finishing stronger than RANDALSTOWN who may also have over-reacted to the pressure from outside it.
The Committee felt that given the proximity of the finishing post at the time, the chances of RANDALSTOWN were not affected by the movement of SPLENDID BET.
Decision:
The protest was dismissed.
It was ordered that the Judges placings would stand and that dividends and stakes be paid accordingly.
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Protest
Rules: Rule 869(4) and Rule 869 (8)
Informant: Mr JM Muirhead - Stipendiary Steward
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent: Mr S Phelan - Open Horseman assisting Mr Cameron and representing the trainer of SPLENDID BET, Mr J MacKinnon - Junior Horseman driver of RANDALSTOWN, Mr Z Butcher - Senior Horseman assisting Mr MacKinnon, Mr T Hall - Trainer of RANDALSTOWN, Mr T Vine - Trainer employer of Mr MacKinnon
Respondent: Mr T Cameron - Junior Horseman driver of SPLENDID BET
StipendSteward:
raceid: 061000d682442d0a7c2af48f3b859261
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: R8
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: 843f50918975e750897d4543694c4539
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 22/08/2013
meet_title: Cambridge HRC - 22 August 2013
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: cambridge-hrc
meet_racingtype: harness-racing
meet_chair: AGodsalve
meet_pm1: BScott
meet_pm2: none
name: Cambridge HRC