Marlborough HRC 24 April 2014 – R 2 (instigating a protest)
ID: JCA15066
Meet Title:
Marlborough HRC - 24 April 2014
Meet Chair:
PWilliams
Meet Committee Member 1:
SChing
Race Date:
2014/04/24
Race Number:
R 2
Decision:
The protest is upheld and “Billy Jack is related to 13th. The amended and now confirmed placings are:-
1st - Rosetta Stone (8)
2nd - Beta B Quick (2)
3rd - Will He Rule (12)
4th - Johnny Mick (6)
5th - Franco Envoy (13)
Authorisation is given for the payment of all dividends and stakes.
Facts:
Following the running of race 2, the “Nigel and Trevor Perry Mobile Pace” Information A6236 instigating a protest was filed by Stipendiary Steward Mr M Zarb alleging a breach of Rule 869(8)(b) by “Billy Jack” driven by Mr D Stratford. The information stated that “Horse number 10 placed 3rd by the Judge interfered with the chances of horse 3 which was unplaced (and that) Billy Jack shifted in final stages crowds (sic) Flickering Ember which broke”.
The judge’s placings were:-
1st - Rosetta Stone (8)
2nd - Beta B Quick (2)
3rd - Billy Jack (10) dead heating with Will He Rule (12)
4th - Johnny Mick (6)
5th - Franco Envoy (13)
Rule 869(8) states:- The Judicial Committee may in addition to any other penalty imposed pursuant to Rule 1003 thereof place any horse which:
b) may have interfered with, or whose horseman may have interfered with, the progress or chance of any other 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”.
There was a significant delay in commencing the protest hearing due to the unavailability of the connections of both horses involved. The trainers of “Billy Jack” were also not on course and Mr Stratford confirmed that he was happy to represent himself.
Submissions for Decision:
Mr Zarb used the head-on film of the race to show that as the horses were approaching the final 150m of the race ”Billy Jack was racing wide on the track with “Flickering Ember” racing inside and Behind “Billy Jack” and “Will He Rule” running on the inside of “Flickering Ember”. Mr Zarb highlighted the gap that was evident between “Jacks Boy” and “Flickering Ember” and said that as “Flickering Ember” commenced to move into it “Billy Jack” moved in causing “Flickering Ember” to touch a wheel and break. Mr Zarb then showed the side-on film and said that “Flickering Ember” was inside of “Billy Jack” and entitled to be there when “Billy Jack” moved in.
Mr Woodward initially said “Flickering Ember” galloped before he moved into the gap and no contact was made. He then said he had to take hold of his horse as he had run of room when “Billy Jack” had moved in but again he emphasised no contact was made after his horse galloped. He confirmed in answer to a question from the Committee that “Billy Jack” had not caused him to break. Notwithstanding that comment, Mr Woodward then said he had taken hold because Mr Stratford “came in a bit” and again said there was no contact before his horse broke. He also confirmed that initially there was a big enough gap for him to move into but the cause of him breaking was that he ran out of room and took evasive action.
Mr Stratford said both horses were side by side but no contact was made prior to “Flickering Ember” breaking. He said the horse to the inside of “Flickering Ember” – “Will He Rule” – had moved in a bit and that, combined with his horse shifting in a bit, had caused Mr Woodward to have to take a hold causing him to break. He said in his view there was no contact between “Billy Jack” and “Flickering Ember” until after the latter had galloped.
Mr Zarb, in summing up, noted Mr Woodward had said he had to take a hold because he received crowding from his outside which in turn led to “Flickering Ember” breaking. Mr Zarb said he did not believe “Will He Rule” moved out during the incident as stated by Mr Stratford, and therefore that horse played no part in “Flickering Ember” breaking.
Reasons for Decision:
The Committee has reviewed the films of the incident several times. It is clear that approximately 150m from the finish line a gap was available on the inside of “Billy Jack” for “Flickering Ember” to move into. As that horse commenced to move into the gap the head of “Billy Jack” was turned slightly inwards and the gap began to close. This tightening of the gap caused “Flickering Ember” to be placed in restricted room which in turn meant Mr Woodward had to take abrupt and evasive action causing his own horse to break. The only reason for “Flickering Ember” breaking was the fact that a gap that was initially big enough for him to move into partially closed leaving Mr Woodward no alternative but to take a hold.
The Committee does not believe “Will He Rule” moved out during the incident and played any part in the breaking of “Flickering Ember”.
Finally, whilst noting the comments of both drivers that no contact was made between them during the incident that cannot be a reason for considering the dismissal of this protest given the evidence presented by Mr Woodward. Given he was initially “confused” about what happened, it is clear to the Committee that the inward movement of “Billy Jack” caused “Flickering Ember to break and lose all chance.
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: a26e06f66ca47fdac85fd562b2a090a5
informantnumber: A6236
horsename: BILLY JACK
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: 28/04/2014
hearing_title: Marlborough HRC 24 April 2014 - R 2 (instigating a protest)
charge:
facts:
Following the running of race 2, the “Nigel and Trevor Perry Mobile Pace” Information A6236 instigating a protest was filed by Stipendiary Steward Mr M Zarb alleging a breach of Rule 869(8)(b) by “Billy Jack” driven by Mr D Stratford. The information stated that “Horse number 10 placed 3rd by the Judge interfered with the chances of horse 3 which was unplaced (and that) Billy Jack shifted in final stages crowds (sic) Flickering Ember which broke”.
The judge’s placings were:-
1st - Rosetta Stone (8)
2nd - Beta B Quick (2)
3rd - Billy Jack (10) dead heating with Will He Rule (12)
4th - Johnny Mick (6)
5th - Franco Envoy (13)
Rule 869(8) states:- The Judicial Committee may in addition to any other penalty imposed pursuant to Rule 1003 thereof place any horse which:
b) may have interfered with, or whose horseman may have interfered with, the progress or chance of any other 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”.
There was a significant delay in commencing the protest hearing due to the unavailability of the connections of both horses involved. The trainers of “Billy Jack” were also not on course and Mr Stratford confirmed that he was happy to represent himself.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
Mr Zarb used the head-on film of the race to show that as the horses were approaching the final 150m of the race ”Billy Jack was racing wide on the track with “Flickering Ember” racing inside and Behind “Billy Jack” and “Will He Rule” running on the inside of “Flickering Ember”. Mr Zarb highlighted the gap that was evident between “Jacks Boy” and “Flickering Ember” and said that as “Flickering Ember” commenced to move into it “Billy Jack” moved in causing “Flickering Ember” to touch a wheel and break. Mr Zarb then showed the side-on film and said that “Flickering Ember” was inside of “Billy Jack” and entitled to be there when “Billy Jack” moved in.
Mr Woodward initially said “Flickering Ember” galloped before he moved into the gap and no contact was made. He then said he had to take hold of his horse as he had run of room when “Billy Jack” had moved in but again he emphasised no contact was made after his horse galloped. He confirmed in answer to a question from the Committee that “Billy Jack” had not caused him to break. Notwithstanding that comment, Mr Woodward then said he had taken hold because Mr Stratford “came in a bit” and again said there was no contact before his horse broke. He also confirmed that initially there was a big enough gap for him to move into but the cause of him breaking was that he ran out of room and took evasive action.
Mr Stratford said both horses were side by side but no contact was made prior to “Flickering Ember” breaking. He said the horse to the inside of “Flickering Ember” – “Will He Rule” – had moved in a bit and that, combined with his horse shifting in a bit, had caused Mr Woodward to have to take a hold causing him to break. He said in his view there was no contact between “Billy Jack” and “Flickering Ember” until after the latter had galloped.
Mr Zarb, in summing up, noted Mr Woodward had said he had to take a hold because he received crowding from his outside which in turn led to “Flickering Ember” breaking. Mr Zarb said he did not believe “Will He Rule” moved out during the incident as stated by Mr Stratford, and therefore that horse played no part in “Flickering Ember” breaking.
reasonsfordecision:
The Committee has reviewed the films of the incident several times. It is clear that approximately 150m from the finish line a gap was available on the inside of “Billy Jack” for “Flickering Ember” to move into. As that horse commenced to move into the gap the head of “Billy Jack” was turned slightly inwards and the gap began to close. This tightening of the gap caused “Flickering Ember” to be placed in restricted room which in turn meant Mr Woodward had to take abrupt and evasive action causing his own horse to break. The only reason for “Flickering Ember” breaking was the fact that a gap that was initially big enough for him to move into partially closed leaving Mr Woodward no alternative but to take a hold.
The Committee does not believe “Will He Rule” moved out during the incident and played any part in the breaking of “Flickering Ember”.
Finally, whilst noting the comments of both drivers that no contact was made between them during the incident that cannot be a reason for considering the dismissal of this protest given the evidence presented by Mr Woodward. Given he was initially “confused” about what happened, it is clear to the Committee that the inward movement of “Billy Jack” caused “Flickering Ember to break and lose all chance.
Decision:
The protest is upheld and “Billy Jack is related to 13th. The amended and now confirmed placings are:-
1st - Rosetta Stone (8)
2nd - Beta B Quick (2)
3rd - Will He Rule (12)
4th - Johnny Mick (6)
5th - Franco Envoy (13)
Authorisation is given for the payment of all dividends and stakes.
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Protest
Rules: 869(8)9(b)
Informant: Mr M Zarb - Stipendiary Steward
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent: Mr C Woodward - Open Horseman & Driver of "Flickering Ember", Mr R Neal - Co-Chief Stipendiary Steward, Mr S Wallis - Stipendiary Steward
Respondent: Mr D Stratford- Junior Horseman & Driver of "Billy Jack"
StipendSteward:
raceid: 6ae51855149d16210a990cd045d846fb
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: R 2
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: 0e26d2ecf363ac15030af01f4be3929a
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 24/04/2014
meet_title: Marlborough HRC - 24 April 2014
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: marlborough-hrc
meet_racingtype: harness-racing
meet_chair: PWilliams
meet_pm1: SChing
meet_pm2: none
name: Marlborough HRC