Matamata RC 16 September 2015 – R 8 (instigating a protest) – Chair, Mr A Dooley
ID: JCA13471
Code:
Thoroughbred
Meet Title:
Racing Matamata - 16 September 2015
Meet Chair:
ADooley
Race Date:
2015/09/16
Race Number:
R8
Decision:
The protest is dismissed and the Judge's placing’s shall stand. The Committee authorised the payment of stakes and dividends in accordance with its decision.
Facts:
Following the running of race 8, Mitavite 2000, an Information was filed Instigating a Protest pursuant to Rule 642(1). The Informant, Mr Tait, alleged that THE SHACKLER or its rider placed 1st by the Judge interfered with the chances of LUCKY DESIRE placed 4th by the Judge.
The interference was alleged to have occurred in the final straight.
The Judge's placing were as follows:
1st No. 2 THE SHACKLER
2nd No. 5 HIGH TAIL IT
3rd No. 1 FORBIDDEN
4th No. 7 LUCKY DESIRE
The official margins were a nose, a long head and 3 ¼ lengths.
Rule 642(1) 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”.
All connections present acknowledged they understood the Rule.
Submissions for Decision:
Mr Tait submitted it was self - explanatory on the video footage that LUCKY DESIRE was stopped in his tracks near the 100 metres when THE SHACKLER moved out. He conceded that the margin between the 2 horses at the finish was 3 ½ lengths.
Ms Spratt submitted that her horse was a grinder and it lost all momentum when THE SHACKLER moved out. She acknowledged there was a long margin between the two horses at the finish.
Mr Dromgool submitted that although his horse moved out LUCKY DESIRE was never going to beat THE SHACKLER.
Ms Schwerin submitted that all the horses were grinding away at the time the interference occurred. She identified that FORBIDDEN contributed to the incident when it shifted in. She added that THE SHACKLER was always going to beat LUCKY DESIRE.
Mr Jones submitted that it was obvious that interference occurred near the 100 metres. He said given the margin at the finish the Stewards were not convinced LUCKY DESIRE would have beaten THE SHACKLER.
Reasons for Decision:
The Committee carefully considered all submissions presented and reviewed the video footage. It was clear near the 100 metres THE SHACKLER moved out and caused interference to LUCKY DESIRE. However, it was noticeable over the final 100 metres THE SHACKLER drew clear to win the race and LUCKY DESIRE visibly lost ground to finish a substantial 3 ½ lengths away.
After taking into account all the above factors the Committee is clearly not satisfied that LUCKY DESIRE would have beaten THE SHACKLER had such interference not occurred.
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: 3b516c0d845ad81e1f3f13c2f46e7694
informantnumber: A4573
horsename: THE SHACKLER
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: 17/09/2015
hearing_title: Matamata RC 16 September 2015 - R 8 (instigating a protest) - Chair, Mr A Dooley
charge:
facts:
Following the running of race 8, Mitavite 2000, an Information was filed Instigating a Protest pursuant to Rule 642(1). The Informant, Mr Tait, alleged that THE SHACKLER or its rider placed 1st by the Judge interfered with the chances of LUCKY DESIRE placed 4th by the Judge.
The interference was alleged to have occurred in the final straight.
The Judge's placing were as follows:
1st No. 2 THE SHACKLER
2nd No. 5 HIGH TAIL IT
3rd No. 1 FORBIDDEN
4th No. 7 LUCKY DESIRE
The official margins were a nose, a long head and 3 ¼ lengths.
Rule 642(1) 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”.
All connections present acknowledged they understood the Rule.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
Mr Tait submitted it was self - explanatory on the video footage that LUCKY DESIRE was stopped in his tracks near the 100 metres when THE SHACKLER moved out. He conceded that the margin between the 2 horses at the finish was 3 ½ lengths.
Ms Spratt submitted that her horse was a grinder and it lost all momentum when THE SHACKLER moved out. She acknowledged there was a long margin between the two horses at the finish.
Mr Dromgool submitted that although his horse moved out LUCKY DESIRE was never going to beat THE SHACKLER.
Ms Schwerin submitted that all the horses were grinding away at the time the interference occurred. She identified that FORBIDDEN contributed to the incident when it shifted in. She added that THE SHACKLER was always going to beat LUCKY DESIRE.
Mr Jones submitted that it was obvious that interference occurred near the 100 metres. He said given the margin at the finish the Stewards were not convinced LUCKY DESIRE would have beaten THE SHACKLER.
reasonsfordecision:
The Committee carefully considered all submissions presented and reviewed the video footage. It was clear near the 100 metres THE SHACKLER moved out and caused interference to LUCKY DESIRE. However, it was noticeable over the final 100 metres THE SHACKLER drew clear to win the race and LUCKY DESIRE visibly lost ground to finish a substantial 3 ½ lengths away.
After taking into account all the above factors the Committee is clearly not satisfied that LUCKY DESIRE would have beaten THE SHACKLER had such interference not occurred.
Decision:
The protest is dismissed and the Judge's placing’s shall stand. The Committee authorised the payment of stakes and dividends in accordance with its decision.
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Protest
Rules: 642(1)
Informant: Mr A Tait - Trainer of LUCKY DESIRE
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent: Ms S Spratt - Rider of LUCKY DESIRE, Ms A Schwerin - Rider of THE SHACKLER, Mr B Jones - Stipendiary Steward, Mr N Harris - Apprentice Jockey Mentor
Respondent: Mr M Dromgool - Trainer of THE SHACKLER
StipendSteward:
raceid: ba394fda097bcb6f2971fddcdbcf72e7
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: 128535134917a3035203fa724070b84e
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 16/09/2015
meet_title: Racing Matamata - 16 September 2015
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: racing-matamata
meet_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
meet_chair: ADooley
meet_pm1: none
meet_pm2: none
name: Racing Matamata