Matamata RC 5 July 2017 – R 5 (instigating a protest) – Chair, Mr A Dooley
ID: JCA11280
Code:
Thoroughbred
Meet Title:
Matamata RC - 5 July 2017
Meet Chair:
ADooley
Race Date:
2017/07/05
Race Number:
R5
Decision:
The protest was 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 5, Broadway Motel 1400, an Information was filed Instigating a Protest pursuant to Rule 642(1). The Informant, Mrs Thornton, alleged that IL ROSSO or its rider placed 1st by the Judge interfered with the chances of her horse CAPITAL placed 2nd by the Judge.
The interference was alleged to have occurred in the final straight.
The Judge's placing were as follows:
1st - No. 9 IL ROSSO
2nd - No. 4 CAPITAL
3rd - No. 6 KARAKA RED
4th - No. 3 OUR JOCKO
The official margin between 1st and 2nd was a long head
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 that they understood the Rule.
Submissions for Decision:
Mrs Thornton stated that in the final straight IL ROSSO shifted in and made contact with CAPITAL on 2 occasions which put her mount off balance. She said that IL ROSSO forced CAPITAL in about 10 horse widths and if the interference had not occurred CAPITAL would have won the race.
Mr Stead said that CAPITAL was entitled to stay on the preferred ground out wide on the track. He said that IL ROSSO was “boring” in on CAPITAL in the final straight. He stated that CAPITAL was a horse that responded well when ridden with vigour. He was of the view that the interference cost his horse more than the long head margin at the finish.
Mr Parkes said at the top of the straight CAPITAL bumped IL ROSSO and that forced his mount wider on the track. He said it was a “no brainer” that IL ROSSO wanted to “lug in” in the home straight. He said that he had done his best to straighten IL ROSSO and the “touch” between the 2 horses was minor. He said that if his horse had run straight it would have won by 1 length and advised that he was unable to use his whip for at least 100 metres. In conclusion he said that IL ROSSO clearly had CAPITAL covered at the finish.
Mr Priscott said that he was happy with Mr Parkes interpretation of the alleged interference and had nothing to add.
Mr Jones on behalf of the Stewards said that there was some merit in the protest. He said that near the 400 metres CAPITAL shifted out to meet IL ROSSO. He said that over the final 300 metres IL ROSSO lay in significantly which forced CAPITAL inwards. He said that it was up to the Committee to decide whether the interference cost CAPITAL more than the long head margin between the 2 horses at the finish.
Reasons for Decision:
The Committee carefully considered all the submissions presented and studied the video footage. Near the 400 metres and again at the 300 metres CAPITAL shifted out wider out the track and made minor contact with IL ROSSO. It was obvious that over the final 300 metres of the race IL ROSSO gradually lay in which dictated CAPITAL inwards. It was evident that Mr Parkes stopped riding IL ROSSO on several occasions and he turned his horses head out a few times in an effort to relieve the inward pressure. Mrs Thornton was only briefly inconvenienced from using her whip when the 2 horses made slight contact and it was apparent that CAPITAL’s momentum was not impeded. It was clear that despite being ridden with a lot of vigour CAPITAL was not taking any ground off IL ROSSO in the home straight.
The Committee was of the opinion that CAPITAL would not have finished ahead of IL ROSSO 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: 1b470dde30c65cba235092f8814d62e1
informantnumber: A7316
horsename: IL ROSSO
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: 06/07/2017
hearing_title: Matamata RC 5 July 2017 - R 5 (instigating a protest) - Chair, Mr A Dooley
charge:
facts:
Following the running of race 5, Broadway Motel 1400, an Information was filed Instigating a Protest pursuant to Rule 642(1). The Informant, Mrs Thornton, alleged that IL ROSSO or its rider placed 1st by the Judge interfered with the chances of her horse CAPITAL placed 2nd by the Judge.
The interference was alleged to have occurred in the final straight.
The Judge's placing were as follows:
1st - No. 9 IL ROSSO
2nd - No. 4 CAPITAL
3rd - No. 6 KARAKA RED
4th - No. 3 OUR JOCKO
The official margin between 1st and 2nd was a long head
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 that they understood the Rule.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
Mrs Thornton stated that in the final straight IL ROSSO shifted in and made contact with CAPITAL on 2 occasions which put her mount off balance. She said that IL ROSSO forced CAPITAL in about 10 horse widths and if the interference had not occurred CAPITAL would have won the race.
Mr Stead said that CAPITAL was entitled to stay on the preferred ground out wide on the track. He said that IL ROSSO was “boring” in on CAPITAL in the final straight. He stated that CAPITAL was a horse that responded well when ridden with vigour. He was of the view that the interference cost his horse more than the long head margin at the finish.
Mr Parkes said at the top of the straight CAPITAL bumped IL ROSSO and that forced his mount wider on the track. He said it was a “no brainer” that IL ROSSO wanted to “lug in” in the home straight. He said that he had done his best to straighten IL ROSSO and the “touch” between the 2 horses was minor. He said that if his horse had run straight it would have won by 1 length and advised that he was unable to use his whip for at least 100 metres. In conclusion he said that IL ROSSO clearly had CAPITAL covered at the finish.
Mr Priscott said that he was happy with Mr Parkes interpretation of the alleged interference and had nothing to add.
Mr Jones on behalf of the Stewards said that there was some merit in the protest. He said that near the 400 metres CAPITAL shifted out to meet IL ROSSO. He said that over the final 300 metres IL ROSSO lay in significantly which forced CAPITAL inwards. He said that it was up to the Committee to decide whether the interference cost CAPITAL more than the long head margin between the 2 horses at the finish.
reasonsfordecision:
The Committee carefully considered all the submissions presented and studied the video footage. Near the 400 metres and again at the 300 metres CAPITAL shifted out wider out the track and made minor contact with IL ROSSO. It was obvious that over the final 300 metres of the race IL ROSSO gradually lay in which dictated CAPITAL inwards. It was evident that Mr Parkes stopped riding IL ROSSO on several occasions and he turned his horses head out a few times in an effort to relieve the inward pressure. Mrs Thornton was only briefly inconvenienced from using her whip when the 2 horses made slight contact and it was apparent that CAPITAL’s momentum was not impeded. It was clear that despite being ridden with a lot of vigour CAPITAL was not taking any ground off IL ROSSO in the home straight.
The Committee was of the opinion that CAPITAL would not have finished ahead of IL ROSSO had such interference not occurred.
Decision:
The protest was 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: Mrs T Thornton - Rider of CAPITAL
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent: Mr R Priscott - Trainer of IL ROSSO, Mr M Stead - Co owner of CAPITAL, Mr B Jones - Stipendiary Steward, Mr M Williamson - Senior Stipendiary Steward
Respondent: Mr J Parkes - Rider of IL ROSSO
StipendSteward:
raceid: 269b0328a402c9bf6f335600c0472c68
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: R5
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: 9f90ff26eaf340ff3d5211ba1d6c79ff
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 05/07/2017
meet_title: Matamata RC - 5 July 2017
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: matamata-rc
meet_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
meet_chair: ADooley
meet_pm1: none
meet_pm2: none
name: Matamata RC