NZ Metro TC 13 November 2012 – R 2 (instigating a protest)
ID: JCA11141
Meet Title:
NZ Metro TC - 13 November 2012
Meet Chair:
RMcKenzie
Meet Committee Member 1:
JPhelan
Race Date:
2012/11/13
Race Number:
R2
Decision:
The protest was dismissed and it was ordered that dividends and stakes be paid in accordance with the judge’s placings.
Facts:
Following the running of Race 2, Hydroflow Graduation Series (Final) Mobile Pace, an information instigating a protest was filed by Chief Stipendiary Steward, Mr N G McIntyre, on behalf of Licensed Open Driver, Mr J R Dunn, alleging that MOSSDALE CONNER (R T May), placed 1st by the judge, interfered with the chances of FIELD OFFICER, driven by Mr Dunn, inside the last 150 metres of the race.
The judge’s placings were as follows:
1st Mossdale Conner
2nd Field Officer
3rd Condrieu
4th Alex
5th Three Pints
The margin between 1st and 2nd was a half head.
Mr McIntyre informed the Committee that he was named as the Informant on the information form but he had brought the protest on behalf of Mr Dunn.
Mr May was present at the hearing of the information together with Mr & Mrs Hope, trainers of MOSSDALE CONNER.
Rule 869 provides as follows:
(8) 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 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.
Submissions for Decision:
Mr Dunn showed head-on and side-on video replays of the final 200 metres of the race. He pointed out his drive, FIELD OFFICER, being challenged by MOSSDALE CONNER on his outer inside the final 200 metres. He said that, with approximately 150 metres to run, MOSSDALE CONNER, which had “shot past” at the top of the straight, “ducked in”. Mr Dunn said that his cart had “ridden up” on the cart of MOSSDALE CONNER, costing his horse momentum. He had got the horse going again and was beaten by a half head. He acknowledged that he had been able to keep driving.
Mr G P Hope submitted that Mr Dunn had moved out at the top of the straight to give room to another runner. He further submitted that, at no stage, did Mr Dunn stop driving FIELD OFFICER. He had plenty of opportunity to get past MOSSDALE CONNER. Mrs Hope said that Mr May had to stop driving MOSSDALE CONNER to straighten it. She submitted that FIELD OFFICER was “flat”.
Mr May stated that he was only marginally in front of FIELD OFFICER at the top of the straight and had remained that way down the straight. The two horses were always going to run 1st and 2nd, Mr May submitted. He admitted that his horse had “run in a little bit” but he had to stop driving and lost ground as a consequence. The carts of the two horses had “touched”. He said that it was doubtful whether FIELD OFFICER would have beaten his horse.
Mr McIntyre was asked to comment on the evidence. He said that Mr Dunn had not had to stop driving his horse. He said that he believed that any interference was “minimal”. He did not believe that the chances of FIELD OFFICER had been affected, but that was for the Committee to determine.
Reasons for Decision:
It was agreed by the parties that MOSSDALE CONNER had shifted ground inwards briefly with approximately 150 metres to run and, further, that the sulkies of it and FIELD OFFICER had touched briefly. The test of whether the progress or chance of the latter was affected is in this case, essentially, would FIELD OFFICER have beaten MOSSDALE CONNER but for any interference it may have received? In that regard, the Committee was satisfied that any interference was very minimal and, in any event, the chances of FIELD OFFICER were not affected as that horse was not, in the Committee’s view, deprived of a winning chance, notwithstanding the margin of a half head. Mr Dunn was able to keep driving his horse at all relevant times and it did appear to the Committee, from its observation of the replays, that it was unlikely to have beaten MOSSDALE CONNER.
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: 1ef3d596afac28ee5eedf0b045a78c1c
informantnumber: A5275
horsename: Mossdale Conner
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: 30/10/2012
hearing_title: NZ Metro TC 13 November 2012 - R 2 (instigating a protest)
charge:
facts:
Following the running of Race 2, Hydroflow Graduation Series (Final) Mobile Pace, an information instigating a protest was filed by Chief Stipendiary Steward, Mr N G McIntyre, on behalf of Licensed Open Driver, Mr J R Dunn, alleging that MOSSDALE CONNER (R T May), placed 1st by the judge, interfered with the chances of FIELD OFFICER, driven by Mr Dunn, inside the last 150 metres of the race.
The judge’s placings were as follows:
1st Mossdale Conner
2nd Field Officer
3rd Condrieu
4th Alex
5th Three Pints
The margin between 1st and 2nd was a half head.
Mr McIntyre informed the Committee that he was named as the Informant on the information form but he had brought the protest on behalf of Mr Dunn.
Mr May was present at the hearing of the information together with Mr & Mrs Hope, trainers of MOSSDALE CONNER.
Rule 869 provides as follows:
(8) 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 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.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
Mr Dunn showed head-on and side-on video replays of the final 200 metres of the race. He pointed out his drive, FIELD OFFICER, being challenged by MOSSDALE CONNER on his outer inside the final 200 metres. He said that, with approximately 150 metres to run, MOSSDALE CONNER, which had “shot past” at the top of the straight, “ducked in”. Mr Dunn said that his cart had “ridden up” on the cart of MOSSDALE CONNER, costing his horse momentum. He had got the horse going again and was beaten by a half head. He acknowledged that he had been able to keep driving.
Mr G P Hope submitted that Mr Dunn had moved out at the top of the straight to give room to another runner. He further submitted that, at no stage, did Mr Dunn stop driving FIELD OFFICER. He had plenty of opportunity to get past MOSSDALE CONNER. Mrs Hope said that Mr May had to stop driving MOSSDALE CONNER to straighten it. She submitted that FIELD OFFICER was “flat”.
Mr May stated that he was only marginally in front of FIELD OFFICER at the top of the straight and had remained that way down the straight. The two horses were always going to run 1st and 2nd, Mr May submitted. He admitted that his horse had “run in a little bit” but he had to stop driving and lost ground as a consequence. The carts of the two horses had “touched”. He said that it was doubtful whether FIELD OFFICER would have beaten his horse.
Mr McIntyre was asked to comment on the evidence. He said that Mr Dunn had not had to stop driving his horse. He said that he believed that any interference was “minimal”. He did not believe that the chances of FIELD OFFICER had been affected, but that was for the Committee to determine.
reasonsfordecision:
It was agreed by the parties that MOSSDALE CONNER had shifted ground inwards briefly with approximately 150 metres to run and, further, that the sulkies of it and FIELD OFFICER had touched briefly. The test of whether the progress or chance of the latter was affected is in this case, essentially, would FIELD OFFICER have beaten MOSSDALE CONNER but for any interference it may have received? In that regard, the Committee was satisfied that any interference was very minimal and, in any event, the chances of FIELD OFFICER were not affected as that horse was not, in the Committee’s view, deprived of a winning chance, notwithstanding the margin of a half head. Mr Dunn was able to keep driving his horse at all relevant times and it did appear to the Committee, from its observation of the replays, that it was unlikely to have beaten MOSSDALE CONNER.
Decision:
The protest was dismissed and it was ordered that dividends and stakes be paid in accordance with the judge’s placings.
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Protest
Rules: 869 (8)
Informant: N G McIntyre, Chief Stipendiary Steward
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent: J R Dunn, Licensed Open Driver, R T May
Respondent: G P & N M Hope, Licensed Public Trainers
StipendSteward:
raceid: 3187891b93d388ec3c021f97220e9df4
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: R2
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: e960e35ef61555fe0979d8a7c76dafd6
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 13/11/2012
meet_title: NZ Metro TC - 13 November 2012
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: nz-metro-tc
meet_racingtype: harness-racing
meet_chair: RMcKenzie
meet_pm1: JPhelan
meet_pm2: none
name: NZ Metro TC