Waikato RC 15 December 2012 – R 2 (instigating a protest)
ID: JCA14131
Code:
Thoroughbred
Meet Title:
Waikato RC - 15 December 2012
Meet Chair:
ADooley
Meet Committee Member 1:
RSeabrook
Race Date:
2012/12/15
Race Number:
R2
Decision:
Accordingly, the protest is dismissed and the judge's placings shall stand. In conclusion we order the payment of stakes and dividends.
Facts:
Following the running of Race 2 an information Instigating a Protest was filed pursuant to rule 642. The Informant, Miss Spratt, alleged that HUFFER placed 2nd by the judge interfered with the chances of her mount COOL STORM placed 3rd by the judge.
The judge's placing were as follows:
1st No. 5 OPEN N SHUT
2nd No. 9 HUFFER
3rd No. 6 COOL STORM
4th No. 2 OAK PARK
The official margin between 2nd and 3rd was a short head.
Submissions for Decision:
Miss Spratt demonstrated on the video films that at approximately the 200 metre mark HUFFER pushed out onto her mount COOL STORM. While she conceded her mount may have over reacted to the incident, she submitted that HUFFER gave her mount a decent bump which affected her momentum. She believed that HUFFER gained half a length on her mount, but her mount came back to be a short head away at the finish.
Mr McKee submitted that while it was obvious HUFFER moved out abruptly it did not affect his horse's momentum. He said it was a 50/50 call.
Mr Coleman submitted that TALE TO TELL, who was racing directly in front of him, shifted out slightly which forced him to move out to gain an uninterrupted run. He believed had this not occurred there would be no protest. He further submitted that Miss Spratt never stopped riding her mount at any stage.
Mr Noble submitted that the outward shift of HUFFER was marginal. He believed this was caused by TALE TO TELL drifting out forcing Mr Coleman to change his running line. He said that Miss Spratt never stopped hitting her mount in the final straight.
Mr Oatham when asked for his assessment of the incident pointed out to the committee that the outward movement of TALE TO TELL was irrelevant to the protest decision. He said there was a marginal run available for HUFFER which Mr Coleman took, this resulted in COOL STORM receiving contact as a consequence. He concluded by saying in his opinion there was some doubt as to whether this contact had any bearing on the final result and the benefit of doubt should be given to respondent.
Miss Spratt in summing up said she was pushed out 3 to 4 horse widths. She submitted if she had not received the bump from HUFFER she would have finished in front of that runner.
Reasons for Decision:
The committee carefully considered all of the submissions presented and reviewed the video films several times. Upon reviewing the video films we established that at the 200 metre mark HUFFER has come out and bumped COOL STORM forcing her wider on the track. However, it was clear on the films that Miss Spratt never stopped riding her mount forward with the whip over the final 200 metres. It was noticeable that after the bump when the horses were racing on level terms that HUFFER was always holding an advantage over COOL STORM in the run to the finish.
For these reasons we are not satisfied that COOL STORM would have beaten HUFFER if interference had 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: 9c20385158131dd77b52dd7a212ce75f
informantnumber: A4878
horsename: HUFFER
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: 24/11/2012
hearing_title: Waikato RC 15 December 2012 - R 2 (instigating a protest)
charge:
facts:
Following the running of Race 2 an information Instigating a Protest was filed pursuant to rule 642. The Informant, Miss Spratt, alleged that HUFFER placed 2nd by the judge interfered with the chances of her mount COOL STORM placed 3rd by the judge.
The judge's placing were as follows:
1st No. 5 OPEN N SHUT
2nd No. 9 HUFFER
3rd No. 6 COOL STORM
4th No. 2 OAK PARK
The official margin between 2nd and 3rd was a short head.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
Miss Spratt demonstrated on the video films that at approximately the 200 metre mark HUFFER pushed out onto her mount COOL STORM. While she conceded her mount may have over reacted to the incident, she submitted that HUFFER gave her mount a decent bump which affected her momentum. She believed that HUFFER gained half a length on her mount, but her mount came back to be a short head away at the finish.
Mr McKee submitted that while it was obvious HUFFER moved out abruptly it did not affect his horse's momentum. He said it was a 50/50 call.
Mr Coleman submitted that TALE TO TELL, who was racing directly in front of him, shifted out slightly which forced him to move out to gain an uninterrupted run. He believed had this not occurred there would be no protest. He further submitted that Miss Spratt never stopped riding her mount at any stage.
Mr Noble submitted that the outward shift of HUFFER was marginal. He believed this was caused by TALE TO TELL drifting out forcing Mr Coleman to change his running line. He said that Miss Spratt never stopped hitting her mount in the final straight.
Mr Oatham when asked for his assessment of the incident pointed out to the committee that the outward movement of TALE TO TELL was irrelevant to the protest decision. He said there was a marginal run available for HUFFER which Mr Coleman took, this resulted in COOL STORM receiving contact as a consequence. He concluded by saying in his opinion there was some doubt as to whether this contact had any bearing on the final result and the benefit of doubt should be given to respondent.
Miss Spratt in summing up said she was pushed out 3 to 4 horse widths. She submitted if she had not received the bump from HUFFER she would have finished in front of that runner.
reasonsfordecision:
The committee carefully considered all of the submissions presented and reviewed the video films several times. Upon reviewing the video films we established that at the 200 metre mark HUFFER has come out and bumped COOL STORM forcing her wider on the track. However, it was clear on the films that Miss Spratt never stopped riding her mount forward with the whip over the final 200 metres. It was noticeable that after the bump when the horses were racing on level terms that HUFFER was always holding an advantage over COOL STORM in the run to the finish.
For these reasons we are not satisfied that COOL STORM would have beaten HUFFER if interference had not occurred.
Decision:
Accordingly, the protest is dismissed and the judge's placings shall stand. In conclusion we order the payment of stakes and dividends.
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Protest
Rules: 642
Informant: Miss S Spratt - Rider of COOL STORM
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent: Mr J Oatham - Stipendiary Steward, Mr L Noble - representing HUFFER
Respondent: Mr M Coleman - Rider of HUFFER
StipendSteward:
raceid: 0b0e0405bd3fa5cab179fe732503161a
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: 4cbe7a9770acf738e384320775d512a2
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 15/12/2012
meet_title: Waikato RC - 15 December 2012
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: waikato-rc
meet_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
meet_chair: ADooley
meet_pm1: RSeabrook
meet_pm2: none
name: Waikato RC