Waipa RC – 7 July 2007 – Race 7

hearingid: c5410cf843c45bd003e7ab0fc251db27

informantnumber:

horsename:

hearing_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing

startdate: 07/07/2007

newcharge:

plea:

penaltyrequired:

decisiondate: no date provided

hearing_title: Waipa RC - 7 July 2007 - Race 7

charge:

facts:

appealdecision:

isappeal:

submissionsfordecision:

reasonsfordecision:

Decision:

Following race 7 D Walsh rider of the second horse FLOOR PLAY protested against the winner HARVEST THE GOLD ridden by N Harris. The protest was brought pursuant to Rule 876(1).

Following race 7 D Walsh rider of the second horse FLOOR PLAY protested against the winner HARVEST THE GOLD ridden by N Harris. The protest was brought pursuant to Rule 876(1).

All parties and connections were notified of the hearing.

The informant, Mr D Walsh, alleged that HARVEST THE GOLD or its rider placed first by the Judge interfered with the chances of FLOOR PLAY placed second by the Judge. The interference occurred in the final straight.

The Judge's placings were HARVEST THE GOLD (number 5) first, FLOOR PLAY (number 1) second, and MATTHEW (number 9) third.

The margin between first and second was a head.

Present during the hearing were the connections/trainer of HARVEST THE GOLD and the connections/trainer of FLOOR PLAY.

Mr D Walsh gave evidence and said he was initially on the inside and behind Mr Harris' mount on entering the home straight. He then improved and moved up on the outside of HARVEST THE GOLD when that horse moved out. He said this caused him to lose momentum. He then alleged a second outward movement from HARVEST THE GOLD. Mrs Cooper confirmed Mr Walsh's evidence.

Mr N Harris, rider of HARVEST THE GOLD, said there was no contact at any stage between the two horses. He said there was slight outward movement from his mount, but it did not affect the outcome.

Mr Baker said Mr Walsh hit the horse 24 times and at no stage stopped riding.

Mr Oatham, Stipendiary Steward, gave an assessment of the alleged incident. He said there was interference at about the 150 metre mark when HARVEST THE GOLD dictated FLOOR PLAY outwards, but thereafter there was always a gap between the horses.

Rule 876(1) requires us to ask first whether interference occurred, and then, if so, whether that interference has cost the horse interfered with a chance of finishing in a better position. We are satisfied having viewed the films and listening to the evidence that slight interference occurred when HARVEST THE GOLD moved out.

We do not believe the chances of FLOOR PLAY finishing in a better position were affected. Accordingly the protest is dismissed and the Judge's placings stand.

W Dollimore                                                                          R Seabrook

CHAIRMAN

sumissionsforpenalty:

reasonsforpenalty:

penalty:

hearing_type: Old Hearing

Rules: 876.1

Informant:

JockeysandTrainer:

Otherperson:

PersonPresent:

Respondent:

StipendSteward:

raceid:

race_expapproval:

racecancelled:

race_noreport:

race_emailed1:

race_emailed2:

race_title:

submittochair:

race_expappcomment:

race_km:

race_otherexp:

race_chair:

race_pm1:

race_pm2:

meetid:

meet_expapproval:

meet_noreport:

waitingforpublication:

meet_emailed1:

meet_emailed2:

meetdate: no date provided

meet_title:

meet_expappcomment:

meet_km:

meet_otherexp:

tracklocation:

meet_racingtype:

meet_chair:

meet_pm1:

meet_pm2:

name: