Whangarei RC 11 July 2015 – R 5 (instigating a protest)
ID: JCA14333
Code:
Thoroughbred
Meet Title:
Whangarei RC - 11 July 2015
Meet Chair:
RSeabrook
Meet Committee Member 1:
AGodsalve
Race Date:
2015/07/11
Race Number:
Race 5
Decision:
Accordingly, after taking all the above into account, the protest is up held and the final placings are as follows:
No 5 FIAMETTE 1st
No 7 SUMMER'S DAY 2nd
No 6 ZAFRENZY 3rd
No 1 BIG VOICES 4th
The committee orders the payment of stakes and dividends accordingly.
Facts:
Following race 5, the NZB Insurance Pearl Series race 1600, a protest was lodged by the informant, Mr M Williamson. He alleged that SUMMER'S DAY, placed 1st by the judge, interfered with the chances of FIAMETTE, placed 2nd by the judge. He submitted the interference occurred in the final straight.
The judge's placings were as follows:
No 7 SUMMER'S DAY 1st
No 5 FIAMETTE 2nd
No 6 ZAFRENZY 3rd
No 1 BIG VOICES 4th
The margin between first and second was a nose.
Rule 642 (1) reads: 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.
Submissions for Decision:
Mr Williamson demonstrated the video films pointing out SUMMER'S DAY (B Hutton) racing in a 3 wide position with FIAMETTE on her outside and approximately a length behind. He said at the 200 metres SUMMER'S DAY which was under pressure shifted out towards FIAMETTE eventually making contact with that runner for the first time. Mr Williamson said SUMMER'S DAY moved out 3-5 horse widths over the final 200 metres. He stated there was contact between the 2 horses on 3 separate occasions in the run to the post. Mr Williamson concluded that, with the nose margin at the post and the effect the outward movement from SUMMER'S DAY had on FIAMETTE, he believed the protest should be upheld.
Mr Innes stated that he had the drop on the other horse at the 100 metres and had gone up to go past when SUMMER'S DAY shifted out and took his rightful line. He said he was intimidated and could not continue to use the whip as he was entitled to do. Mr Innes said he felt as if he was going to go past SUMMER'S DAY quite easily and the interference had cost him the race.
In reply to a question from the committee Mr Innes said there was contact on 3 occasions prior to the finish.
Mr Gibbs said the films clearly showed there was contact on three occasions and although My Innes was using his whip he had been hampered in the last part by the other horse. He concluded by saying the video footage showed it all.
Mr Hutton said he always had the other horse covered and Mr Innes did not have to stop riding. He conceded that he did move out and made contact briefly but felt that the third time it was past the post. Mr Hutton concluded by saying FIAMETTE had her chance to go past him.
Mr Pike asked to see a back on film of the interference and was told by Mr Williamson it was unavailable. He said it was clear that Mr Innes did not stop riding his horse out the whole way to the line and that in his opinion, while it was hard to tell, he believed the third contact was after the finish. He said Mr Hutton tried to straighten and put his whip away but conceded there had been two bumps. However Mr Pike believed the better horse won on the day.
Mr Williamson summarised by saying the third contact was prior to the winning post and said the committee should take three points into account: firstly FIAMETTE came from behind SUMMER'S DAY, secondly, there was contact between the horses on three occasions which unbalanced FIAMETTE and thirdly, FIAMETTE was moved out three to five horse widths in the run up the straight.
Reasons for Decision:
The committee carefully considered all the evidence and submissions as presented. The films showed SUMMER'S DAY racing in a loose 3 wide position soon after turning for home. At this stage FIAMETTE was racing on her outside and approximately one length behind. It was clear that FIAMETTE was making ground on SUMMER'S DAY in the run up the straight. However over the final 100 metres SUMMER'S DAY rolled out at least 3 horse widths while FIAMETTE was maintaining her line. Between the 100 metres and the finishing post SUMMER'S DAY made contact with FIAMETTE three times placing Mr Innes in restricted room which resulted in him being unable to ride his mount to the best advantage.
Because the margin between the two horses was a nose at the line and FIAMETTE'S momentum was affected by the outward movement of SUMMER'S DAY through Mr Innes being unable to use his whip properly, the committee is satisfied that if interference had not occurred FIAMETTE would have beaten SUMMER'S DAY.
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: 7684f49e3180fc02839704b9b5cd7fc7
informantnumber: 3593
horsename: SUMMER'S DAY
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: 12/07/2015
hearing_title: Whangarei RC 11 July 2015 - R 5 (instigating a protest)
charge:
facts:
Following race 5, the NZB Insurance Pearl Series race 1600, a protest was lodged by the informant, Mr M Williamson. He alleged that SUMMER'S DAY, placed 1st by the judge, interfered with the chances of FIAMETTE, placed 2nd by the judge. He submitted the interference occurred in the final straight.
The judge's placings were as follows:
No 7 SUMMER'S DAY 1st
No 5 FIAMETTE 2nd
No 6 ZAFRENZY 3rd
No 1 BIG VOICES 4th
The margin between first and second was a nose.
Rule 642 (1) reads: 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.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
Mr Williamson demonstrated the video films pointing out SUMMER'S DAY (B Hutton) racing in a 3 wide position with FIAMETTE on her outside and approximately a length behind. He said at the 200 metres SUMMER'S DAY which was under pressure shifted out towards FIAMETTE eventually making contact with that runner for the first time. Mr Williamson said SUMMER'S DAY moved out 3-5 horse widths over the final 200 metres. He stated there was contact between the 2 horses on 3 separate occasions in the run to the post. Mr Williamson concluded that, with the nose margin at the post and the effect the outward movement from SUMMER'S DAY had on FIAMETTE, he believed the protest should be upheld.
Mr Innes stated that he had the drop on the other horse at the 100 metres and had gone up to go past when SUMMER'S DAY shifted out and took his rightful line. He said he was intimidated and could not continue to use the whip as he was entitled to do. Mr Innes said he felt as if he was going to go past SUMMER'S DAY quite easily and the interference had cost him the race.
In reply to a question from the committee Mr Innes said there was contact on 3 occasions prior to the finish.
Mr Gibbs said the films clearly showed there was contact on three occasions and although My Innes was using his whip he had been hampered in the last part by the other horse. He concluded by saying the video footage showed it all.
Mr Hutton said he always had the other horse covered and Mr Innes did not have to stop riding. He conceded that he did move out and made contact briefly but felt that the third time it was past the post. Mr Hutton concluded by saying FIAMETTE had her chance to go past him.
Mr Pike asked to see a back on film of the interference and was told by Mr Williamson it was unavailable. He said it was clear that Mr Innes did not stop riding his horse out the whole way to the line and that in his opinion, while it was hard to tell, he believed the third contact was after the finish. He said Mr Hutton tried to straighten and put his whip away but conceded there had been two bumps. However Mr Pike believed the better horse won on the day.
Mr Williamson summarised by saying the third contact was prior to the winning post and said the committee should take three points into account: firstly FIAMETTE came from behind SUMMER'S DAY, secondly, there was contact between the horses on three occasions which unbalanced FIAMETTE and thirdly, FIAMETTE was moved out three to five horse widths in the run up the straight.
reasonsfordecision:
The committee carefully considered all the evidence and submissions as presented. The films showed SUMMER'S DAY racing in a loose 3 wide position soon after turning for home. At this stage FIAMETTE was racing on her outside and approximately one length behind. It was clear that FIAMETTE was making ground on SUMMER'S DAY in the run up the straight. However over the final 100 metres SUMMER'S DAY rolled out at least 3 horse widths while FIAMETTE was maintaining her line. Between the 100 metres and the finishing post SUMMER'S DAY made contact with FIAMETTE three times placing Mr Innes in restricted room which resulted in him being unable to ride his mount to the best advantage.
Because the margin between the two horses was a nose at the line and FIAMETTE'S momentum was affected by the outward movement of SUMMER'S DAY through Mr Innes being unable to use his whip properly, the committee is satisfied that if interference had not occurred FIAMETTE would have beaten SUMMER'S DAY.
Decision:
Accordingly, after taking all the above into account, the protest is up held and the final placings are as follows:
No 5 FIAMETTE 1st
No 7 SUMMER'S DAY 2nd
No 6 ZAFRENZY 3rd
No 1 BIG VOICES 4th
The committee orders the payment of stakes and dividends accordingly.
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Protest
Rules: 642 (1)
Informant: Mr M Williamson - Stipendiary Steward
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent: Mr C Gibbs - Trainer of FIAMETTE, Mr L Innes - Rider of FIAMETTE
Respondent: Mr W Pike - Trainer of SUMMER'S DAY, Mr B Hutton - Rider of SUMMER'S DAY
StipendSteward:
raceid: a3304f21b7740f251f050132b5997625
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: Race 5
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: c7f7bcb0f84db9ebba5b6fb01eb8b557
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 11/07/2015
meet_title: Whangarei RC - 11 July 2015
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: whangarei-rc
meet_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
meet_chair: RSeabrook
meet_pm1: AGodsalve
meet_pm2: none
name: Whangarei RC