You are here: Home / Race Days / Auckland RC - 26 October 2013 / Auckland RC 26 October 2013 - R 5 ( instigating a protest)

Auckland RC 26 October 2013 - R 5 ( instigating a protest)

Created on 29 October 2013

Rules:
642(1)
Committee:
ADooley (chair)
GTankard
Respondent(s):
Mr S Lucock - Trainer of STATHAM
Informant:
Mr A Pike - Trainer of BEST COMMAND
Information Number:
A6007
Horse Name:
STATHAM
Persons present:
Mr O Bosson - Rider of STATHAM
Mr K Leung - Apprentice Rider of BEST COMMAND
Mr M Williamson - Stipendiary Steward
Evidence:

Following the running of Race 5, Pandoro Panatteria 1200, an Information was filed Instigating a Protest pursuant to Rule 642(1). The Informant, Mr Pike, alleged that STATHAM placed 1st by the Judge interfered with the chances of BEST COMMAND placed 2nd by the Judge.

The interference was alleged to have occurred between 500 metres to 350 metres.

The Judge's placing were as follows:

1st - No. 15 STATHAM
2nd - No. 1 BEST COMMAND
3rd - No. 8 CARTELL
4th - No. 9 DOUBLE PARKED

The official margin between 1st and 2nd was a neck.

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 they understood the Rule.

Submissions For Decision:

Mr Pike submitted that on the point of the turn STATHAM rolled in and made contact with BEST COMMAND which caused his horse to become unbalanced. He added at the 150 metre mark BEST COMMAND had to come across the heels of STATHAM. He said in his opinion if the interference had not occurred on the point of the turn Mr Leung would not have found himself in that position.

Mr Leung said that he concurred with Mr Pike's assessment of the alleged incident.

In response to a question from the Committee, Mr Pike acknowledged that Mr Leung did not have to stop riding his mount forward in the final straight.

Mr Bosson submitted that he was travelling quite well prior to the turn and in his view Mr Leung “fell asleep” when in the lead. Mr Bosson said he took advantage of Mr Leung's lapse and went clear on the point of the turn.

Mr Lucock submitted that on the point of the turn STATHAM ran straight past BEST COMMAND.

Mr Williamson submitted that the official margin between the 2 horses was a neck. He said before the alleged incident BEST COMMAND had its head turned inwards and was having difficulty making the bend. He further submitted that the films were inconclusive as to whether BEST COMMAND had shifted out or STATHAM was shifting in on the turn. He said the alleged interference at the 150 metres was of no relevance to this protest. For these reasons the Stewards' do not support the protest.

Mr Pike in summing up said BEST COMMAND’S head was turned inwards and she was not laying out. He stated that it became very tight on the point of the turn which impacted on his horse for 1 or 1 ½ strides. He added that the movement on the turn resulted in BEST COMMAND dropping back by a length and a quarter.

Mr Lucock in summing up said it was obvious that BEST COMMAND was laying out and STATHAM maintained his rightful running line.

Reasons For Decision:

The Committee carefully considered all evidence and submissions presented and reviewed the video films several times. We established at the 600 metres BEST COMMAND was 3 lengths in front of the field. It was noticeable on the point of the turn that BEST COMMAND was under a hold with her rider sitting up in the saddle. At that point, Mr Bosson quickly took advantage of this and put a length on BEST COMMAND. At approximately the 400 metres the head on film shows that STATHAM was racing 1 off the rail and if BEST COMMAND was travelling well enough the gap was still available to her. The alleged interference at the 150 metre mark was not as a consequence of the earlier incident and as such was not taken into account.

In summary the video films showed that STATHAM did not cause interference to BEST COMMAND as alleged by the Informant.

Decision:

Accordingly the protest is dismissed and the Judge's placings shall stand. In conclusion we order the payment of stakes and dividends.

Document Actions