You are here: Home / Race Days / Canterbury JC - 21 April 2018 / Canterbury R 21 April 2018 - R 7 (instigating a protest) - Chair, Mr S Ching

Canterbury R 21 April 2018 - R 7 (instigating a protest) - Chair, Mr S Ching

Created on 25 April 2018

SChing (chair)
Ms S McKay - Licensed Trainer
Miss A Comignahi - Class B Rider of COURTE ZARDINI
Ms P Gerard - Licensed Trainer
Mr T Moseley - Class A Rider of ZA ZA GABOR
Information Number:
Horse Name:
Persons present:
Mr M Davidson - Stipendiary Steward
Mr D Walsh - Apprentice Jockey Mentor assisting Miss Comignahi

Following the running of Race 7, the New Zealand Bloodstock Stakes, an Information Instigating a Protest was filed by the connections of 2nd placed ZA ZA GABOR, ridden by Mr T Moseley, alleging interference by 1st placed COURTE ZARINDI, ridden by Miss A Comignaghi , over the final 150m.

The Judges placings in this race were as follows.
2nd - ZA ZA GABOR (16)
3rd - WEE GILY (15)
4th - PINUP COUP (8)
5th - KIWI IDA (2)
6th - BENEFICIAL (7)

Rule 642(1) provides as follows.
If a placed horse or its Rider causes interference within the meaning of this Rule 642 to another 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.”

The connections of COURTE ZARINDI were represented at this hearing by Trainer, Ms S McKay, Apprentice Rider, Miss A Comignaghi and Mr D Walsh, NZTR Apprentice Rider Mentor, assisting Miss Comignaghi.

The connections of ZA ZA GABOR were represented by Trainer, Ms P Gerard and Rider, Mr T Moseley.

All parties agreed that they understood the Rule and the nature of the protest.

Submissions For Decision:

Informant Mr T Moseley gave evidence that on 3 occasions, COURTE ZARINDI, ridden by Miss Comignaghi, bumped his mount, ZA ZA GABOR, over the concluding 150m. He showed on the head on and side on films COURTE ZARINDI, racing on the inside of ZA ZA GABOR and approximately a short ½ length to a neck ahead. Mr Moseley said that COURTE ZARINDI shifted out and made contact, the first being a bump, the second being firmer contact followed by a third point of contact. He said his mount kept improving despite the contact made and COURTE ZARINDA had shifted him out 2 to 3 horse widths over the concluding stages. Mr Moseley stated that he had been hindered on 2 to 3 occasions and with the margin between first and second only being a nose, he believed his chances had been affected. He also stated that at no time did he stop riding his mount out. Co-Informant Trainer, Ms P Gerard stated that the first point of contact resulted in ZA ZA GABOR changing legs, dropping back and rebalancing before coming again. She said the second and third points of contact hampered ZA ZA GABOR, the horse having to get going again after each bump.

Respondent Trainer, Ms S McKay stated that both horses were moving around under pressure over the final stages. She said that the first point of contact was minor with a bit more involvement with the second bump and the third point of contact minor as well. Ms McKay submitted that there was not enough in it to consider relegation and ZA ZA GABOR was never going to get past COURTE ZARIDA regardless.

Miss Comignaghi conceded that her horse ran out a bit but did not feel that there was any contact between the horses. She stated that at any stage did she think that ZA ZA GABOR would get past her.

Mr D Walsh, on Miss Comignaghi’s behalf, stated that the second point of contact was when both horses were moving with ZA ZA GABOR moving in and COURTE ZARINDA, moving out, which he said, made that point of contact firmer. He said the first point of contact was minor with the third difficult on the films to ascertain whether contact was actually made. Mr Walsh submitted that at no stage over the final stages did Mr Moseley stop riding his horse out. He also said that ZA ZA GABOR had every opportunity to get past COURTE ZARINDA over the concluding stages.

Officiating Stipendiary Steward, Mr M Davidson, gave his interpretation of the incident and stated that there were 3 points of contact, and although Mr Moseley may have moved slightly, the majority of the movement was from the inside runner, COURTE ZARINDA. He said the second bump was the most significant point of contact with ZA ZA GABOR being dictated out possibly a horse width. Mr Davidson stated that COURTE ZARINDA had dictated ZA ZA GABOR even further over the final stages and would leave the determination of the protest up to the Committee.

Reasons For Decision:

We carefully considered the evidence given and the video coverage of the incident. The Committee was satisfied that COURTE ZARINDA had shifted ground outwards over the concluding stages when racing on the inside and slightly ahead of ZA ZA GABOR. We were also satisfied that contact between both horses occurred on 3 occasions. This Committee found that the first and third points of contact were slight and what we determined as brushes between the horses. The second point of contact was the most significant but determined there was some influence from ZA ZA GABOR who did move inwards towards COURTE ZARINDA when that horse was shifting out. We were also satisfied that COURTE ZARINDA dictated ZA ZA GABOR outwards to a degree but also satisfied that this dictation was not significant enough to affect ZA ZA GABOR’S chances to any great degree. We also noted that ZA ZA GABOR’s rider, Mr Moseley, did not have to stop riding his mount out over the final stages.

Taking all factors into consideration, including the margin of a nose, this Committee was not satisfied on the balance of probabilities, that but for the interference received, ZA ZA GABOR would have beaten COURTE ZARINDA. We therefore determined that the protest be dismissed.


The protest was dismissed with the judges official placings confirmed.

Document Actions