You are here: Home / Race Days / Racing Te Aroha - 9 July 2017 / R Te Aroha 9 July 2017 - R 6 (instigating a protest) - Chair, Mr A Dooley

R Te Aroha 9 July 2017 - R 6 (instigating a protest) - Chair, Mr A Dooley

Created on 10 July 2017

Rules:
642(1)
Committee:
ADooley (chair)
ASmith
Respondent(s):
Mr G Falconer - Trainer of NOAH JON
Informant:
Mr C Studd - Rider of ISTIMAGIC
Information Number:
A8877
Horse Name:
NOAH JON
Persons present:
Ms N Kelly - Trainer of ISTIMAGIC
Mr G Walsh - Rider of NOAH JON
Mr A Coles - Stipendiary Steward
Mr M Williamson - Senior Stipendiary Steward
Evidence:

Following the running of race 6, Knottingly Farm Open Steeplechase, an Information was filed Instigating a Protest pursuant to Rule 642(1). The Informant, Mr C Studd ,alleged that NOAH JON or its rider placed 1st by the Judge interfered with the chances of his horse ISTIMAGIC placed 2nd by the Judge.

The interference was alleged to have occurred in the final straight.

The Judge's placing were as follows:

1st No. 6 NOAH JON
2nd No. 8 ISTIMAGIC
3rd No. 1 JOKING
4th No. 2 WAI NOT

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

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 that they understood the Rule.

Submissions For Decision:

Mr Williamson identified NOAH JON and ISTIMAGIC as they entered the final straight.

Mr Studd alleged that NOAH JON cut back in front of his mount ISTIMAGIC between the last 2 fences. He said that his horse lost all of its momentum and had such interference not occurred ISTIMAGIC would have won the race.

Ms Kelly said that ISTIMAGIC had to change direction in the final straight and her horse shortened stride prior to jumping the last fence. She was of the view that NOAH JON had interfered with ISTIMAGIC.

Mr Walsh said that NOAH JON had “run down” the 2nd to last fence but disagreed that he interfered with ISTIMAGIC. He said that Mr Studd never stopped riding his mount and added that ISTIMAGIC had its chance to win the race.

Mr Falconer said that he supported Mr Walsh’s interpretation of the alleged interference and had nothing further to add.

Mr Coles was invited by the Committee to comment on the alleged interference. He said that in the final straight both horses had a clear line in the run to the fences. He identified that NOAH JON run down the 2nd to last fence but stated this had no effect on ISTIMAGIC. He said that at no point did Mr Studd have to stop riding ISTIMAGIC. He said that every horse had its opportunity and the Stewards did not support the protest.

Reasons For Decision:

The Committee carefully considered all the submissions presented and reviewed the video footage. We established that NOAH JON jumped outwards at the 2nd to last steeplechase fence in the final straight and on landing Mr Walsh angled his mount back in prior to jumping the last fence. At that point Mr Walsh was sufficiently clear of ISTIMAGIC and in our opinion there was no video evidence to support Mr Studd’s assertion that NOAH JON had caused interference to ISTIMAGIC. It was clearly evident that ISTIMAGIC’S momentum was not hampered in the final straight.

Decision:

The protest was dismissed and the Judge's placing’s shall stand.

The Committee authorised the payment of stakes and dividends in accordance with its decision.

Document Actions