You are here: Home / Race Days / Taranaki RC - 23 November 2012 / Taranaki RC 23 November 2012 - R 8 (instigating a protest)

Taranaki RC 23 November 2012 - R 8 (instigating a protest)

Created on 28 November 2012

ISmith (chair)
R Manning - Licensed Trainer
R Hutchings - Apprentice Jockey
Information Number:
Horse Name:
Persons present:
J Millar - Licensed Trainer
O Bosson - Licensed Jockey

Following the running of Race 8 a protest was lodged pursuant to rule 642(1) by R Hutchings alleging that horse number 1 High Roller or its rider placed 1st by the Judge, interfered with the chances of horse number 13 Joyous placed 5th by the Judge, alleging interference in the home straight.

Judge's placings were:

1st High Roller (1)

2nd Heapzacash (3)

3rd Jokraar (8)

4th Chocolate Cake (9)

5th Joyous (13)

The official margins between 1st and 5th, short head, 2 lengths, half length, and a neck.

Submissions For Decision:

Mr Hutchings informed the committee that rounding the home turn and around the 300 metres mark O Bosson has come around his horse and has laid in a substantial amount making contact with his horse sideways, and taken all his chances out of winning the race. It has stopped his momentum and lost his balance.Viewing the films both head and side on R Hutchings demonstrated where he was hampered by O Bosson.

O Bosson said as he came past the 300 metres he had come from behind R Hutchings and his horse seemed to be under pressure, as he has moved past him his horse High Roller has rolled in a fraction and when the horses touched there was an over reaction from both horses.O Bosson said he could not see how R Hutchings horse could beat him home considering the margins between 5th place and 1st. R Manning conceded there was a marginal amount of buffeting but it was also attributed by the outwards movement of L Allpress ( Chocolate Cake) simultaneously as O Bosson has moved in slightly, which has made it look a lot worse than it was.

R Manning said under the rule R Hutchings would have to finish in front of our horse and no way you could say that.We have come from behind and there is a clear margin in it.

J Millar said R Manning’s horse has come from behind, our horse was bowling along and lost momentum, you can’t expect a horse to pick itself up and sprint again.

R Neal stated the racing was tight O Bosson’s mount was out wider and inclined to lay in. There was slight movement by L Allpress, and R Hutchings has to take a good hold of his horse. Importantly considering the margins at the finish, it is seriously doubtful that had R Hutchings not suffered the interference Joyous would have beaten High Roller at the finish.

R Hutchings by right of summing up said it has stopped his momentum. You can’t expect after running 1800 metres outside the leader, to be asked to run again a second time. If he had clear running to keep rolling, keep momentum and keep balanced, he thinks he would have beaten the winner.

Reasons For Decision:

In reaching a decision the committee carefully considered all the evidence presented. Although interference to Joyous has occurred, the films clearly show that there was inwards movement by High Roller simultaneously as Chocolate Cake makes a minor movement outwards. Contact was made by High Roller and Joyous about the hind quarters which magnifies the incident. Joyous is impeded and loses momentum. With the distance left to run out to the finish, High Roller was before the incident finishing the better , and taking into account the margins at the finish of the race being a short head, 2 lengths, ½ length, a neck, between fifth placing and first, the committee are satisfied in our opinion, had such interference not occurred, Joyous would not have beaten High Roller.


Accordingly the protest is dismissed and Judge's placings stand - 1, 3, 8, 9, 13.

Dividends to be paid accordingly.

Document Actions