You are here: Home / Race Days / Canterbury JC - 24 October 2020 / Canterbury JC 24 October 2020 R 7 (instigating a protest) - Chair, Mr S Ching

Canterbury JC 24 October 2020 R 7 (instigating a protest) - Chair, Mr S Ching

Created on 26 October 2020

Rules:
642(1)
Committee:
SChing (chair)
OJarvis
Respondent(s):
Mr MR Pitman - Licensed Trainer
Mr K Chowdhoory - Class B Rider
Informant:
Mr K Asano - Class B Rider
Information Number:
A12835
Horse Name:
MARINE
Persons present:
Mr J Oatham - Chief Stipendiary Steward
Mr A Carston - Licensed Trainer
Mr M Smith - Stable representative for Baker/Forsman
Evidence:

Following the running of Race 7, the War Decree Stakes (Group 3), Class B Rider, Mr K Asano, filed an Information instigating a protest, under Rule 642(1) in that MARINE, ridden by Mr K Chowdhoory, placed second by the Judge, interfered with the chances of UNITION, ridden by Mr K Asano, placed third by the Judge, alleging interference over the concluding stages. The official margin was ½ a length.

The Judges placings in this race were as follows.
1st - VITESSE BO (10)
2nd - MARINE (2)
3rd - UNITION (1)
4th - ELIZABETH ROSE (9)
5th - FASHION SHOOT (7)
6th - SHOWEMHOWITSDONE (6)

The connections of MARINE were represented at this hearing by Rider, Mr K Chowdhorry and Trainer, Mr M Pitman, with Rider, Mr K Asano, Trainer, Mr A Carston and Stable representative, Mr M Smith, representing the connections of UNITION.

Submissions For Decision:

Informant, Mr Asano, using the available films, both head on and side on, showed the alleged interference near the 100m by pointing out MARINE, ridden by M Chowdhoory, who was leading at the time, positioned 3 off the rail with UNITION, ridden by Mr Asano, racing on the inside of MARINE. Mr Asano pointed out MARINE, who shifted ground inwards when under a ride and make contact on several occasions with UNITION, prior to the line. Mr Asano, with the assistance of Mr Carston stated that the contact caused UNITION to lose balance and momentum, which in turn cost him second place.

Mr Chowdhoory and Mr Pitman stated that MARINE had come from behind UNITION at the home turn after being bumped, unbalanced and forced wider entering the straight, by UNITION. They stated that MARINE had UNITION covered over the concluding stages and MARINE was always going to run second, with or without interference.

Mr Oatham, as officiating Stipendiary Steward, was asked for his interpretation of the incident. He stated that it was clear that UNITION has lay out and taken MARINE wider on the track rounding the home turn, with both runners making contact on several occasions. Any interference by MARINE to UNITION only appears to happen approaching the 100m when both horses were under a hard ride. Mr Oatham stated that MARINE does lay in and make firm contact with UNITION on a couple of occasions and dictates that horse in over the final stages. He added that initially MARINE has come from a position behind UNITION and looking at that interference and the official margin of ½ a length at the line, the Stewards would not be comfortably satisfied that UNITION would have beaten MARINE home but for that interference.

Reasons For Decision:

We carefully considered the evidence presented and the video coverage of the alleged incident. The Committee was satisfied that entering the straight, UNITION has shifted wider on the track making light contact on a number of occasions with MARINE, forcing that horse wider on the track. We were also satisfied that near the 100m MARINE shifted ground inwards under a ride and made firm contact on two occasions over the concluding stages. We found that MARINE had come from behind UNITION in the straight and had headed UNITION prior to the points of contact over the concluding stages. We also found that although UNITION was unbalanced momentarily, as a result of the contact, UNITION’ s rider, Mr Asano, did not stop riding his horse. We also took into consideration the official margin of a ½ length.

Taking all factors into consideration, we were not satisfied, that but for the alleged interference received, UNITION would have finished ahead of MARINE. We therefore determined that this protest is dismissed.

Decision:

The protest against MARINE is dismissed.
It was ordered that dividends and stakes be paid in accordance with the official judges placings.

Document Actions