You are here: Home / Race Days / Taupo RC - 10 October 2018 / Taupo RC 10 October 2018 - R 7 (instigating a protest) - Chair, Mr A Dooley
Related Items

10 Oct 2018
Taupo-Rc - R7

Taupo RC 10 October 2018 - R 7 (instigating a protest) - Chair, Mr A Dooley

Created on 11 October 2018

Rules:
642(1)(
Committee:
ADooley (chair)
Respondent(s):
Mr J Riddell - Rider of SURE HE CAN
Informant:
Ms T Thornton - Rider of TUNZAGUTZ
Information Number:
A12106
Horse Name:
SURE HE CAN
Persons present:
Mr A Coles - Stipendiary Steward
Mr W Hillis - Trainer of SURE HE CAN
Mr D Hollinshead - Trainer of TUNZAGUTZ
Evidence:

Following the running of race 7, Ascot Farm 1800, an Information was filed Instigating a Protest pursuant to Rule 642(1). The Informant, Ms T Thornton, rider of TUNZAGUTZ, alleged that SURE HE CAN or its rider placed 3rd by the Judge interfered with the chances of her mount placed 4th by the Judge.

The interference was alleged to have occurred over the concluding stages of the race.

The Judge's placing were as follows:

1st No. 9 VERMONT
2nd No. 5 SUPABLUE
3rd No. 1 SURE HE CAN
4th No. 8 TUNZAGUTZ

The official margin between 3rd and 4th 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 they understood the Rule.

Submissions For Decision:

Ms Thornton said that over the final stages of the race SURE HE CAN made contact with TUNZAGUTZ on two occasions. She said had the interference not occurred TUNZAGUTZ would have beaten SURE HE CAN.

Mr Hollinshead reiterated that contact occurred twice over the concluding stages of the race. He added that the interference definitely cost TUNZAGUTZ 3rd place.

Mr Riddell said the protest had no merit and identified that SURE HE CAN came from behind TUNZAGUTZ. He said there was only a “little bit of contact”.

Mr Hillis reiterated that SURE HE CAN came from behind TUNZAGUTZ in the final straight. He believed that SURE HE CAN always had TUNZAGUTZ covered.

Mr Coles on behalf of the Stewards said that at the 200 metres SURE HE CAN was in front of TUNZAGUTZ. He said the two horses brushed slightly about four strides before the finish line. He said the major contact happened on the finish line and the Stewards did not support the protest.

Reasons For Decision:

The Committee carefully considered all evidence and submissions presented and reviewed the video footage.

The Committee found that inside the final 50 metres both SURE HE CAN and TUNZAGUTZ momentarily brushed. As a consequence there was no evidence that TUNZAGUTZ lost any momentum. The main point of contact between SURE HE CAN and TUNZAGUTZ occurred when the horses were crossing the finish line.

Having considered the very minor nature of this incident, the manner in which both horses finished the race off and the short head margin at the finish the Committee is of the opinion that SURE HE CAN was always going to finish in advance of TUNZAGUTZ.

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