Ashburton RC 6 July 2023 – R4 – PROSERVE

Evidence

Following the running of Race 6, an Information was filed Instigating a Protest pursuant to Rule 642(1). The Applicant, Class A Rider Courtney Barnes, Rider of DEELS DONE, alleged that horse No. 7 PROSERVE, placed 2nd by the Judge, interfered with the chances of horse No. 5 DEELS DONE, placed 3rd by the Judge.

The interference was alleged to have occurred in the final stages of the race.

The Judge’s provisional placings were as follows:

1st   No.9 ESTABLISHMENT

2nd  No.7 PROSERVE

3rd   No. 5 DEELS DONE

4th   No.2 ATHENE

The official margin between 2nd and 3rd was a Neck

Rule 642(1) provides:

“If a placed horse or its Rider causes interference within the meaning of this Rule 642 to another placed horse, and the Adjudicative 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”.

Submissions For Decision

The Applicant, Courtney Barnes, showed relevant films of the final stages of the race. She pointed out PROSERVE shifting in when under a ride and making firm contact with DEELS DONE, near the finish line. She stated this contact put her horse off stride, causing DEELS DONE to become unbalanced and lose momentum. Miss Barnes stated that the interference had affected her chances of finishing in 2nd place.

The Respondent, Mr Pitman, stated that PROSERVE had come from behind DEELS DONE, despite hanging, and was still improving past that horse when contact was made. He said that there was no way that DEELS DONE would have beaten PROSERVE to the finish line, with or without the contact made.

Stipendiary Steward Mr Davidson, outlined the Stewards’ interpretation of the alleged interference. He stated that there was no doubt that contact had been made by PROSERVE onto DEELS DONE, approximately 4 strides from the line. He stated that PROSERVE was improving despite hanging, over the concluding stages, and was finishing better than DEELS DONE. He added that he could see little merit in the protest.

Reasons For Decision

In accordance with the requirements of the Protest Rule, the Adjudicative Committee must firstly establish that interference occurred; and secondly, if interference is established, the horse interfered with would have beaten the other runner, had such interference not occurred.

After hearing submissions and reviewing the video footage, the Adjudicative Committee established that it was clear that interference had occurred when PROSERVE shifted, in making firm contact with DEELS DONE, with approximately 4 strides to go.

The Adjudicative Committee is satisfied that PROSERVE did interfere with the chances of  DEELS DONE, however having considered the degree and nature of the interference, the way both horses finished the race off and the official margin, which in this instance was a neck,  combined with the  fact the interference occurred close to the finish line, the Adjudicative Committee was satisfied that, but for the interference suffered to DEELS DONE by PROSERVE, DEELS DONE would not have beaten PROSERVE to the line.  On that basis the protest is dismissed, and the Judge’s placings stand.