Waikato TR 27 September 2024 – R7 – THE GREEN KEEPER

Evidence

Following the running of Race 7, an Information was filed Instigating a Protest pursuant to Rule 642(1). The Applicant, Rider W Pinn on behalf of Trainer Mr G Rogerson alleged that horse No. 10 (THE GREEN KEEPER) placed 3rd by the Judge, interfered with the chances of horse No. 14 (HANALEI STAR), placed 4th by the Judge.

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

The Judge’s provisional placings were as follows:

1st    No. 5    SAVACAT (K Myers)

2nd   No. 1    OCEANS OF STANIMA (J Fawcett))

3rd    No. 10  THE GREEN KEEPER (J Doyle)

4th    No. 14   HANALEI STAR (W Pinn)

The official margin between 3rd and 4th was a short 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”.

Interference is defined as:

• a horse crossing another horse without being at least its own length and one other clear length in front of such other horse at the time of crossing;
• a horse jostling with another horse, unless it is proved that such jostling was caused by the fault of some other horse or Rider or that the horse or Rider jostled with was partly at fault; or
• a horse itself, or its Rider, in any way interfering with another horse or the Rider of another horse in a Race, unless it is proved that such interference was caused by the fault of some other horse or Rider or that the horse or Rider interfered with was partly at fault.

Submissions for Decision

Prior to hearing submissions from the respective parties, the Adjudicative Committee requested that Stewards show all available race films of the alleged interference and identify the runners. Four camera angles were available, namely head-on, side-on, back straight and turn.

Mr Rogerson, the Trainer of HANALEI STAR, stated that interference occurred as a result of THE GREEN KEEPER shifting out in the home straight into the line of HANALEI STAR. As a result, Mr Rogerson said that THE GREEN KEEPER bumped the shoulder of HANALEI STAR, who lost momentum.  He said the bump cost HANALEI STAR at least ¾ length and the margin between the two horses at the finish was only a short neck.  He concluded that but for the interference, his horse would have finished third.

Mr Pinn, the Rider of HANALEI STAR, said that he had no further comment, as Mr Rogerson summed it up well.

Mr Doyle, the Rider of the GREEN KEEPER and representing the connections of the horse, said that his mount was racing in ‘blinkers’ and when he got to the middle of the track, could not see horses on either side.  He said that he accepted he made contact with HANALEI STAR, but neither Rider stopping riding out to the finish and believed that despite the interference, he would have still finished in third place.

Senior Stipendiary Steward Mr Jones outlined the Stewards’ interpretation of the alleged interference.  He said that HANALEI STAR improved from behind THE GREEN KEEPER and nearing the 150 metre mark, that horse has shifted out and made contract with HANALEI STAR for approximately three strides.  He said from that point, both horses had a clear and free run to the finish.  He concluded that THE GREEN KEEPER held a clear margin to the finish and although the protest has some merit, Stewards would have difficulty supporting a change in placings.

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.

The standard of proof is on the balance of probabilities, which simply means ‘more probable or than not’ that the horse interfered with would have beaten that runner.

After hearing submissions and reviewing the video footage, the Adjudicative Committee established that near the 150 metres, THE GREEN KEEPER has shifted out into the running line of HANALEI STAR and made solid contact.  As a consequence, HANALEI STAR was forced wider on the track.  But despite the contact, both horses continued forward momentum, and their respective Riders were able to fully ride their mounts out to the finish.  Over the concluding stages, THE GREEN KEEPER held a clear margin.

Although the Adjudicative Committee finds that interference has occurred, it is not satisfied to the required standard of proof that but for the interference, HANALEI STAR would have beaten THE GREEN KEEPER.

On that basis, in the exercise of the Adjudicative Committee’s discretion, the protest is dismissed.

Decision

The protest is dismissed, and the Adjudicative Committee authorises the payment of dividends and stake money in accordance with its decision.