Marlborough HRC 19 January 2025 – R12 – WHAT THE BELL

Summary of Facts:

Following the running of Race 12 , the Applicant Stipendiary Steward Matthew Sole, filed an Information pursuant to Rule 870(2)(c) instigating a protest alleging that WHAT THE BELL broke over the concluding stages failing to lose ground.

The Respondent, Open Driver Samantha Ottley was present at the hearing and indicated the protest was  contested.

The Judge’s provisional placings were:

1st – No. 2    BULLIT TRAIN

2nd – No. 1    WHAT THE BELL

3rd – No. 3    TAKE AFTER ME

4th –   No. 11  JUDY J

Rule 870(2) (c)

870(2) The following shall be a breach of sub-rule (1) hereof:
(c) failure to lose ground by the break.

Submissions for Decision:

Using available race films, Stipendiary Steward Matthew Sole identified WHAT THE BELL driven by Ms Ottley, in second place as the field approached the 50m. After passing the 50m, Mr Sole demonstrated on the replay that WHAT THE BELL, began trotting roughly before breaking and galloping over the line. Mr Sole pointed that WHAT THE BELL had galloped less than 50m before the post, which was within the Breaking Horses Regulations. He also showed that WHAT THE BELL was not lapped on by the third horse, TAKE AFTER ME, with the margin being a clear length.

Of concern and the reason for the Protest, he said, was it was not clear that WHAT THE BELL had lost ground when in a break over the final stages. Mr Sole added that the angles of the replays available, were not helpful in assessing the incident.

Ms Ottley stated that when WHAT THE BELL broke, she immediately took a hold of the horse and although it appears on the replays that WHAT THE BELL does not seem to lose ground, she submitted that the horse had lost ground. Ms Ottley submitted that WHAT THE BELL did not gain an advantage when in a break over the final stages of the race.

Reasons For Decision:

After hearing submissions and reviewing the race films, it was clearly evident to the Adjudicative Committee that WHAT THE BELL broke free of interference and galloped for less than 50 metres over the concluding stages of the race. The Adjudicative Committee also determined that WHAT THE BELL was not lapped on, with a clear length margin back to the 3rd horse TAKE AFTER ME. The Adjudicative Committee was further satisfied that Ms Ottley took hold of WHAT THE BELL when the horse broke and although difficult to ascertain due to the replay angles, did lose ground to a degree and gained no advantage, with the clear margins of the race being 3/4 length between 1st and 2nd and 1 length back to the 3rd horse, determined that the protest be dismissed.

Decision:

The protest was dismissed, with Judge’s placings standing as above.