Marton JC 24 August 2025 – R4 – HE’S A BATTLER

EVIDENCE:

Following the running of Race 4, the “BAYLEYS BARTLEY REAL ESTATE MANAWATU LTD 2140”, Mr J Doyle, the Rider of “MAHOE”, which finished 2nd, lodged a protest under Rule 642(1) against the horse placed 1st,  “HE’S A BATTLER”, ridden by Mr L Kauri.

SUBMISSIONS FOR DECISION:

Mr Doyle contended that his mount suffered interference from “HE’S A BATTLER” in the home straight, by Mr Kauri’s horse putting “MAHOE” under constant pressure over the final 100 metres.  He said he was “intimidated” and hampered in being unable to ride aggressively and suffered a brief bump on the finish line.  The margin was a nose.  Mr Doyle said he believed he would have won, had there not been such sustained pressure.

The Adjudicative Committee received the evidence from the head on film, Mr Kauri, Mr Myers and Ms Clapperton.  Mr Goodwin presented his expert opinion as to the proper interpretation of the race film.

REASONS FOR DECISION:

The Adjudicative Committee dismissed the protest because “interference” as required under the Rules was not established.

(a)  Under Rule 642(1), there has to first be “interference” before the Adjudicative Committee can proceed further to determine whether it might relegate an offender.  This second step cannot be taken unless, first, “interference” occurs.

(b)  “Interference” (as a noun) is defined in Rule 642(2)(b).  In this case, such was not established to have occurred.  There was no crossing of the winner when not clear, nor jostling of the winner, or in any way interfering (a verb) with the second placed.

(c)  There was no “interference” as defined in the Rule.  All that happened was that Mr Kauri rode tightly over the final stages, not improper so as to consist of “interference” as defined in the Rule, but this was not improper, but rather “good riding” as stated by Ms Clapperton.

DECISION:

The protest is dismissed.