South Canterbury RC 28 December 2025 – R1 – NAVAL COMMAND

ID: RIB62139

Respondent(s):
Robyn Kay Ayton - Trainer

Applicant:
Nayton Mitchell - Trainer

Adjudicators:
Dave Anderson (Chair)

Persons Present:
Mrs Veronica Fisher, Mrs Rebecca Haley and Mr Mark Davidson - Stipendiary Stewards, Robyn Ayton and Nayton Mitchell - Trainers, Amber Riddell and Brandon May - Jockeys

Information Number:
A21758

Decision Type:
Protest

Rule(s):
642(1) - Riding/driving infringement

Plea:
Contested

Protest:
Interference near the 150m

Animal Name:
NAVAL COMMAND

Code:
Thoroughbred

Race Date:
28/12/2025

Race Club:
South Canterbury Racing Club

Race Location:
Phar Lap Raceway - State Highway 1, Washdyke, Timaru,

Race Number:
R1

Hearing Date:
28/12/2025

Hearing Location:
Phar Lap Raceway

Outcome: Protest Dismissed

Penalty: N/A

Evidence – Protest

Following the running of Race 1, an Information was filed Instigating a Protest per Rule 642(1). The Applicant, Trainer Nayton Mitchell alleged that horse No. 3 NAVAL COMMAND (B May) placed 1st by the Judge, interfered with the chances of horse No. 1 KIDS GOT GEARS (A Riddell) placed 2nd by the Judge.

The alleged interference was said to have occurred in the final straight, over the concluding stages of the race.

The Judge’s provisional placings were as follows:

1st No. 3 NAVAL COMMAND

2nd No. 1 KIDS GOT GEARS

The official margin between 1st and 2nd was a head.

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 explained the key elements of the Protest Rule; was there any interference; and secondly, without it, would the affected horse have won.

The race films were shown and the two horses involved identified.

Mr Mitchell said his horse was contacted and lost momentum, when looking like the winner approaching the 150m.

Miss Riddell, Rider of KIDS GOT GEARS, said she agreed with Mr Michell’s submission. She agreed she hasn’t stopped riding her mount, but was always aware of pressure to her inside.

Mr May, Rider of NAVAL COMMAND, accepted he shifted ground and said there was only one touch to KIDS GOT GEARS and Miss Riddell never stopped riding her horse. He said he felt the contact wasn’t enough, to impede KIDS GOT GEAR, from winning the race.

Ms Ayton, Trainer of NAVAL COMMAND, said she thought the contact to KIDS GOT GEARS was very minimal.

Stipendiary Steward Mrs Fisher, said the margin at the finish was a head. She said the contact KIDS GOT GEARS received, has slightly dictated the horse outwards, but Miss Riddell has continued to ride her horse out to the finish of the race.

Reasons for Decision

Following the requirements of the Protest Rule, the Adjudicative Committee must firstly be satisfied that interference occurred; and secondly, if interference is proven, 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 probabilities than not’ that the horse interfered with, would have beaten that runner.

After considering all the evidence, the Adjudicative Committee found that in the middle stages of the run home, NAVAL COMMAND has shifted out, dictating COCOMORA (K Hercock) out on to KIDS GOT GEARS, making slight contact. Miss Riddell has continued riding her horse, without any hesitation. The two horses have finished the race out strongly, without interference, and NAVAL COMMAND has held its advantage and looked to extend it, as they crossed the winning post.

Therefore, after considering in particular the nature of the interference; the manner in which both horses finished the race off over the final 150 metres and the margin of a head, the Adjudicative Committee could not be comfortably satisfied that had the interference not occurred, KIDS GOT GEARS would have finished in advance of NAVAL COMMAND.

Accordingly, 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.

Decision Date: 28/12/2025

Publish Date: 29/12/2025