Auckland TR 20 June 2026 – R1 – Lance O’Sullivan

EVIDENCE:

Following the running of Race 1, Deputy Chief Stipendiary Steward Mr B Jones filed an Information alleging a breach of Rule 614(2) by the O’Sullivan and Scott Training Partnership, namely that runner number 2, UDERZO (W Kennedy) was presented to race with the incorrect saddle.

Rule 614(2) provides that:

A person must not be neglectful or careless in saddling a horse.

Mr Lance O’Sullivan represented the Stable at the hearing and admitted the breach.

Senior Stipendiary Steward Ms P Kinsey told the Adjudicative Committee that while conducting pre‑race gear checks in the back parade ring, she came to the two O’Sullivan and Scott runners — No. 2 UDERZO and No. 6 MOSINVADER — who were the final horses to be inspected. During this process, she noticed that UDERZO’s saddle was missing its lead bag. Given the omission, she made further enquiries to establish what had occurred.

In response, Mr O’Sullivan explained that the stable had two runners engaged in the race, and the stable foreman had collected UDERZO’s saddle from the weigh‑out area. He stated that the error arose because UDERZO’s Rider had weighed out for Race 1, and the Rider for No. 2 in Race 2 (next race) had also weighed out. Both saddles were left in the same area. As a result, the wrong saddle was incorrectly uplifted i.e. the saddle for runner No.2 in race two was uplifted.

Mr O’Sullivan accepted that this situation should not have been allowed to occur and acknowledged that the current procedure permitting back‑to‑back weigh‑outs, requires greater separation of saddles to prevent such mix‑ups.

Mr O’Sullivan commended Ms Kinsey for identifying the error.

DECISION:

The Respondent having admitted the breach, it was deemed to be proved.

SUBMISSIONS FOR PENALTY:

Deputy Chief Stipendiary Steward Mr Jones concurred that the procedure was less than ideal, but submitted that the obligation rested with the Trainer to ensure the correct saddle is uplifted from the weighing room.

Mr Jones submitted that Stewards could only identify one comparable case. Namely: S Cole, 6 January 2018 at Ruakaka – this resulted in a $200 fine. He suggested that for consistency, a similar fine would be appropriate in this case. Mr Jones added that due to the error, the race was delayed 2 minutes.

Mr O’Sullivan submitted that due to the circumstances, either a fine of $100 or not a fine at all, would be more appropriate.

REASONS FOR PENALTY:

The error was identified at an early stage, meaning there were no consequences for the betting public and no loss to the connections of UDERZO. The Adjudicative Committee accepts that the breach arose from an inadvertent mistake.

Both Mr Jones and Mr O’Sullivan acknowledged that difficulties arise when saddles for consecutive races are left in the same area after Riders weigh out, particularly where the saddles carry the same saddlecloth number. In those circumstances, the Adjudicative Committee accepts that the mix‑up was understandable and clearly unintentional.

The procedure allowing back‑to‑back weigh‑outs should be reviewed to ensure clearer separation of saddles to prevent a recurrence.

Nevertheless, this is a strict liability offence, and the onus remains on the Trainer to ensure that the correct saddle is uplifted.

The Penalty Guide provides for a $300 fine. Taking into account the circumstances of the breach, a reduced fine of $200 is appropriate.

CONCLUSION:

Training Partnership O’Sullivan and Scott are fined $200.