Riccarton Park – Canterbury JC 24 January 2026 – R5 (instigating a protest) – THE ENTERTAINER

Evidence

Following the running of Race 5, an Information was filed Instigating a Protest pursuant to Rule 642(1). The Applicant Class B Rider Triston Moodley – LITTLE BUT FIERCE  alleged that ENTERTAINER, placed 3rd by the Judge, interfered with the chances of LITTLE BUT FIERCE, placed 4th by the Judge.

The interference was alleged to have occurred near the 100m.

The Judge’s provisional placings were as follows:

1st   No.5   GRAEME JOHN

2nd  No.1   QUINTABELLE

3rd   No.3   THE  ENTERTAINER

4th   No.10  LITTLE BUT FIERCE

The official margin between 3rd and 4th was: 1/2 length

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”.

Submissions for Decision

The Applicant, Triston Moodley, demonstrated the replays to show that near the 100m, 3rd placed horse THE ENTERTAINER, shifted out into the line of 4th placed LITTLE BUT FIERCE and in doing so, he had to check and change ground to the inside of THE ENTERTAINER to gain clear running. He stated that this interference caused him to stop riding and cost him momentum, and in his opinion, lost at least 1/2 a length and possibly 3rd placing.

The Rider of THE ENTERTAINER, Liam Kauri, stated that his saddle had slipped earlier in the race and his horse was difficult to control under these circumstances, which contributed to his mount’s behavior. He pointed out that Mr Moodley did not stop riding his mount out during the alleged interference and that THE ENTERTAINER was always going better than LITTLE BUT FIERCE. He added that THE ENTERTAINER was always going to finish in 3rd placing.

Trainer of THE ENTERTAINER, Anna Furlong, stated that Mr Kauri had summed the incident up accurately and elected to make no further submissions.

Senior Stipendiary Steward Mr Davidson outlined the Stewards’ interpretation of the alleged interference. He said that THE ENTERTAINER was at least 1 3/4 lengths in front of LITTLE BUT FIERCE when shifting out near the 100m. He said that LITTLE BUT FIERCE was inconvenienced in this incident and whether this was enough to change the placings, he would leave up to the Adjudicative Committee.

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.

After hearing submissions and reviewing the video footage, the Adjudicative Committee established and was satisfied that THE ENTERTAINER shifted out near the 100m and caused LITTLE BUT FIERCE to change ground. The Adjudicative Committee was also satisfied that THE ENTERTAINER was nearly 2 lengths clear when shifting out and determined that LITTLE BUT FIERCE was only inconvenienced in this incident, having to change ground to race to the inside of THE ENTERTAINER.  The Adjudicative Committee was further satisfied that but for the inconvenience to LITTLE BUT FIERCE BY the entertainer, at the 100m, LITTLE BUT FIERCE would not have finished ahead of THE ENTERTAINER.

On that basis, the protest is dismissed.

Decision

Accordingly, the protest is dismissed, and the Judge’s placings stand.

The Adjudicative Committee authorised the payment of stakes and dividends in accordance with its decision.