Taumarunui RC 26 July 2025 – R4 (request for a ruling) – RIBKRAKA

Evidence:

Following the running of Race 4, Chief Stipendiary Steward John Oatham lodged an Information requesting a ruling pursuant to Rule 637(1)(b) seeking to disqualify RIBKRAKA from its 2nd placing.

The Judge’s numbers crossing the line were:

1st        No 5   ORTEGA

2nd       No 1   RIBKRAKA

3rd        No 8   VIVA GLAM

4th        No 2   EAGLE ROCK

The basis for the request was that RIBKRAKA caused severe interference (to the field) near the 950m when crossing ILLUMINATED MISS, when not fully clear, which clipped a heel and fell.

Rule 637(1)(b) provides “A horse may be, in addition to any other penalty which may be imposed, disqualified for a race if such horse,…causes interference to another horse.

Submissions for Decision:

Mr Oatham commenced the Stewards’ submissions by reading the Rule. Stipendiary Steward B Jones then showed the head on race films and identified all runners in the race field. He pointed out Mr Okubo leading the field and looking to shift down to the rails, with Ms Strawbridge placed to his inside. He played the film forward, showing Mr Okubo looking to his inside on two occasions, while continuing an ongoing shift to the rails, eventually getting directly into the line of Ms Strawbridge (ILLUMINATED MISS), causing her to clip heels and fall. Mr Jones said that Mr Okubo was never his own length plus another length clear and the result of his actions, has caused every runner in behind to suffer interference. He said the worst interference was suffered by ILLUMINATED MISS (fell), GRACE THE ACE (brought down), I PARK (brought down), and GINA ROSA (lost Rider).

Mr Scott, Trainer of RIBKRAKA, said in assessing the merits of the Ruling, the Adjudicative Committee should only focus on what happened to the second horse and what had occurred to other runners, was irrelevant. Mr Scott identified that ILLUMINATED MISS was racing with a hood on and just prior to the incident, the Rider was looking to take another hold. Mr Scott submitted that Ms Strawbridge was as much to blame for the incident, in that she was in a position she should not have been in.

In regard to the disqualification, Mr Scott asked Mr Oatham if a disqualification under this Rule had occurred previously in NZ, with Mr Oatham confirming that a previous disqualification under this Rule had occurred in 2014. Mr Scott referenced the fact that there were 6 lengths back to the third horse at the finish and if horses were to be disqualified due to interference, “where would it end”, as it would result in a lot more disqualifications. He said in his view, for a slight misjudgement by Jockey Okubo and the fact Ms Strawbridge couldn’t stop her horse, while going for another hold and not pulling back to take a trail, determined that it wasn’t all Mr Okubo’s fault.

Mr Okubo said that he looked to his inside on two occasions and that Ms Strawbridge should have taken a hold of her horse to take a trail.

Mr Pike, assisting Mr Okubo, said speaking to a Jockey after the race, they suggested Ms Strawbridge was struggling to hold her horse. He said that Ms Strawbridge’s horse was laying out towards the heels of Mr Okubo’s mount when racing in tight quarters, and that Ms Strawbridge was an inexperienced 3kg claimer. Mr Pike also added he had not heard of this Rule being implemented previously and asked Mr Oatham to outline the date at which it had previously occurred. Mr Oatham outlined the date and circumstances of the previous breach, which resulted in that runner being disqualified from winning the race; on that occasion, the Rider Jonathan Parkes, was deemed to be reckless.

Mr Oatham’s final submission was that the Stewards could not accept that any blame should be attributed to Ms Strawbridge. He said while she is a relatively inexperienced Rider, she was always holding a position to the inside of Mr Okubo. He said despite Mr Okubo looking to his inside on two occasions, he continued to move towards the rail, placing pressure on Ms Strawbridge’s mount, while only 1/2 – 3/4  of a length clear.  Mr Oatham told the Adjudicative Committee that if it was so apparent that Ms Strawbridge couldn’t hold her mount, then Mr Okubo should not have crossed and if Ms Strawbridge’s mount was laying out, it only occurred very late and was a result of Ms Strawbridge turning her horse’s head towards the rail and away from the heels of Mr Okubo’s mount.

Mr Oatham concluded by saying that Mr Okubo was totally culpable for the ride and “massive amount” of interference, which occurred to the entire field behind him. He said Stewards believed that given the level of interference, disqualification was warranted.

Reasons for Decision:

The Adjudicative Committee carefully considered the submissions presented and reviewed the various available camera angles of the incident.

To disqualify a horse from a race due to interference, is a rare occurrence and should only be done so under exceptional circumstances. The Adjudicative Committee is aware of two previous occasions where this Rule has been enforced, the most recent being in 2014, where Jonathan Parkes’ mount ABSOLUTELY SACRED, caused severe interference to DARBY SHAW, resulting in its Rider being dislodged. Mr Parkes’ mount went on to win the race and was subsequently disqualified. In 2009, Kate Hercock’s mount was disqualified from its finishing position, due to causing a fall.

The Adjudicative Committee advised connections that while it was a highly emotive event due to 3 horses falling, 1 being brought down and injury to their Riders, the Adjudicative Committee had looked at the circumstances leading up to, the consequential effects of the interference, any breach of the Rules that may have occurred and the outcome of the race, to determine whether disqualification was warranted.

The Adjudicative Committee identified that approaching the 1100m, Mr Okubo commenced to shift his mount down towards the rail. Racing to Mr Okubo’s inside was Ms Strawbridge, riding ILLUMINATED MISS.

Mr Okubo looks twice to his inside, while continuing to let his mount stride forward and shifts into the line of ILLUMINATED MISS, who clips a heel and falls. As a consequence, the entire field suffers interference, with a further two horses falling and one dislodging its Rider. When Mr Okubo shifts into the line of ILLUMINATED MISS, he is no more than 1 length clear and his mount is racing generously underneath him, the resultant interference leaves RIBKRAKA clear of the field. RIBKRAKA then goes on to finish the race in 2nd placing.

The Adjudicative Committee does not accept that Ms Strawbridge contributed to the incident. It is the Adjudicative Committee’s view that the interference occurred as a direct result of Mr Okubo’s carelessness and/or lack of judgment.

The Adjudicative Committee determined that, as a consequence of Mr Okubo’s actions, every runner in the field—except for his own mount, RIBKRAKA—suffered interference. This interference materially compromised each affected horse’s ability to either complete the race, or finish in their best possible placing.

In summary, Mr Okubo has ridden carelessly, constituting a breach of the Rules. His actions triggered a chain of events that led to significant interference and disruption to the entire race field. There is no doubt that the outcome of the race, was materially affected as a result.

In acting carelessly, Mr Okubo’s ride ultimately gained an advantage over the rest of the field. Accordingly, the Adjudicative Committee concludes that RIBKRAKA has benefited unfairly from this interference.

For these reasons, the Adjudicative Committee finds the Stewards’ request for a ruling to be justified and upholds the request to disqualify RIBKRAKA from its second placing.

Decision:

Accordingly, under the provisions of Rule 637(1)(b), the Adjudicative Committee disqualifies RIBKRAKA from its 2nd placing.

In addition, Mr Okubo forfeits his riding fee under the provisions of Rule 357(2):

Rule 357(2) Where a horse is disqualified from a Race by reason of the fault or misconduct of the Rider, the applicable riding fee will not be payable provided however that if the Adjudicative Committee is satisfied the disqualification is due to inexperience or inadvertence, it may direct that the Rider be paid the applicable riding fee.  

Revised placings:

1st          No 5   ORTEGA

2nd         No 8   VIVA GLAM

3rd          No 2   EAGLE ROCK

4th          No 4   BEAU MILLER