Waikato RC 11 February 2023 – R5 – SELVA VERDE

Evidence

Following the running of Race 6, an Information was filed Instigating a Protest pursuant to Rule 642(1). The Applicant, Trainer of sixth placed SELVA VERDE (No 10), alleged that the fourth placed RISING STORM (No 1) interfered with its chances over the concluding stages of the race.

The interference was alleged to have occurred in the final straight.

The Judge’s provisional placings were as follows:

4th  No. 1 RISING STORM

5th  No. 3 PATSYS LASS

6th  No. 10 SELVA VERDE

The margin between fourth and sixth was a neck and 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”.

Prior to hearing submissions from the respective parties, the Adjudicative Committee requested that Stewards show all available race films of the alleged interference and identify the runners. In addition, the provisions of the Protest Rule were outlined.

Submissions For Decision

The Applicant Mr Bishara, submitted that the films showed that his horse (SELVA VERDE) had to be restrained after RISING STORM rolled in. He said that Ms Newman had to take hold and although there is not much money involved between fourth and sixth placings, the interference cost his horse two placings.

The Rider of SELVA VERDE, Ms Newman submitted that she was “going for rails run and he (Mr Kennedy), came back onto me”.  She said that she had to take a hold of her mount and pull back.

The Trainer of RISING STORM, Mr Marsh, submitted that there was never sufficient room for SELVA VERDE to take the inside gap. He added that SELVA VERDE was under a hold, but Ms Newman never stopped riding.

The Rider of RISING STORM, Mr Kennedy, submitted that although his mount shifted in and out, there was not much of a gap for SELVA VERDE. He added that at one point he rolled off for 100 metres, and he did not think that SELVA VERDE would have gotten past his mount.

Mr Jones outlined the Stewards’ interpretation of the alleged interference.  He submitted that minor interference occurred after the 200-metre mark when RISING STORM rolled inward.  He said that Mr Kennedy did attempt to correct his mount.  Mr Jones said that both horses had an unimpeded run to the finish over the concluding 125 metres and Stewards could not say that SELVA VERDE would have beaten RISING STORM but for the interference.

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 that RISING STORM ran about over the concluding stages of the race and SELVA VERDE was held up and did suffer slight interference when looking for a rails run from the 200-metre mark.  At various stages, there was a gap sufficiently wide enough for SELVA VERDE, but the opportunity was not taken before the gap closed. Finally, it was clear that from the 120 metres, both runners had an unimpeded run to the finish.

Having considered the degree and nature of the interference, the way both horses finished the race and the margins at the finish, the Adjudicative Committee does not believe that SELVA VERDE would have finished ahead of RISING STORM.  On that basis, in the exercise of our discretion, the protest is dismissed, and the Judge’s placings stand.

Decision

The protest is dismissed and the Adjudicative Committee authorises the payment of dividends and stake money in accordance with its decision.