Wanganui JC 29 December 2024 – R3 – MARY ROSE

Evidence

Following the running of Race 3, an Information was filed Instigating a Protest pursuant to Rule 642(1). The Applicant, Rider L Allpress alleged that horse number 8 (MARYROSE) placed 1st by the Judge, interfered with the chances of horse number 3 (LA DULCIN’EE) placed 2nd by the Judge.

The alleged interference was over the concluding stages.

The Judge’s provisional placings were as follows:

1st   No. 8 MARYROSE

2nd  No. 3 LA DULCIN’EE

3rd   No.  9 WISEMEN’S DIVA

4th   No. 5 PERSONALLY

The official margin was ½ 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

Prior to hearing submissions from the respective parties, head, side and rear views of the incident were played.

Mrs Allpress showed the head-on view from the top of the straight, pointing out that she came from behind MARYROSE and was well established to the inside of that runner, when Mr Lawson-Carroll moved inwards and took her run. She said she had to stop riding for 4-5 strides at a crucial time of the race.

Trainer of MARYROSE, Mr G Andrew, acknowledged contact had been made, but said his Rider pulled off straight away and MARYROSE was pulling further ahead of LA DULCIN’EE towards the line. Mr Lawson-Carroll said LA DULCIN’EE had 2 opportunities down the home straight to push through the gap to the inside of MARYROSE, but was not good enough. He agreed there was contact, but said Mrs Allpress was only affected for a couple of strides and his horse was increasing the margin at the finish.

Stipendiary Steward Mr Goodwin, outlined the Stewards’ interpretation of the alleged interference. He said Mrs Allpress was well-established in the gap when the incident occurred, however over the final stages of the race, Mr Lawson-Carroll (MARYROSE) was comfortably holding LA DULCIN’EE.

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 MARYROSE moved inwards prior to the 100m mark and contacted LA DULCIN’EE. Both horses became unbalanced as a result. The Rider, Mr Lawson-Carroll, corrected his line of running and angled out wider on the track. His horse MARYROSE, ran to the line strongly. Mrs Allpress’ mount LA DULCIN’EE, did not appear to be making up any ground on the winner.

The Adjudicative Committee is satisfied that MARYROSE did interfere with the chances of LA DULCIN’EE, by making contact with that runner. The key components in dismissing the protest were how both horses were travelling prior to the interference, and how both ran to the line following the incident. LA DULCIN’EE was not travelling in a manner to suggest she was about to shoot through on the inside prior to MARYROSE moving in. Secondly, following the contact, LA DULCIN’EE did not appear to be making up any ground on MARYROSE, in fact MARYROSE looked to be finishing the better of the two.

Considering the way both horses finished the race off, and the margin of ½ length at the finish, the Adjudicative Committee has some doubt that LA DULCIN’EE would have finished ahead of MARYROSE, even in the absence of interference.  On that basis, in the exercise of the Adjudicative Committee’s discretion, the protest is dismissed, and the Judge’s placings stand.

Decision

Accordingly, the protest is dismissed, and the Judge’s placings stand. The Adjudicative Committee authorised the payment of dividends and stake money in accordance with the decision.