July objection - upheld or not ????

I say overruled, did Fourie stop riding? (No) but im not the stipes, but congrats to the Snaith stable, top trainer and top horse.

Looking at it from a horses perspective I got the impression that Legislate initiated Wylies interest in him

THE STIPENDIARY STEWARDS REPORTED (ER) :
a) WYLIE HALL (AUS) (M Byleveld), the winner, placed second on an Objection. Selected for the taking of specimens for analysis. Trainer W Marwing advised (RJ).
b) LEGISLATE (R Fourie) placed second and eventual winner after Objection. Selected for the taking of specimens for analysis. Trainer J Snaith advised (RJ).
c) FUTURA (G Hatt), placed third. Selected for the taking of specimens for analysis. Trainer B Crawford advised (TN).
d) In view of the performances of ESPUMANTI (GB) (A Delpech) (15.60 lengths) and LOUIS THE KING (K Shea) (11.35 lengths) the Veterinary Surgeon was requested to examine this filly and this colt.
e) KING OF PAIN (B Fayd’herbe) and LOUIS THE KING (K Shea) raced wide throughout.
f) ESPUMANTI (GB) (A Delpech) pulling hard in the early stages difficult to restrain.
g) In a slow run race CAPTAIN AMERICA (S Cormack) pulling hard and difficult to settle, clipped the heels of IN THE FAST LANE (G van Niekerk) at approximately the 1800 metre mark and stumbled.
h) At approximately the 700 metre mark LOUIS THE KING (K Shea) clipped the heels of CAPTAIN AMERICA (S Cormack) and stumbled becoming unbalanced.
i) Approaching the 250 metre mark LEGISLATE (R Fourie) shifted inwards and brushed the hindquarters of WYLIE HALL (AUS) (M Byleveld) and was straightened. Leaving the 200 metre mark WYLIE HALL (AUS) (M Byleveld) shifted outwards and brushed LEGISLATE (R Fourie) outwards and thereafter between the 100 metre mark and the 50 metre mark WYLIE HALL (AUS) (M Byleveld) continued to shift outwards brushing LEGISLATE (R Fourie) on two occasions.
j) An Objection was lodged by Jockey R Fourie, rider of the second placed horse LEGISLATE, against the winner WYLIE HALL (AUS) (M Byleveld) on the grounds of interference over the final 300 metres. The Objection Board after considering the evidence were of the opinion that but for the interference LEGISLATE ( R Fourie) would have beaten WYLIE HALL (AUS) (M Byleveld)and therefore upheld the Objection and amended the result.
k) An Inquiry will be held into Trainer W Marwing’s behaviour in and around the Boardroom after the running of the 7th Race.
l) WHITELINE FEVER (R Danielson) returned post race having cast the left hind shoe.



While I agree with the Board using their rules - I do however have a problem with the subjective presumption that Horse A would have beaten Horse B BUT for the interference. How many times have we seen a horse that looks dead and gone come back to win(Strydom has done this many times) -

that was a shocking decision...this is going straight to court because it is daylight robbery,.

I won on Legislate, but thought it was a very poor decision

The Judges used their opinion in coming to the decision? is there no appeals panel?

I am more interested in the behaviour of Mr Weiho Marwing in the boardroom...

hibernia wrote: The Judges used their opinion in coming to the decision? is there no appeals panel?

Bob the rules entitle them to make that decision - Factually there was contact twice by WH and once early on by Legislate - Now the first contact is nullified by the fact that WH still won the race(His placing was not affected by the contact) - The Stipes then use their discretion to determine if Legislate would have won BUT for the interference. They looked at the distance he was beaten, the amount of ground he lost from being unbalanced in the last 50m - the steps taken by both Jockeys to avoid the incident etc - I doubt any court case or appeal would succeed as the rules give the Stipes subjective power to decide the merits of the case and there was a serious movement (watch Punta Areanas behind WH) of at least 5 horse widths to the outside by WH which could(subjective again because we just don't know) have cost Legislate the Race.
I have always thought that a "contact in the last 200m" rule should apply - If you make contact in this area and the movement is caused by you then you are placed behind any horse you affect.

toontony wrote: I won on Legislate, but thought it was a very poor decision

If you feel bad about winning that money then please send to the Captain Morgan Preservation group of which I am the sitting President :evil:

LoL

If you needed the money for more Captain Morgan, you should have listened to my tips including Tellina

toontony wrote: If you needed the money for more Captain Morgan, you should have listened to my tips including Tellina

I have a feeling that I'll be having a bigger bank balance if a horse I like on Thursday takes to the sand and I'll tip her to you after I've struck a bet :evil: