THE SUNSHINE COAST NEWSPAPER COLUMN: THE EAGLE FARM PROTEST ... A PROTEST WITH A DIFFERENCE

By Graham Potter | Sunday, December 18, 2016

Graham Potter writes a weekly column for the Sunshine Coast daily. Due to demand from those having trouble accessing the paper these columns are now also published on HRO courtesy of the Sunshine Coast daily.

Attending a protest hearing at a racetrack is an interesting experience.

The media have been allowed to observe protest hearings for some time now and, in general, there are certain ‘givens’ going into the steward’s room.

For example, the rider and the connections of the horse allegedly impeded will claim they suffered a heavy bump without which they would have easily have made up more ground than the margin by which they were beaten.

Some jockeys will even claim that it is ‘clear for everybody to see what happened’ on the video. They use words like, ‘obviously’ and ‘no doubt.’

Meanwhile the rider and connections of the horse accused of causing interference will state the horses coming together was a brush at best, not any real contact, and that they were always going to win. “Clearly.’ ‘No question about it.’

You know that there is almost always going to be this real ‘give and take’ exchange with the truth often struggling to find a clear run in the debate.

That is the way it works.

Stakeholders involved do whatever they have to do to keep or reclaim the race following a set procedure where that combative mindset is so entrenched it almost always follows a familiar path.

*******************************************************************************************************

The protest in the third race at Doomben last Wednesday was the exception to the rule.

Whatever the rights and wrongs of that particular outcome, punters on the second placed runner, in theory at least, would have expected a lot more from their jockey in the protest hearing.

“I probably might have just got up,” was hardly the compelling line of evidence you would expect from somebody trying to convince the stewards to reverse the result, particularly when the jockey and trainer of the winner were making strong cases of their own, some thought against the odds.

There was just no venom in his strike ... no, ‘I would have gone past him for sure.’

Does that rider deserve censure for arguably making a half-hearted argument and hardly even mentioning the way his mount was carried out right across the track, albeit after he had initiated the contact, over the final 100m ... or, heavens above, was he just telling the truth as he saw it?

That in itself remains an interesting debate.

The bottom line though is that any protest outcome is owned by the stewards and, as they well know, whatever arguments are put forward, passionate or passive, their final decision will never be the right one for everyone.

As was the case last Wednesday.

******************************************************************************************************

HRO comments:

The argument and counter argument that goes on post verdict after a contentious protest decision really mirrors what happens in the steward's room.

It all depends which side you are looking at it from.

But this time the discussion is to no avail as the result is already officially done and dusted.

For the record, these are the relevant comments put forward in evidence by the connections of the two runners involved. (Read in conjunction with viewing the race photos on the right).

Robbie Fradd ... giving his grounds for his protest:

"My horse does drift in a bit ... then he goes in a bit more ... there might be a bit of contact there ... I think the inside horse has also drifted out and made contact with me which has unbalanced my horse. I think we would have been a lot closer. I probably might have just got up."

Jim Byrne ... defending his winning ride on Tempete Rouge:

"I think it is quite evident on the video my filly is going pretty straight until the first point of contact which is from Mark My Word ... who comes in and screws my horses hind-quarters sideways.

"When Mark My Word makes contact I do concede my horse shifts out. I was on a straight path before that and had Mark My Word's jockey stopped and straighten his horse instead of riding along, we would not have made contact. My horse only shifted after the first point of contact.

Matthew Dunn ... trainer of the winner, Tempete Rouge:

"The second horse has come in probably six horses. I didn't go to university and study physics but if a horse hits another horses hindquarters like that, that horse has nowhere to go except sideways. My horse was forced to go that way, he had to go left or fall over, and there was a domino effect ... but we hadn't even moved before they touched.

From the official Steward's Report:

On return to scale a protest was lodged by jockey R. Fradd, rider of the 2nd placegetter, Mark My Word against Tempete Rouge being declared the winner, alleging interference over the final stages.

After taking evidence from the parties concerned and viewing the stewards’ patrol video, stewards were of the view that inside the 100m Mark My Word, which was hanging, initially shifted in, bumping the hind quarters of Tempete Rouge, which then shifted out in the run to the finish line.

Stewards were of the view that the initial contact was as a result Mark My Word shifting in, and bearing in mind the long head margin at the finish, they were unable to satisfy themselves that the result should be altered and therefore dismissed the protest.

More articles