Amo Racing's Norfolk Stakes Appeal Dismissed

Amo Racing's appeal against the controversial victory of The Ridler  in the Norfolk Stakes (G2) has been dismissed, although Paul Hanagan's ride on the winner was criticized by the disciplinary panel as "poor, reprehensible, and self-evidently culpable."

In a lengthy explanation of the reasons behind the verdict, the panel also called for a "broad review" of the interference rules in the wake of the controversial race.

The British Horseracing Authority announced this month that a consultation would take place to consider whether penalties for riding offenses should be increased, including those involving interference.

However, the panel suggested any broad review of interference should go further than being "merely confined to the matter of penalties" and that such a review would be "desirable and could be very beneficial."

The Norfolk, in which The Ridler interfered with the placed horses, is one of a series of high-profile cases relating to riding offenses this season. 

The stewards at Royal Ascot suspended Hanagan June 16 for 10 days for careless riding in the Norfolk, while Tom Marquand this month unsuccessfully appealed against a three-day ban for careless riding, which was imposed after winning a group 3 at Glorious Goodwood.

And in July, Robert Havlin had his five-day ban for careless riding aboard Free Wind  in the Bet365 Lancashire Oaks (G2) canceled without the case reaching appeal after the BHA reviewed the decision made by the stewards.

Although the panel rejected the appeal brought forward by Kia Joorabchian's Amo operation, Hanagan's ride in the Norfolk was criticized heavily even if it did not, in the panel's view, amount to being dangerous.

The panel said: "His inattention and misjudgement were not defensible. He is a jockey of huge experience (with approaching 17,000 rides and 2,200 winners behind him) and should have done much better. It was a bad, high-level instance of careless riding and he entirely deserved a suspension of real substance."

Amo, responsible for second and third Walbank  and Crispy Cat , argued that The Ridler should be disqualified or demoted for veering sharply across the track under Hanagan and causing interference to the placed horses, with the runner-up beaten 1 3/4 lengths and the third two lengths.

Rory Mac Neice, representing Joorabchian, said the jockey rode dangerously and his mount should therefore be disqualified, while barristers Roderick Moore, for Hanagan, and Louis Weston, for the BHA, argued against the claim of dangerous riding, and stressed the interference came for a "very short bit of time."

However, the claim that the winning ride should be deemed dangerous was rejected. "We cannot possibly hold that what happened by way of interference either to Crispy Cat or to Brave Nation amounted to interference which was severe," the panel wrote.

A second ground for appeal suggesting Crispy Cat would have won the race in the absence of interference was also rejected. In the panel's view, this chance was described as "slim."