Here is rule 31(a)
31. (a) In the event of the Stewards being satisfied that the result of a race has been
materially affected due to a contingency arising they may, at their sole and absolute
discretion, declare any race to be null and void or any horse or horses to be non-starter
(s), even after the same is run, provided however, that the weighed in or All Clear signal
has not been hoisted.
Above is rule 31 (a) lets break it up and see if justice has really been done.
1) In the event of the Stewards being satisfied that the result of a race has been
materially affected due to a contingency arising they may, at their sole and absolute
discretion, declare any race to be null and void or any horse or horses to be non-starter(s), even after the same is run, provided however, that the weighed in or All Clear signal has not been hoisted.
Above I have highlighted 4 points that link the sentence now lets see if any of them apply to the race in question.
A) materially affected : means the steward have to be SATISFIED that a party or parties have to have a materialistic gain at the time of making this decision they can proceed with the next step ,
Lets See if the stewards have fulfilled the criteria in their report... here is the report ::::::::::: the Stewards decided to invoke Rule 31(b) by declaring all bets on the race to be null and void as the circumstances presented prima facie evidence that the race was not fairly run with the favourite subject to an apparent malpractice. The decision was taken in the interest of the betting public and in view of the exceptional circumstances.
The term prima facie means : At first sight; before closer inspection , Evident without proof or reasoning; as it seems at first;
Clearly the meaning guilty at first sight and not PROVED hence the term the steward have to be SATISFIED does not apply as satisfied mean knowing beyond reasonable doubt and in there own report they were not 100% sure of the fact or facts.
2) at their sole and absolute discretion, declare any race to be null and void or any horse or horses to be non-starter (s), even after the same is run, provided however,
Did that really happen and why not .................... Maybe i am getting carried away but this decision does not do justice across the board.
This is gross injustice to the common public as the decision was evidently made as the horse was the favorite...... If Welsfargo did not finish second the stewards would have disqualified Maripsa and M kharidi which would have given the race to the Favorite but as W Fargo finished second it was not possible for the stewards to disqualify two horses hence they had to refund the bets.
We all know that stewards are punters to if even 30% of the stewards had backed the actual winner in the race would they have voted is favor of this ridiculous decision.
As Far a N Lagad is concerned I have no respect left for the Man hope Karma Catches up.
Disgraceful
