It emerged during the closing arguments of Christophe Soumillon's appeal against an eight-day ban that the Royal Ascot raceday stewards issued the 'wrong' penalty for his ride on Puerto Rico in the St James's Palace Stakes. Disciplinary panel chair HH Clement Goldstone KC stated: 'They took the wrong bracket for penalties.' Barrister Louis Weston, representing the British Horseracing Authority (BHA), agreed: 'They certainly reached the wrong decision on penalty.'
Background of the Incident
The ten-time French champion jockey was banned for eight days after the £700,000 Group 1 feature on 18 June. Soumillon rode Aidan O'Brien's Puerto Rico, the stable second string to Irish 2,000 Guineas winner Gstaad. During the race, Soumillon looked behind twice, notably when entering the straight where Puerto Rico moved to the left, leaving a clear run along the inside rail for Ryan Moore on Gstaad. Moore's challenge fell short as Gstaad lost by a short head to Bow Echo, while Puerto Rico finished last of six.
Inquiry Findings
At the subsequent inquiry, Soumillon was found guilty of riding Puerto Rico 'in such a way that intended to give an advantage to another horse from the same stable, in that he moved his mount away from the rail thereby ensuring a clear run for Gstaad on his inside.' However, the appeal hearing revealed the penalty bracket was misapplied. Goldstone noted the range for the breach was seven to 21 days. Weston argued: 'They've gone right to the bottom of it, and they shouldn't have done. They should have started at the starting point which was 14.'
Soumillon's Defence
Soumillon denied riding to Gstaad's advantage. He stated he had decided before the race to stay off the inside rail because he believed the ground was slower there and wanted to avoid a point where he had seen noisy children earlier. He also said Puerto Rico tends to hang left and that he looked behind after hearing a horse clip heels twice. His solicitor, Rory Mac Neice, argued that TurfTrax data supported the view that the ground was quicker away from the rail. Mac Neice added: 'The BHA does not allege any pre-planning, no allegation that Mr Soumillon was instructed to ride for another Coolmore horse by any person... It is inherently implausible that someone of Mr Soumillon's competitive nature would unilaterally and on his own account, decide in a race to ride for another horse.'
Prosecution's Argument
In his final submission, Weston said Soumillon had not given the ground as the reason for his manoeuvre to the stewards at the inquiry. He stated: 'If you are a rider of the skill of Mr Soumillon you wouldn't want to get into a conflict with another horse. You would follow the rail because it's straight line up the inside. He doesn't do any of that. He does the opposite. He gets into trouble with Power Blue. He rides into trouble and he opens the door to allow another horse through.'
Outcome
The hearing was adjourned, with the verdict expected on Thursday.
