The Appeals Body (Division One) Joseph Finnegan (in the Chair), Robert Dore and Philip McLernon met at the Turf Club, The Curragh, Co Kildare on 10th November 2015 to consider the appeal of the Ann and Alan Potts Partnership, owner of Sizing Granite against the decision of the Stewards not the reverse the placings of Devils Bride, placed first, and Sizing Granite placed second, following the running of the Brady Family Ham Supporting Naas GAA Poplar Square Steeplechase (Grade 3) at Naas on 1st November 2015.

The grounds of appeal lodged were that Sizing Granite was interfered with by Devils Bride after jumping the final fence and but for the interference Sizing Granite would have won in view of the fact that the winning distance was only a head.

Evidence was heard from J.J. Burke, rider Sizing Granite, David Mullins, rider Devils Bride and Henry de Bromhead, trainer Sizing Granite. Film of the race was also viewed.

In his evidence J.J. Burke referred to the final stages of the race and the interference that was caused to his horse by Devils Bride crossing in front of him about one furlong from the finish. Mr Burke said Sizing Granite finds plenty under pressure and that he was staying on again when the interference occurred. He said the interference resulted in him having to take evasive action and in his view he would have won the race if interference did not take place.

In his evidence David Mullins said he accepted there was interference but it did not affect the result of the race. He said his horse idled when he hit the front and stayed on again when challenged by Sizing Granite in the latter stages of the race. He said he was confident that his horse was the best horse in the race and that he would have won anyway.

In his submission Henry de Bromhead referred to the definition of interference and said the actions of Devils Bride caused Sizing Granite to lose momentum and that J.J. Burke had to maneuver Sizing Granite around Devils Bride to get a clear run. He said Sizing Granite was beaten by a head and that the interference cost his horse the race. He said he was convinced if his horse had been allowed a clear run that he would have won, as the horse and jockey lost momentum as a result of the interference. He estimated that the interference cost his horse a length and a half and noted that his horse was only beaten by a head at the finish.

Having considered the evidence the Appeals Body was not satisfied that the result would have been altered if interference had not occurred and therefore dismissed the appeal. They ordered that the placings remain unaltered.

The case was presented by Paul Murtagh, Stipendiary Steward.