Home » Racing & Sport » Judge Error – NHA Takes Responsibility

Judge Error – NHA Takes Responsibility

'Best interests of the sport of horseracing'

The National Horseracing Authority confirms that at the race meeting held at Flamingo Park Racecourse on Monday, 12 August 2019, Judge Mr Nigel Mazibuko erred in entering the incorrect result for Race 9.

National Horseracing AuthorityThe details of the error are that,  the Judge originally advised the Stipendiary Board of the correct result of the race that being: 2 x 6 x DH 3, 13 x 8.

It was based on this disclosure that the Stipendiary Board gave the “ALL CLEAR”.

However, during the subsequent entering of the result onto the system, the Judge erred and entered the dead heat for third position as 3 x 8 x 13.

In these circumstances, that is, where the Judge makes an error in declaring the placings in a race, Rule 65.8 makes provision for the correction of this error.

In this regard, and after an investigation into the matter, it was established that from the photo finish of the race it was visually evident that there was a 0,50 length difference between the dead heat third position and fifth position.

Accordingly, the Judge’s result was amended to the correct result.

Additionally, in order to ensure that the above application does not result in prejudice to any interested party, the NHA recommended to the Racing Operator that it amended its declared result to read as the correct result.

The NHA acknowledged that this would ordinarily come at a cost to the Racing Operator, however, the NHA takes full accountability and responsibility for the error.

Ultimately, the above decision is in the best interest of the sport of thoroughbred horseracing.

Internal disciplinary action will be taken.

  • Press release issued by NHA on Tuesday 13 August 2019

Have Your Say

Comments Policy
The Sporting Post encourages allcomers to feel free to have their say in the spirit of enlightening the topic, the participants and the originator of the thread. However, if it is deemed to be either offensive, insulting, personal, false or possibly unsubstantiated, the Sporting Post shall, on it's own assessment, alter or remove comments.

The use of pseudonyms is permitted by posters to afford everybody the equal opportunity to inform or express ideas, on condition that the content of any post does not infringe upon any aspect, stated or implied, of the Sporting Post's advertised public comments policy.

It should be expressly noted that the views expressed by posters are not necessarily those of the Sporting Post.

8 comments on “Judge Error – NHA Takes Responsibility

  1. Martin says:

    How long is it going to the NHS to hold it’s internal disciplinary inquiry, probably more than it took for the PE trainers. Then will be given a slap on the wrist.
    The NHS is a joke there in no constancy and I thought with Mr Vee was going to more transparent with the betting public and all involved.
    The NHA needs to grow some b…s

  2. Speedyvar says:

    Just what is the NHA up to.They state
    The details of the error are that, the Judge originally advised the Stipendiary Board of the correct result of the race that being: 2 x 6 x DH 3, 13 x 8.

    It was based on this disclosure that the Stipendiary Board gave the “ALL CLEAR”.
    The ALL CLEAR was given on this results so now Rule 65.8 clicks in
    65.8 Should it be proved after the ALL CLEAR has been announced that there was an error in the
    placings declared by the judge, the ALL CLEAR result shall stand for BETTING PURPOSES.
    However, the error shall be corrected in the records for statistical purposes. Where such
    correction affects stake money such money shall be returned to the RACING OPERATOR
    for re-distribution.
    After the ALL CLEAR is posted Rule 65.8 does not make provision for the correction of this error for BETTING PURPOSES.
    So the question is what is going on with NHA and the Rules

  3. Roderick Mattheyse says:

    How does the NHA take full accountability and responsibility for the error ?

  4. Charles says:

    Nick Rust, the British Horseracing Authority’s chief executive, in response to a complaint about BHA mistakes. “Where the wrong results are called, we have fired the offending judge,” . “Again, no technology or second checks in place until my watch. We won’t see further errors now.”
    Would we ever hear Vee Moodley say the same?

  5. JessK says:

    What appears not have been taken into account is that the Tote has its own rules which have been approved by the National Gambling Board.

    The two relevant rules here are :-

    Horseracing is conducted subject to the rules of the National Horseracing Authority and
    any other condition(s) imposed by the PLA

    The result of a Race shall be official when they are declared as such in terms of these Rules, that
    is when the All Clear is declared by the racetrack and the “Official Result” is announced by the

    The NHA statement about what transpired at Flamingo Park makes little sense. It appears that the NHA does not understand the rules.

    1. Rule 65.8 does NOT allow for a correction of the error.

    2. The NHA has no right to reccomend to the Tote to change the result. The change of the result by the Tote whether on the recommendation of the NHA or not is a breach by the Tote of its rules and could have far reaching implications locally or internationally.

    3. It’s almost impossible that an investigation in terms of the rules took place.

    Rule 79 states :

    All inquiries, investigations and adjudications into and upon breaches or contraventions of
    the CONSTITUTION or the RULES by any PERSON or individual, shall be conducted,
    undertaken and made by an INQUIRY BOARD constituted and appointed in terms of the
    CONSTITUTION (which clearly didn’t happen)

    On the surface, this looks like a breach of the rule by the rule makers. Unless a comment or explanation from Mr. Moodley and the NHA can tell us otherwise ?

  6. Mgram says:

    The way I see things, the rules are administered in two ways:

    1. If a licenced individual transgresses the rules, they are charged, in the majority of casesfound guilty, and given a fine

    2. If the NHA transgresses the rules, they explain the transgression as “in the best interests of horse racing”, and no fine nor explanation is necessary for not applying the rules in the first place.

    It seems it is very much a do as I say, and dont do what I do culture.

    This ruling would not stand up to scrutiny in any competent court of law.

  7. Wayne Fouche says:

    I’m afraid there is no way the NHA can take responsibility. FIRE the judge and FIRE the so called race course managers.Only fully trained people should be allowed to be in these positions. But Alas this will never happen.


    Wayne, Vee Moodley is cross training officials to be Judges, Handicappers & Stipendiary Stewards.

    Why not try them out at the starting stalls, the medical van and the chip fryer ?

Leave a Comment

‹ Previous

‘I Was Framed’ – Flamingo Park Trainer

Next ›

Champion Breeders - Summerhill

Live From 18h30 This Evening!