Christophe Soumillon's ban for riding to benefit a stablemate has been reduced to five days from eight on appeal after the disciplinary panel concluded that while his ride on Puerto Rico aided Gstaad, it was not his intention to do so.
Soumillon appealed against the sanction by race-day stewards at Royal Ascot, who had deemed his ride in the St. James's Palace Stakes (G1) had been performed in a way that allowed Gstaad, ridden by Ryan Moore, to get a favorable run up the inside rail when narrowly losing out to hot favorite Bow Echo.
In a summary of its findings, the disciplinary panel said the lack of any clear intent from Soumillon to ride in a way to aid a stablemate was the key factor in reducing the ban, for all that his ride did assist Gstaad's efforts in the race, with the penalty instead being one of interference rather than "team tactics."
The panel said, in part: "We consider that, absent any intention on the part of (Soumillon) to benefit his stablemate, this breach should be dealt with as what is in effect a case of interference, significantly aggravated by the fact that it had the consequence of benefiting a stablemate.
"In those circumstances, we consider that an appropriate sanction is a suspension of five days. Accordingly, the disciplinary panel allows the appeal against the sanction by reducing the period of suspension from eight days to five days."
During the evidence sessions July 2, Soumillon's impassioned defense included claims he had heard opponents clipping heels, was in search of better ground, was being "aggressively" pressured by rivals, and was seeking to avoid an area where noisy children had been present earlier in the day when steering away from the inside rail.
Closing arguments were given to the disciplinary panel Thursday. Louis Weston, representing the British Horseracing Authority, said the appeal came down to how Soumillon's ride appeared to be at odds with what would be expected of a top-level rider in a group 1 race, including when checking over his shoulder in the final stages of the contest.
He said: "Mr. Soumillon instead rides in an opposite way to what you would expect. Look at the looks. He is clearly looking to see what is happening. What he is doing is checking where Gstaad is."
However, Rory Mac Neice, representing Soumillon, said the BHA had failed to make the case that Soumillon's riding had been done with intent to advantage Gstaad.
Mac Neice said there had always been room on the inside rail for a horse to go through and that TurfTrax data showed the ground was better where Puerto Rico had raced away from the rail.
He added, "There are no allegations he was instructed to ride for another Coolmore horse. The BHA's case is Mr. Soumillon decided this all by himself—he was not asked to do it. That would have required him to have acted completely out of character. It's inherently implausible that someone of Mr. Soumillon's competitive nature would unilaterally and on his own ride for another horse."
