Greg Sugars NOT so sweet - will he be Disqualified? NO, Stewards FAIL us

[Messenger]

There are plenty of threads that I could have put this in but I have chosen to highlight it even though it is a Lowlight

IMO the drive deserves 12mths disqualification

There is a sprint lane at Bendigo

Sugars was on the favourite, the winner was supported

http://www.harness.org.au/racing/fie...22#BNC20012209

[Messenger]

It was some form reversal for the winner
It started 100/1 for Jennifer Douglas 10 days before and finished 10th
transferred to Julie Douglas and Bob's your uncle

[Showgrounds]

Shocking drive, had it been by an occasional driver it would be deemed incompetent. Which, considering we are talking about Greg Sugars, makes it even worse.

[Messenger]

http://www.harness.org.au/racing/ste...l/?mc=BN200122

Greg Sugars, driver of Eiffel From Heaven ($2.70 fav), was questioned regarding the tactics adopted on the mare, in particular his decision to not direct the mare wider between the 400m to the 200m to fully follow Mister Cracker and further his decision to direct the mare wider on the track upon straightening and not utilise the sprint lane which resulted in Eiffel From Heaven being held up during the early stages of the home straight prior to obtaining clear running.

Mr Sugars explained that he was aware Sheffield Peak had been under pressure passing the 400m and for this reason shifted out to a half cart position in an attempt to follow Mister Cracker with a view of improving to its outside approaching the 300m. Mr Sugars added upon doing so Mister Cracker was placed under pressure and did not improve forward as expected and for this reason he directed Eiffel From Heaven in to follow Sheffield Peak to gain clear running via the sprint lane. Mr Sugars added that he was cautious not shift out fully from behind Sheffield Peak as he did not want to allow Malava Miss the opportunity of improving to his inside and thereby saving ground rounding the final turn when he would be required to improve wider on the track around runners and it being afforded clear running via the sprint lane. Mr Sugars added he felt should he remain following Sheffield Peak then this would result in Malava Miss being placed three back along the marker pegs inside Betterthanflyhigh and consequently unable to improve until upon straightening when he would have first use of the sprint lane.

Mr Sugars further explained that once Malava Miss commenced to improve wider he attempted to also shift wider, however due to that runner improving quickly he was unable to continue to do so without causing interference. Mr Sugars further explained that upon straightening he persisted with his attempt to shift wider when able due to being positioned slightly wider rather than directing Eiffel From Heaven to the extreme inside and added he felt the mare still had sufficient opportunity to finish in its best possible position. Upon consideration of the tactics adopted by Mr Sugars, and the subsequent explanation, Stewards did not feel that the tactics adopted were entirely unreasonable in these circumstances and took the matter no further on the available evidence.

Up until the emboldened this was a beautiful piece of storytelling and it must have been lulling the stewards to sleep because when we got to the emboldened part they should have been saying YOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING - a novice would have known to go to the sprint lane

I have lost all faith in the chair of this stewards panel Michael Ross

So now we are supposed to accept that there was nothing to see here and move on
This is plain wrong
The sport is doomed if this is the best we can do!

[Messenger]

Ask yourself if a novice would have been so commended for this story (I know they would probably not have had the oratory skills)
I am a fan of Greg Sugars driving skills but stewards cannot be charmed by our 'name drivers' in the stewards room

This was no driver mistake, Greg Sugars does not make those sort of mistakes
Does Michael Ross believe that Eiffel From Heaven would have won the race if he used the sprint lane? (Everybody else does)
If he does then in this betting reliant industry - Mr Sugars had to be suspended
Furthermore, a comprehensive investigation needed to be initiated to determine if/why Mr Sugars did not want to win the race

[Messenger]

https://www.thetrots.com.au/news/int...pril-may-2018/
Scroll down and you will find a 'Getting To Know' on Michael Ross

I think Michael needs to read his own words:

Q: What does Integrity mean to you?
Integrity is being honest and having strong moral principles and truthfulness and that the industry requires this and no one person within the harness racing industry is bigger then it.

This means not being charmed by the big names (ps I am assuming the then instead of than is a typo)

It mentions that Michael was a driver - does anybody know what state he drove in?

[Messenger]

I felt for the trainer Mark Callaghan who normally drives the horse himself but I see that the horse has now gone to Brett Bunfield

[Showgrounds]

I've never heard of Michael Ross but so many of us "drivers" never progressed past trials or fast work. This non-decision is not a joke because it is not funny. It is a slap in the face for those of us who have mucked out boxes, spent sleepless nights foaling down mares and sleeping in boxes with sick mares and foals. Not to mention those who fund the racing industry - the punters. Sugars told the stewards a fairy tale except their was no happy ending. Well, thre was for Greg.

It highlights the ineptitude of stewarding across the board. In past times the best steward panels included former horsemen, names such as Keith Greenwood, Leigh Kirby and Lou Austin come to mind. Try spinning them a cock and bull story and see how you got on. At the same time if you gave them a plausible explanation they would support you and not try to fit you up. Unfortunately stewards deal these days with some well resourced smarties that will mount a legal challenge or appeal against any decision that doesn't go there way. Overturning the convictions against the likes of The Cobram Three undoubtedly leaves the feeling emasculated when facing potentially controversial decisions such as the Sugars one.

The CARE principle comes into play.

[aussiebreno]

I've never heard of Michael Ross but so many of us "drivers" never progressed past trials or fast work. This non-decision is not a joke because it is not funny. It is a slap in the face for those of us who have mucked out boxes, spent sleepless nights foaling down mares and sleeping in boxes with sick mares and foals. Not to mention those who fund the racing industry - the punters. Sugars told the stewards a fairy tale except their was no happy ending. Well, thre was for Greg.

It highlights the ineptitude of stewarding across the board. In past times the best steward panels included former horsemen, names such as Keith Greenwood, Leigh Kirby and Lou Austin come to mind. Try spinning them a cock and bull story and see how you got on. At the same time if you gave them a plausible explanation they would support you and not try to fit you up. Unfortunately stewards deal these days with some well resourced smarties that will mount a legal challenge or appeal against any decision that doesn't go there way. Overturning the convictions against the likes of The Cobram Three undoubtedly leaves the feeling emasculated when facing potentially controversial decisions such as the Sugars one.

The CARE principle comes into play.

Not saying you necessarily forgot, but its proves your point even more considering Cobram initially had a 4th.

[Showgrounds]

Don't worry, I haven't forgotten D'Artagnan.