Greg, I agree that it looked bad for a 2nd favourite (and stablemate of the heavily supported favourite) to drop in like that.
Multi runners from the same stable is always a worry for our code as positioning is so regimented compared to the gallops (where IMO there is less opportunity for team riding).
In this case if they preferred their other runner to win, then his stablemate was never going to beat him. If MM stays in the death but hangs back like he was, he was 99% certain to get the 1x1 from the horse that made a move shortly after but then if you didn't want to win you wait to be pocketed by the 3w train.
Dropping to the fence looks really suspect - some might think it makes a certainty that you will not win. If the stewards put themselves in the shoes of a punter, are they going to be happy seeing that move if they had their money on MM . I believe the onus is on the stewards to expect every driver to give their horse the best possible chance and I am surprised that they accepted GD's explanation so readily - did they consider it improved MM's chance of winning? I wonder whether they even asked GD if that was his intention - improve the horse's chance of winning.
The fact that he was stood down for 7 days after his previous race lends some weight to the driver's explanation - was there any notification that MM would be driven conservatively (not sure there is such a thing, now I think it is either further forward or further back)
Perception is everything and that move did not look good - thus the QDT and yet it meant nothing for the driver did little more than disagree with them. Try that next time the police pull you over
Here is a link to the race folks
http://www.harness.org.au/racing/fie...17#APC09091710