With regards to Husbands's suspension. I have owned trained and driven harness horses but have no experience with thoroughbreds. I did review the tape of the race several times, that Husbands was suspended for. He was 3rd longest in the betting pool yet saved all the ground by coming up the rail to finnish second. If I had bet him I would be estactic with the result and his effort. So why was he suspeneded. I can't prove it(because the Ontario Racing Commission is like a star chamber), but I have it on good information that "complaints were made from a couple of 2 dollar bettors that Husbands did not try because his brother rode the winner". Perhaps Husbands is not politically correct and is not a ORC sycophant, I don't know, but if you suspend him for that race I could send you tapes of 100's of races you would have to suspend others. It is beyond revolting,and not only was it right to reinstate him, but apologee's and compensation are deserved in his case. Oh by the way I would not know him or his brother if I fell over them!!

Definitely an interesting read.
Glad to hear the jockey Simon Husbands did indeed suceed in his appeal for his livelihood.
I find it very interesting that when a jockey does not use a whip he gets a suspension when whipping seems to be the norm for the industry that is reviewing it's whipping rules. As a fan, I did not see the race but I would not have thought any different if he did or did not use the whip. I watch both types of racing and enjoy them for what they are a battle between a number of horses & drivers/jockeys trying to prove who is best on that day.

Marie Stoyles-Moura