01/09/2026
It’s been a day or two since the end of the supreme and I wanted the dust to settle a bit but the constant celebrations on FB on the New Zealand win bothered me a bit as it wasn’t all that was presented.
’s what I wrote;
A bizarre end to the Wayleggo cup, reminiscent of the infamous under arm delivery in one day cricket, handed NZ the win.
Australian Grant Cooke posted an impressive score of 80 as the first competitor out for Australia in the final test. NZ trailed by 20 points coming in after two tests and had some ground to make up. Both judges gave Grant and Gilbert the good score. The competition continued with outstanding trialling from both teams. Scores were posted and it looked like Australia were heading for the win. Then the controversy. While watching the run on video the NZ team noticed that Gilbert had worked while wearing his dog collar. The rules state that this is permitted but the teams had agreed to not wear collars on NZ request. It hadn’t been noticed by Grant or either judge and score cards had been handed in, signed as correct and scores had been posted.
Setting a dangerous new precedent of video reviewing runs a protest was lodged by NZ. The result? A convenient penalty of 30 points for Grant and Gilbert handing NZ the win. It was not a breach of the rules to wear a collar, just an agreement, there was no acknowledged penalty for a dog wearing a collar but 30 points ensured the win. It was given well after the fact and in video review something that has never been done. Both judges missed it in real time but agreed on a penalty after the event. It was the only judging error that was reviewed when other errors were dismissed or ignored. The penalty was excessive and conveniently, enough points to overturn Australia’s lead. A bizarre end to what had been a terrific hard fought, nail biting contest. A bitter taste for the Aussie’s and a hollow win for the Kiwis. Wearing a muzzle in sheepdog trials is a 5 point penalty. Wearing a collar was deemed a 30 point penalty, excessive and extreme and just enough to overturn Australia’s lead.
What a shame the trial was won on arbitration rather than the quality of the dog work. A sad reflection of the modern cut throat win at any cost approach to sport. Like the under arm delivery of 1981, it’s a win, but it will be remembered for all the wrong reasons.
