|
|
Post by rideanotherday on Dec 22, 2015 14:29:15 GMT
 Perhaps my western upbringing is showing...
There are a LOT of people upset that he got DQ'd over this. "FEI blood rule, which is FEI Jumping Rules Article 242.3.1: “Mandatory Disqualification - Horses bleeding on the flank(s), in the mouth or nose or marks indicating excessive use of spurs or of the whip anywhere on the horse.”
There is CLEARLY blood on the horse. (looks like a couple of nicks to me). Why are people trying to defend him? Article here.
The spurs I wear riding are not rock grinders by any stretch - they are blunt rowels. I've taken some winter hair off before when a particularly lazy horse didn't want to get off my leg nicely. I haven't marked a horse ever.
Perhaps someone who rides jumpers can weigh in and let me know a) how he managed to open the horse up and b) why is he being defended? |
|
|
|
Post by horseguy on Dec 22, 2015 21:46:44 GMT
I read the article from Chronicle of the Horse and it was like watching a C-Span segment. This is part of the "new way", which is rules governed by committees with appeal processes. I have been a ring steward at shows and a US Polo Association certified umpire. That was years ago when there was no instant replay or appeals. If the baseball umpire behind the plate said it was a strike, it was a strike. In that era individual judgement by officials was appreciated and valued by the participants of a sport. Likewise, officials felt and respected the sometimes great burden placed upon them. Life went on, things like appeals did not hold up the process nor could they be used to satisfy someone's need for drama. Judgement was paramount.
Now no one can be trusted to apply their individual judgement, it seems. Committees are formed to protect us from individual judgement. How's that workin for our culture?
The practical answer is in the moment. It's not about chapter and verse from a rule book that makes officials into mindless robots. It's about the horse. Did he have dry skin? Was there an prior wound? And it's about the rider. What kind of spurs does he use? Is he respectful of horses? Standing there in the moment an experienced judge, steward or umpire can make an integrated call taking into consideration all the applicable factors. The official can give a warning, penalty, or ejection based on all the facts and conditions much better than any committee. When this was the norm, yes there were some abuses of this absolute power, but far fewer mistakes occurred and less time was wasted than under the new approach, which is some kind of overcompensation for or of some crazy idea of governance.
|
|
