|
Post by MrsShowing on Sept 10, 2016 13:12:31 GMT
Ok, that makes sense. Thanks for that. It's helpful and reassuring.
I think in all honesty that, like Clobo, I've never come across a situation where I have thought a child was so big for a pony that I had a welfare concern. Adults yes, but never a child, and that is why I have always been happy to give verbal feedback.
Regarding the 4th, thank you. Let me think about it.
|
|
|
Post by Surprised on Sept 10, 2016 13:15:31 GMT
Thank you for sharing this but again this could be deemed as ambiguous when referencing this to the debate on 'rider unsuitability' which appears to be about riders being too big for the pony they ride. The question asked was about 'overall picture of the pony/horse and rider which could cover many things as well as size of rider and I would expect the majority of judges to respond in the positive to awarding marks on overall picture, showing after all is about type; conformation; way of going and overall picture. The question is not purely about size/weight of rider which may result in a different ratio of answers.
|
|
|
Post by the showing register on Sept 10, 2016 13:17:56 GMT
It has happened to me this year and I spoke to the child which, after all this consultation, I wish I had not ! It was fine and the child (not that young ) told me about the new pony just arrived as this one was too small so no harm done. I agree it is not a common thing but there is a growing number of adults probably pushing things a bit.
|
|
|
Post by the showing register on Sept 10, 2016 13:31:46 GMT
Thank you for sharing this but again this could be deemed as ambiguous when referencing this to the debate on 'rider unsuitability' which appears to be about riders being too big for the pony they ride. The question asked was about 'overall picture of the pony/horse and rider which could cover many things as well as size of rider and I would expect the majority of judges to respond in the positive to awarding marks on overall picture, showing after all is about type; conformation; way of going and overall picture. The question is not purely about size/weight of rider which may result in a different ratio of answers. I agree it is possible as Mrs Showing knows to make questions come up with the answer you might favour (which has not been done ) and it is to an extent ambiguous. But these are starting points and at the very least we have offered an opportunity for everyone to have a say its not being done by a committee behind closed doors and whatever the outcome it will have been discussed and raised the profile. We have downgraded the weight issue inside the ring to suitability which could also mean a child far too overhorsed and in doing this I had hoped to have taken some of the sting out of the weight issue until weight ratios are scientifically proven. Outside the ring it is often very clear someone is too big / heavy. Its all down to words and how they are interpreted !
|
|
|
Post by Surprised on Sept 10, 2016 14:14:11 GMT
I think the word 'suitability' is a way forward. As has already been debated it is a minefield to look for a definitive guideline on size as ponies vary so much a 128cm native for example could carry more than a 128cm show pony. Suitability of rider for breed type and using the breed descriptions is a way forward. I think this will help our breeders who were becoming very concerned and again shows the importance of judges who know breed type. Well done - phew enjoy the rest of your weekend!
|
|
|
Post by the showing register on Sept 10, 2016 15:05:34 GMT
I think the word 'suitability' is a way forward. As has already been debated it is a minefield to look for a definitive guideline on size as ponies vary so much a 128cm native for example could carry more than a 128cm show pony. Suitability of rider for breed type and using the breed descriptions is a way forward. I think this will help our breeders who were becoming very concerned and again shows the importance of judges who know breed type. Well done - phew enjoy the rest of your weekend! PHEW ! indeed !!
|
|
|
Post by kateanne0 on Sept 10, 2016 16:29:15 GMT
I've read this thread with interest.
From my experiences, I find that the majority of instances of what is deemed 'unsuitable for mount' can relate to younger 'tubby' not necessarily fat children on smaller SP's or natives. We have 'leggy' children on ponies that could be deemed 'too small' for them even if their weight,is not an issue as they are usually quite slim.
In the horse classes there are some larger than average adults. However, many of them are 'light' riders and are not bouncing about on the horses back.
The horse welfare issue will be the rider sitting on the cantle and probably giving the horse a sore back. The concern should be to ensure that larger riders understand that the size of the saddle to fit the horse, just may not be suitable for their backsides to fit into. If a judge really believes that there is a serious welfare concern on the weight of the rider to size of the pony/horse, this is something that should be addressed outside of the ring.
Common sense should prevail. Undoubtedly, the picture of either adult or child, as mentioned above, will form a picture in the judge's eye that is either acceptable to them or not. Marks should include overall picture and marks can be deducted; however, this inevitably leads back to judges using the full range of marks (which is yet another issue)! Let's be honest, if the rider looks too large/too leggy for the mount, the picture will not be great but they still could have been the combination that gave the best show and best conformation mark!
I understand what TSR are trying to achieve but it is not perceived as politically correct to be offending/criticising riders, especially younger more vulnerable children on weight issues in the ring; nor should judges be put into the unenviable position of criticising riders weight in the ring.
If a judge has a serious concern about a rider weight issue to size of mount, a note of the riders back number can identify the rider/owner details and the concern be addressed sensitively from thereon; perhaps by the Showing Society concerned?
Do I need a tin hat?
|
|
|
Post by hazeysunshine on Sept 10, 2016 17:53:07 GMT
Having recently been in a awful position - not sure if I was referenced earlier on in this thread. The REAL problem lies in the warming up areas, whereby small show ponies are ridden in by big adults. This is the welfare issue, not tall riders on m&m ponies whom where bred to carry farmers up and down hills! I had marks ( quite a few ) deducted because I was deemed to *big* for a Welsh C pony, this was in the conformation section, the pony had just jumped clear round a big hoys track, clearly not a 'welfare issue' when she'd managed to lug my fat arse round the course. Its ridiculous to allow judges to deduct points because they think someone is to heavy for the pony - and undoubtedly it will primarily affect amateurs. There is no easy way around this, im not saying there isnt a problem, because there is. But allowing judges to deduct marks, or picking riders/ponies in classes and removing them because they are too big is not right! Whether it is said verbally or not, things like this lead people to have eating disorders. Drastic although you may think, the comments made to me were far from appropriate to be saying to anyone. If this rule is enforced, I will sell up most of my natives as being tall I will probably be penalised like I already have been! Surely there are more pressing issues going in in showing? How about, severely overweight horses, ponies being ridden round in tack they cant wear in the ring, unfair judging, excessive make up hiding faults, lunging in for hours on end... the list is endless! I apologise for the bitter post, but as I have experienced this first hand, those on my social media page can see that I am NOT to big/heavy for this pony, but I still spent £40 + entry fee + diesel to attend a show, for my pony to go brill but be penalised unfairly! Eta- I take size 8 clothing, however look bigger than i am due to having a large chest, I am already very conscious about this, and have to invest in very expensive sports bra's, on the odd occasion I have used vet wrap but having to do it so tight means I have nearly passed out. This makes girls look bigger than they are, and would be another factor as to the judge deducting marks because of the 'overall picture', or having marks deducted because they are deemed to heavy. Absolutely ridiculous. It wasn't yourself it was a fell pony. But blummin heck if someone who is a size 8 is getting told that then there is no hope for the rest of us. It's a very wooly ruling and term unsuitable. It has the potential to give some of the less than fair judges something to hide behind. Best pony and show in the ring doesn't place, why oh I deemed them unsuitable. Unless there is further research and a definitive ruling given it should be left alone. As you can see from the thread it's already causing children to be weighing themselves. I fit my saddle, my saddle fits my pony, I'm within the height and weight range and having his back checked know there are no concerns. However being a little bit chunky I could be deemed to be unsuitably mounted on my tank of a fell pony in someone's opinion. I've done 20% weight, the mounted games height and weight and a calculation based on weight to bone ratio. Fine with all. Might have to take a letter from his physio saying he can carry me haha.
|
|
|
Post by sjw87 on Sept 11, 2016 17:06:40 GMT
More for Mrs Showing ..In the TSR May judges survey the first question was ' When awarding marks should a proportion of the way of going mark be attributed to the overall picture of the pony / horse and rider ?' 185 judges responded 85.16 % answered yes 10.44 % said no 3.3 % had no view on the question This led to the next survey when we asked how a judge would handle this in and out of the ring. This survey is still open. The point I am making is if judges are already deducting marks because the 'picture ' is not looking good how is an exhibitor supposed to know unless you speak to them and the results of the next survey are strongly for not speaking to a rider especially a child. Several people have written in suggesting a column but this has been kicked out of touch on HG. So you can see a real conundrum and perhaps there is no answer ? Were there any further questions to expand on what different judges consider with the term 'overall picture' or any indication given to the definition being used for the purposes of the survey? The person/people conducting the survey may have been solely meaning weight/size of rider but unless this was clearly expressed, participants may have been considering it to be a term used to cover a wide range of things including turnout, tack (including choice of bit), showmanship or simply even the 'wow factor' or conversely deducting a few marks for an accurate show where the horse lacked presence which detracted from the 'overall picture'. All this as well as the suitability of the rider. I'm sure I'm not the only one who has heard a judge justify that a horse with a slight blip in the show was placed above one who did an accurate show because the 'overall picture' was better. I'm just not convinced that all judges consider the 'overall picture' to be solely synonymous with the suitability of mount for the rider's size and weight. Sent from my SM-A300FU using proboards
|
|
|
Post by flee on Sept 11, 2016 17:19:36 GMT
I'm following this with great interest and would like to make a couple of points . I am 5' 9" and naturally quite muscular and , as muscle weighs more than fat , I am probably quite a bit heavier than people think . I have never been thin but when I was 'eventing fit ' I was a slim and toned size 10 . I weighed around 10-10 1/2 st and with all my riding kit and tack weighed in at around 11 1/2 st . Size 10 but still too heavy for some ponies . That is one scenario , here is another . A child that we cared for was a dress size 8 when she came to us . Slim ? No . She was 8 years old , 4 ft tall and morbidly obese , at almost 10st she was more than twice the recommended weight for her age and height .( NB After 18 months with us she weighed 5st - but that's another story !) Size 8 and short but too heavy for a small pony . Point One -Dress size is no indication of weight and you can't tell how much someone weighs just by looking at them . There is a lot of p*ssyfooting going on here because no one is prepared to define exactly what ' suitability' or ' overall picture' actually means . So if we stop being all PC for a moment and assume that the concern here is that there is a welfare issue ( because why else would you even bother to introduce new legislation ? ) then the concern is that there are animals being ridden in classes by riders who are too heavy for them . And if that is the concern then what , if anything , are you going to do about it ? Check the size label on their jacket ? Deduct a few marks at the end of the class ? But then again , there's another issue - if a pony was brought into the ring that appeared to be ill or unsound it would ( or should !) be asked to leave immediately . If then a rider is perceived as being ' too heavy ' ( as opposed to 'overweight') why would they then , if this is a welfare issue , be allowed to continue the class , with the judge knocking a few points off at the end in the vague hope that the rider will know why ? And what if the rider doesn't 'get it ' ? What is the point ? Point Two - if the concern is rider weight as a welfare issue then you need to weigh any rider who gives cause for concern BEFORE THEY GO INTO THE RING . If you're talking about a 'picture' that isn't to the judges liking BUT there is no welfare issue then ' so what ? , the only thing that's suffering is their chance of winning . Be clear about what you mean and whether you're prepared to enforce it yourselves . In my opinion asking judges to police this is just passing the buck . But let's be honest here , no one is going to have the nerve to install a 'weighing steward ' in the collecting ring . So in the good old tradition of not-offending-anybody-PC-dom , rather than deducting marks , why not mark the class in the traditional way and then give the judge an extra 10 marks to be awarded for suitability of mount for rider/overall picture ie the opportunity to gain EXTRA POINTS . Could have quite an impact and , most importantly , NO ONE WOULD BE OFFENDED . Because that just wouldn't do .
|
|
|
Post by the showing register on Sept 11, 2016 17:27:47 GMT
There were other questions and one about how many marks judges deducted. My feeling is that under many of the class classifications and the terms of giving marks (judges are deducting up to 15 marks in some cases) an exhibitor would not know this and perhaps would not expect marks to be deducted for that reason .Conversely if a pony gave a poor show but the judge liked the picture could it then gain marks ?
This seems a very grey area and one that I had not considered until we ran the survey. It is indirectly associated with weight as this is part of the overall picture.
|
|
|
Post by the showing register on Sept 11, 2016 17:44:38 GMT
I'm following this with great interest and would like to make a couple of points . I am 5' 9" and naturally quite muscular and , as muscle weighs more than fat , I am probably quite a bit heavier than people think . I have never been thin but when I was 'eventing fit ' I was a slim and toned size 10 . I weighed around 10-10 1/2 st and with all my riding kit and tack weighed in at around 11 1/2 st . Size 10 but still too heavy for some ponies . That is one scenario , here is another . A child that we cared for was a dress size 8 when she came to us . Slim ? No . She was 8 years old , 4 ft tall and morbidly obese , at almost 10st she was more than twice the recommended weight for her age and height .( NB After 18 months with us she weighed 5st - but that's another story !) Size 8 and short but too heavy for a small pony . Point One -Dress size is no indication of weight and you can't tell how much someone weighs just by looking at them . There is a lot of girl p*ssyfooting going on here because no one is prepared to define exactly what ' suitability' or ' overall picture' actually means . So if we stop being all PC for a moment and assume that the concern that there is a welfare issue here ( because why else would you even bother to introduce new legislation ? ) then the concern is that there are animals being ridden in classes by riders who are too heavy for them . And if that is the concern then what , if anything , are you going to do about it ? Check the size label on their jacket ? Deduct a few marks at the end of the class ? But then again , there's another issue - if a pony was brought into the ring that appeared to be ill or unsound it would ( or should !) be asked to leave immediately . If then a rider is perceived as being ' too heavy ' ( as opposed to 'overweight') why would they then , if this is a welfare issue , be allowed to continue the class , with the judge knocking a few points off at the end in the vague hope that the rider will know why ? And what if the rider doesn't 'get it ' ? What is the point ? Point Two - if the concern is rider weight as a welfare issue then you need to weigh any rider who gives cause for concern BEFORE THEY GO INTO THE RING . If you're talking about a 'picture' that isn't to the judges liking BUT there is no welfare issue then ' so what ? , the only thing that's suffering is their chance of winning . Be clear about what you mean and whether you're prepared to enforce it yourselves . In my opinion asking judges to police this is just passing the buck . But let's be honest here , no one is going to have the nerve to install a 'weighing steward ' in the collecting ring . So in the good old tradition of not-offending-anybody-PC-dom , rather than deducting marks , why not mark the class in the traditional way and then give the judge an extra 10 marks to be awarded for suitability of mount for rider/overall picture ie the opportunity to gain EXTRA POINTS . Could have quite an impact and , most importantly , NO ONE WOULD BE OFFENDED . Because that just wouldn't do . Thanks flee. The first draft had a much stronger wording but it became clear very quickly that many judges just dont want to speak to anyone in the ring hence the second draft is softer but probably not so effective in stopping overweight riders. I have had some very long letters from judges that come on here telling me they dont want to speak to riders because of abuse. Riders should try and think in positive terms in that we have such a range of breeds and types in the UK that there is a horse or pony for every size.If you have a vet at a show they are the natural enforcers but most smaller shows do not have vets so who is going to do it ? Judges , show officials , weight stewards ? You tell me !! British Dressage is bringing in a rule for 2017 that instructs judges and stewards to ask riders to dismount so how they will get on with that we shall see ( no scales just by eye) as for enforcing .. well a rule is only as efficient as its implementation hence such a long consultation. As I said in a previous post I see the outside the ring rule as probably being widely accepted ( unwise words bound to be proved wrong now !) but fierce debate over the inside the ring one.
|
|
|
Post by hazeysunshine on Sept 11, 2016 18:19:03 GMT
I'm following this with great interest and would like to make a couple of points . I am 5' 9" and naturally quite muscular and , as muscle weighs more than fat , I am probably quite a bit heavier than people think . I have never been thin but when I was 'eventing fit ' I was a slim and toned size 10 . I weighed around 10-10 1/2 st and with all my riding kit and tack weighed in at around 11 1/2 st . Size 10 but still too heavy for some ponies . That is one scenario , here is another . A child that we cared for was a dress size 8 when she came to us . Slim ? No . She was 8 years old , 4 ft tall and morbidly obese , at almost 10st she was more than twice the recommended weight for her age and height .( NB After 18 months with us she weighed 5st - but that's another story !) Size 8 and short but too heavy for a small pony . Point One -Dress size is no indication of weight and you can't tell how much someone weighs just by looking at them . There is a lot of girl p*ssyfooting going on here because no one is prepared to define exactly what ' suitability' or ' overall picture' actually means . So if we stop being all PC for a moment and assume that the concern that there is a welfare issue here ( because why else would you even bother to introduce new legislation ? ) then the concern is that there are animals being ridden in classes by riders who are too heavy for them . And if that is the concern then what , if anything , are you going to do about it ? Check the size label on their jacket ? Deduct a few marks at the end of the class ? But then again , there's another issue - if a pony was brought into the ring that appeared to be ill or unsound it would ( or should !) be asked to leave immediately . If then a rider is perceived as being ' too heavy ' ( as opposed to 'overweight') why would they then , if this is a welfare issue , be allowed to continue the class , with the judge knocking a few points off at the end in the vague hope that the rider will know why ? And what if the rider doesn't 'get it ' ? What is the point ? Point Two - if the concern is rider weight as a welfare issue then you need to weigh any rider who gives cause for concern BEFORE THEY GO INTO THE RING . If you're talking about a 'picture' that isn't to the judges liking BUT there is no welfare issue then ' so what ? , the only thing that's suffering is their chance of winning . Be clear about what you mean and whether you're prepared to enforce it yourselves . In my opinion asking judges to police this is just passing the buck . But let's be honest here , no one is going to have the nerve to install a 'weighing steward ' in the collecting ring . So in the good old tradition of not-offending-anybody-PC-dom , rather than deducting marks , why not mark the class in the traditional way and then give the judge an extra 10 marks to be awarded for suitability of mount for rider/overall picture ie the opportunity to gain EXTRA POINTS . Could have quite an impact and , most importantly , NO ONE WOULD BE OFFENDED . Because that just wouldn't do . This is exactly what I've been trying to say think you just worded it better than me. Also can I come to you and be put on a diet, I'd love to lose a few stone haha
|
|
|
Post by flee on Sept 11, 2016 18:24:48 GMT
Allowing judges to AWARD additional marks for suitability and overall picture , rather than deducting them , could be very effective . A rider may dismiss , or misinterpret , a few deducted points here and there , but if you were consistently getting 1 out of 10 ( for example ) in the suitability/overall picture section then you would surely be asking yourself "why?". But consistency in marking is the key here .
|
|
|
Post by flee on Sept 11, 2016 18:46:14 GMT
Thanks flee. The first draft had a much stronger wording but it became clear very quickly that many judges just dont want to speak to anyone in the ring hence the second draft is softer but probably not so effective in stopping overweight riders. This is exactly where the confusion arises . Is this issue about riders who may well be 'overweight ' but ARE NOT too heavy for the pony they are riding , the issue being that they are simply not as pleasing to the eye , or about riders who may well be slim , but ARE too heavy for the animal they are riding ? Aesthetics or welfare ? Please clarify .
|
|
|
Post by MoneyMoney on Sept 11, 2016 19:21:38 GMT
The H&H seem to have got the point without any p@$$y-footing around: www.horseandhound.co.uk/news/rules-proposed-tackle-issue-overweight-riders-594964 If nothing else, the issue has certainly put TSR in the limelight. And if TSR really wants to police this and do something effective that does not rely on judges having to mete out punishments on a subjective basis to people who may look a bit porky but may or may not actually be too heavy for the pony, then what about asking the judge to make a note of the competitor's number, give this to the show organisers, and the show organisers report back to TSR, and TSR can then take proper, effective, welfare-specific action, e.g. writing to the competitor to invite them for a proper weighing procedure of horse and rider under veterinary supervision with guidance on what to do next if one is found to be too heavy. If it IS really about welfare, then that is what needs to happen. If it's not about welfare, just aesthetics, then really it doesn't matter one jot to anyone other than the rider/owner.
|
|
|
Post by the showing register on Sept 11, 2016 19:47:09 GMT
The H&H seem to have got the point without any p@$$y-footing around: www.horseandhound.co.uk/news/rules-proposed-tackle-issue-overweight-riders-594964 If nothing else, the issue has certainly put TSR in the limelight. And if TSR really wants to police this and do something effective that does not rely on judges having to mete out punishments on a subjective basis to people who may look a bit porky but may or may not actually be too heavy for the pony, then what about asking the judge to make a note of the competitor's number, give this to the show organisers, and the show organisers report back to TSR, and TSR can then take proper, effective, welfare-specific action, e.g. writing to the competitor to invite them for a proper weighing procedure of horse and rider under veterinary supervision with guidance on what to do next if one is found to be too heavy. If it IS really about welfare, then that is what needs to happen. If it's not about welfare, just aesthetics, then really it doesn't matter one jot to anyone other than the rider/owner. That is an idea and can be put forward on the 4th someone else has suggested something similar a referral could be handled by professionals such as vets. Several commemts for a mark to be added on and this is up for debate on the 4th. Again the arguments are all about inside the ring what do you think about the outside the ring wording ? And yes its all about welfare otherwise I would not be giving up so much of my time to this. Years ago Ponies of Britain had a strong welfare arm and with PoB demise it has dwindled in importance. I think it is important we discuss these issues and listen to everyones views. Over 90 shares for the article already.
|
|
|
Post by Give us a break on Sept 11, 2016 19:58:03 GMT
I was under the impression this issue was started by people complaining about adults riding in sp in preparation for the ring, how has it got to this stage, after all if we step back into a time before politics ruled grown men rode natives over all kind of terrain. It's seem to have got completely out of control and if one child gives up what they love because of someone else's opinion then that's got to be a bad thing. No amount of discussion is going to change anything and are the hoys judges in 3 weeks time going to abide by the above suggestions.
|
|
|
Post by the showing register on Sept 11, 2016 20:19:31 GMT
I was under the impression this issue was started by people complaining about adults riding in sp in preparation for the ring, how has it got to this stage, after all if we step back into a time before politics ruled grown men rode natives over all kind of terrain. It's seem to have got completely out of control and if one child gives up what they love because of someone else's opinion then that's got to be a bad thing. No amount of discussion is going to change anything and are the hoys judges in 3 weeks time going to abide by the above suggestions. This is a consultation so of course HOYS judges are not! and I do think open discussion is a good thing as opposed to closed door decision making hence I am on here replying to a guest. The outside the ring rule covers your first comment and I was not aware this was now specifically about Natives.
|
|
|
Post by MrsShowing on Sept 11, 2016 21:14:57 GMT
I think the question of outside the ring is far more important, as it's more prevalent. However, I don't think this is an issue purely for judges and officials. In fact, I don't think it's really for judges who are engaged in a judging appointment at all. If one is judging one doesn't get chance to observe ponies being worked in, and nor should one really. On the day of a judging appointment we are rightly focused exclusively on what comes before us in the ring. It is NOT a judging issue, although personally I have no problem speaking to anyone who gives me concern from a welfare perspective.
Is there a process by which this could be opened out more widely? For example, if anyone at the show - a fellow competitor, a member of the public, someone who judges but is not judging on that day, really anyone - has a concern they could raise this with a nominated show official and that official could decide whether to feed back to the society concerned or whether to take immediate action? It seems to work ok with rules about only using tack allowed in the ring, and other similar rules. If anyone thinks it's a problem, they have a word with the show organisers, and someone duly reminds the rider of the rules. I don't see why it couldn't work in the same way for large adults riding in small ponies.
But having said that... it is the same few competitors/producers who use grown adults, grown men in fact in many instances, to work in lightly built show ponies. Does it really need everyone to be policing everyone else in order to address this? Surely, it's very easy to identify the handful of culprits and write to them, while also urging other societies to issue sanctions such as not accepting entries if they persist. That would only need to happen once or twice for everyone to get the message. But you would need to get other societies on board with this.
Yes, someone has pointed out above that some of these show ponies need to be worked in by adults for safety reasons. No, they don't. They need to be selectively bred for suitable temperament and those that do not have the right temperament should not be developed as children's riding ponies. Full stop. We've only ourselves to blame here, as competitors, judges and breeders. We've put other factors ahead of temperament in order to win, and this is one of the outcomes. In the days of PoB, referred to above, ponies had quality AND suitable temperament and I don't recall ever seeing a grown man on a 12h show pony in those days.
|
|
|
Post by thegroom on Sept 12, 2016 9:18:22 GMT
I'm following this with great interest and would like to make a couple of points . I am 5' 9" and naturally quite muscular and , as muscle weighs more than fat , I am probably quite a bit heavier than people think . I have never been thin but when I was 'eventing fit ' I was a slim and toned size 10 . I weighed around 10-10 1/2 st and with all my riding kit and tack weighed in at around 11 1/2 st . Size 10 but still too heavy for some ponies . That is one scenario , here is another . A child that we cared for was a dress size 8 when she came to us . Slim ? No . She was 8 years old , 4 ft tall and morbidly obese , at almost 10st she was more than twice the recommended weight for her age and height .( NB After 18 months with us she weighed 5st - but that's another story !) Size 8 and short but too heavy for a small pony . Point One -Dress size is no indication of weight and you can't tell how much someone weighs just by looking at them . There is a lot of p*ssyfooting going on here because no one is prepared to define exactly what ' suitability' or ' overall picture' actually means . So if we stop being all PC for a moment and assume that the concern here is that there is a welfare issue ( because why else would you even bother to introduce new legislation ? ) then the concern is that there are animals being ridden in classes by riders who are too heavy for them . And if that is the concern then what , if anything , are you going to do about it ? Check the size label on their jacket ? Deduct a few marks at the end of the class ? But then again , there's another issue - if a pony was brought into the ring that appeared to be ill or unsound it would ( or should !) be asked to leave immediately . If then a rider is perceived as being ' too heavy ' ( as opposed to 'overweight') why would they then , if this is a welfare issue , be allowed to continue the class , with the judge knocking a few points off at the end in the vague hope that the rider will know why ? And what if the rider doesn't 'get it ' ? What is the point ? Point Two - if the concern is rider weight as a welfare issue then you need to weigh any rider who gives cause for concern BEFORE THEY GO INTO THE RING . If you're talking about a 'picture' that isn't to the judges liking BUT there is no welfare issue then ' so what ? , the only thing that's suffering is their chance of winning . Be clear about what you mean and whether you're prepared to enforce it yourselves . In my opinion asking judges to police this is just passing the buck . But let's be honest here , no one is going to have the nerve to install a 'weighing steward ' in the collecting ring . So in the good old tradition of not-offending-anybody-PC-dom , rather than deducting marks , why not mark the class in the traditional way and then give the judge an extra 10 marks to be awarded for suitability of mount for rider/overall picture ie the opportunity to gain EXTRA POINTS . Could have quite an impact and , most importantly , NO ONE WOULD BE OFFENDED . Because that just wouldn't do .
|
|
|
Post by thegroom on Sept 12, 2016 9:23:54 GMT
posted before saying Hear Hear, well said Flee
|
|
|
Post by thatboythatgirl on Sept 12, 2016 11:53:24 GMT
The bigger welfare issue is outside the ring not in it, the focus needs to be taken away from small breed m+ms which alot seems to stem from kids competing against adults debate rather than a welfare debate. There are cases still some welfare cases in the size of riders on small breeds. IMO the welfare issues lies outside of the ring, small often not particular substantial ponies being worked in for hours by not very small adults for which a marks system is not going to stop.
|
|
|
Post by the showing register on Sept 12, 2016 12:06:00 GMT
The bigger welfare issue is outside the ring not in it, the focus needs to be taken away from small breed m+ms which alot seems to stem from kids competing against adults debate rather than a welfare debate. There are cases still some welfare cases in the size of riders on small breeds. IMO the welfare issues lies outside of the ring, small often not particular substantial ponies being worked in for hours by not very small adults for which a marks system is not going to stop. , Thanks for this reasoning. Do you think the outside the ring rule might work ? That is if a show does not have its own ?
|
|
|
Post by MrsShowing on Sept 12, 2016 13:59:35 GMT
The bigger welfare issue is outside the ring not in it, the focus needs to be taken away from small breed m+ms which alot seems to stem from kids competing against adults debate rather than a welfare debate. There are cases still some welfare cases in the size of riders on small breeds. IMO the welfare issues lies outside of the ring, small often not particular substantial ponies being worked in for hours by not very small adults for which a marks system is not going to stop. , Thanks for this reasoning. Do you think the outside the ring rule might work ? That is if a show does not have its own ? No, see my post above. It's not for judges to do this when engaged in judging appointments.
|
|
|
Post by sjw87 on Sept 12, 2016 14:22:37 GMT
, Thanks for this reasoning. Do you think the outside the ring rule might work ? That is if a show does not have its own ? No, see my post above. It's not for judges to do this when engaged in judging appointments. Completely agree with MrsShowing. If the whole show is run by the society then they can have whatever rules they like and place officials in the lorry park/working in areas to monitor this but if it's just a case of a society having a section of classes at a show run by a third party (ie. County shows with numerous affiliations), do they have any jurisdiction outside of their ring? What if they pull someone up who is competing under a society that does not have a ruling in place against it? Sent from my SM-A300FU using proboards
|
|
|
Post by honeypot on Sept 12, 2016 15:04:50 GMT
When I have stewarded at the larger shows we have a H&S briefing which covers the rules of the showground which are given to every official and they are expected to have read and uphold. I covers everything from general rules up to a major incident. All you have to do is give well trained stewards the right to police outside the rings. I like walking up the horsebox lines, knowing I do not have to get ready. At some show grounds you are not allowed to lunge, I have stopped people from doing this. If in the opinion of the steward the rider/handler is causing a welfare issue to the pony/horse they are asked to dismount, desist, most of us have phone cameras, take a snap. If the owner/rider disagrees take it to the Secs with their appeal fee. When you enter the showground you are agreeing to abide by the rules, of the show/showground and this should be on the schedules, with all the H&S welfare regulations. If you do not agree you are escorted off the showground, no entries refunded. If you are hiring the showground, I am sure they would be happier with a clear H&S, welfare policy in place and I am sure the insurers would to.
|
|
|
Post by the showing register on Sept 12, 2016 15:42:38 GMT
So going from above posts it would be up to shows to use the wording in their schedule if they were affiliated to TSR or a similar already in place H and S wording might suffice and monitor it with stewards who could have attended a training session ? Or judges could act if they wished ?
Very helpful stuff ... thank you
Bear in mind we have over 500 affiliated shows the majority are small club shows who might not have a wording like the GYS does and other county shows.
|
|
|
Post by the showing register on Sept 12, 2016 15:48:04 GMT
Allowing judges to AWARD additional marks for suitability and overall picture , rather than deducting them , could be very effective . A rider may dismiss , or misinterpret , a few deducted points here and there , but if you were consistently getting 1 out of 10 ( for example ) in the suitability/overall picture section then you would surely be asking yourself "why?". But consistency in marking is the key here . Before this was drafted it was mooted with the focus groups that an additional mark of 10 was awarded. It seemed a game changer but most people thought it would be used as a fiddle mark ie a poor show then gains 10 for overall impression and it wins with two wrong legs ! It was thought that the show should be marked and then points deducted so it did not inflate the mark. Your thoughts ??
|
|
|
Post by kateanne0 on Sept 12, 2016 19:57:58 GMT
Allowing judges to AWARD additional marks for suitability and overall picture , rather than deducting them , could be very effective . A rider may dismiss , or misinterpret , a few deducted points here and there , but if you were consistently getting 1 out of 10 ( for example ) in the suitability/overall picture section then you would surely be asking yourself "why?". But consistency in marking is the key here . Before this was drafted it was mooted with the focus groups that an additional mark of 10 was awarded. It seemed a game changer but most people thought it would be used as a fiddle mark ie a poor show then gains 10 for overall impression and it wins with two wrong legs ! It was thought that the show should be marked and then points deducted so it did not inflate the mark. Your thoughts ?? The whole marking system is open for any judge to give the marks to the horse/pony they want to win! I'm not saying all judges would do this but the system could be open to abuse. We already have enough threads on here about the marking system and its manipulation! In an earlier quote I used the saying 'not politically correct' the more I read about this subject my comment should now change to 'discrimination'! IMO it would be far better for this issue to be handled by the people responsible for horse welfare, e.g. World Horse Welfare or BHS to name just 2, to take responsibility for drafting potential rules for riders and suitable mounts. Many riding schools have rules regarding the maximum weight of riders allowed to ride their ponies/horses, why can't the societies come up with something along those lines? Perhaps many of the horse journals could get together and run a story simultaneously on welfare issues that have been proven to be because of the riders weight/height/size? This thread is becoming very controversial; I am all for debates but this one is bordering on discrimination against the larger/taller riders. For the rules to work there must be substantial evidence to make a correct welfare call on the show ground. I feel sorry for the stewards, judges or associates that may leave themselves open to a legal case of discrimination. As someone else has stated, take a good look at the warm up areas and behind the lorries! Rules are openly flaunted! Just because the rules of any society/showground say no lunging, only use tack that can be used in the ring doesn't mean that people adhere to them because they definitely DO NOT! Police these areas and stop the endless lunging of small ponies so that the little jockey can get on and stop the use of draw reins and larger grooms/owners, etc, getting on the small ponies! Let's have rules that can be enforced![/b
And yes, I have stewarded and I have stopped what I deem to be unacceptable behaviour towards a pony in an out of the way area! And reported said behaviour to the owner/parent of the child!
|
|