|
|
Post by maxandpaddy on Dec 15, 2017 13:41:58 GMT
Press statement from Senior Showing and Dressage Ltd. Dated 15th December 2017
Following an objection lodged against the winner of the SSADL In Hand Champion at the final of the London Olympia Horse Show there has been a meeting of the SSADL disciplinary committee. The committee upheld the objection due to the winner being found in breach of rule 27E and subsequently the winner, Randal IV, has been disqualified. The results will be adjusted accordingly. The winner of the SSADL Anthony D Evans In Hand Final is now Laithehill Pasha and Alison Stratton.
|
|
|
|
Post by chloesmum on Dec 15, 2017 14:05:22 GMT
Don't know the details as we haven't competed this year but really feel sad for all that this has happened after the result. Surely if someone had cause to raise an objection they could have done it before the contest?
Obviously congratulations to all with Laithehill Pasha great news for natives.
|
|
|
|
Post by maxandpaddy on Dec 15, 2017 14:23:37 GMT
Apparently it’s the make up/body oils rule, the SSADL ruling is none are allowed and a complaint was made and upheld that the winner had used them
I know rules have to be followed but I’m a bit shocked by this one. Apparently oils were used on the coat x
|
|
|
|
Post by chloesmum on Dec 15, 2017 14:45:18 GMT
Yes I have seen on their facebook page and I think it is really sad. Yes of course rules are rules and SSADL has obviously done the correct thing in investigating a complaint and upholding it, they are totally professional. However what a nasty taste it leaves, can it be honestly said that no other competitor used show spray on mane; tail or coat? I doubt it.
I guess we will never know who complained and I hate to say this but it can only be a fellow competitor who probably saw the horse being prepared and I am assuming you can only complain if you are a fellow competitor?
How very sad that showing comes to this, I love SSADL in the 3 years we competed the finals were an amazing experience, the team so supportive and fellow competitors so lovely it made for a fantastic Christmas party and as SSADL always pointed out everyone there is a Champion in their own right.
So much for Christmas goodwill.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pepper on Dec 15, 2017 15:01:00 GMT
Whilst a rule is a rule. For such a minor transgression ... really?! Was it worth it. I feel for all involved and as you say, it leaves a rather sour taste
|
|
|
|
Post by comanchediva on Dec 15, 2017 15:50:03 GMT
From what I can gather from FB, it was the black hoof oil the winner was wearing that was against the rules.
|
|
|
|
Post by sparrow on Dec 15, 2017 17:13:18 GMT
What is classed as make up - I, personally, wouldn't have considered hoof oil to be make up. What about all the white socks - is chalk or the many other whitening products, considered to be make up?
Should this have been picked up by the judges - any judge who accepts such a prestigious show should be fully au fait with the rules.
|
|
|
|
Post by Philippa on Dec 17, 2017 8:13:36 GMT
What is classed as make up - I, personally, wouldn't have considered hoof oil to be make up. What about all the white socks - is chalk or the many other whitening products, considered to be make up? Should this have been picked up by the judges - any judge who accepts such a prestigious show should be fully au fait with the rules. I agree the judge should have been up to speed with this rule!! I feel for those poor poor people who have paid all that money and felt the elation at one of the most prestigious shows. Yes, they are partly to blame too but like someone else said, black hoof paint ...... really?  If they show other ponies regularly it would be something that's probably 2nd nature to do. |
|
|
|
Post by honeypot on Dec 17, 2017 8:40:24 GMT
I can not understand the need to cover the hooves in black paint, and all the other glitter and paint that gets caked on.
Some of the breeds do not allow white hooves as part as the breed standard, and I have seen pictures of ponies that suddenly develop four black ones. I have even seen a picture on FB where the pony had a complete colour change, going darker. The shampoos now are not like the bit of dolly blue we used to use, and think we were quite daring.
For most of use it used to be a bath, a bit of sheen and perhaps a bit of baby oil, now show makeup has gone to a whole other level, and I would be interested in the level of proof needed for someone to lose a class. Were there pictures before and after?
|
|
sarahp
Happy to help
Posts: 9,510
|
Post by sarahp on Dec 17, 2017 9:35:32 GMT
Not at all sure about coat oils, but surely anything that alters the colour on a pony, like black hoof oil or face makeup, could be construed as altering the markings registered and on the passport. Chalk will only whiten already white bits.
I too come from the age of bath, sheen and baby oil, add to that old fashioned clear hoof oil, but recognise that we do have to move with the times. For me though, and apparently SSADL with which I have no connection whatsoever, falsifying ponies' markings in any way is going too far. If SSADL have written rules to that effect they should be adhered to in competition.
|
|
|
|
Post by dancer on Dec 17, 2017 10:47:01 GMT
Someone close to the original winner has stated on Facebook that it was the use of chalk to cover a 2cm scar which was objected to.
|
|
|
|
Post by Philippa on Dec 17, 2017 10:47:16 GMT
I use black supreme hoof oil on my SP but I wouldn’t use it on the M&M’s. I also only whiten white socks and hate make up of any description on faces.
Each to their own.
|
|
|
|
Post by jakes87 on Dec 17, 2017 11:14:35 GMT
I was black make up to cover a scar. It was made clear to competitors all that no make up was to be used they did so they broke the rule. I very much doubt that the horse would of been marked down if the scar was on show as, as far as im aware arent scars and minor blemishes to be overlooked in ssadl classes?
People complain that rules are broken all the time and nothing is done, someone lodged a complaint and they upheld it and look at the backlash!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by lucynlizzysmum on Dec 17, 2017 11:23:05 GMT
The lady who was the original winner has put a statement on facebook on the SSADL page that it was black chalk - from her viewpoint she was allowed to use it per the briefing the evening before. Always difficult when a rule is slightly ambiguous. It is very sad that this has happened and I agree with you Jakes87 - people complain when rules aren't upheld but they also do when they are. We don't show under SSADL - however, I assist in running a show with SSADL qualifiers and they are extremely strict, so I can see why a complaint has been upheld. Just very sad for all concerned. ETA I have no connections with any of the competitors!
|
|
|
|
Post by sallie on Dec 18, 2017 7:17:46 GMT
I understand it was not "Black chalk" but a black oil based concealer, which when a white cloth was run down the front legs , it was covered in black concealer
|
|
