|
|
Post by jmbsec on Sept 11, 2009 21:58:24 GMT
"how an animal can appear to increase in height by 5cms after a full height certificate has been issued. Could it be the JMB website is erroneous in its reporting of remeasurement heights?"
I hope we have not reported the results of re-measurements incorrectly on the website.
Some of the reasons that have been suggested on horsegossip or elsewhere for a 5cm difference between a normal full measurement and a re-measurement of the same animal are:
1. animals may alter in height to this extent when their state of fitness/fatness/body condition changes
2. even after being measured in their 7th year they still grow
3. one of both measuring procedures were not done in accordance with the JMB protocol
4. the original measurer screwed up
5. the two referees and the JMB steward at the re-m screwed up
6. the animal was doped/dehydrated/starved/excessively worked/had its hooves pared excessively at one or the other measurements
7. the measuring pads/measuring sticks were "out"
.....etc etc......
Are any of these reasons valid? I will leave other horsegossipers to comment.
|
|
|
|
Post by jellybabe on Sept 14, 2009 8:41:30 GMT
jmbsec
i,m worried by your statement that you couldn,t care less what your stewards are saying
is there no professionalism or standards that you as chief exc impose
i would have thought you and the jmb would have wanted to show a united front
to be clear
i think you have a jmb steward commenting on this site
giving opinions and gossiping (over 60 a month)
forgive me if i,m wrong but in my day people in responsible positions did not gossip and spread rumour
looks like you are ok with this or "couldn,t care less"
do not turn a BLIND EYE to this
get it stopped and impose a bit of disipline
leave the gossiping to us
|
|
|
|
Post by sageandonion on Sept 14, 2009 10:13:11 GMT
With regard to your last post JMB, I can't form an opinion as I don't know (and presumably others don't either) who or how many are measuring over and above their previous measurement and therefore out of their class.
So we can't see if there is a significant issue or not.
You did say to an earlier request that you cannot at this stage report this. Could you say why not and is there a format which you could give this information in?
|
|
|
|
Post by sallie on Sept 14, 2009 11:36:07 GMT
Dear jmbsec
Please could you tell me if the "Stewards"are paid a fee by yourselves or by the Society they represent? i only ask a if they are paid were do we get a list of who they are?--- are they then responsible to the body the represent or to the JMB?
so if they are paid a fee how many re measurements to they attend per week/day and if they are in full time employment does the fee cover lose of earning's?
many thanks
Sallie
|
|
|
|
Post by blondemoment on Sept 14, 2009 13:44:44 GMT
Reading this thread with interest, I think the some of the judges are to blame, if they keep putting up the big uns in the class people are going to panic and try and get theirs measured in cause they know the judge won't look at them if they are smaller, prehaps society's should look at the judges that 9 times out of 10 put up the largest exhibit, prehaps if they know they are being monitored they will start to judge the class as the classification states eg between 12h and 13h.
With the younger horses why not just state a novice class irrelevent of height but only on type therefore only 4 to 6 year olds can compete without the pressure of measurment, yes the jmb will lose out on revenue but at least all the arguments would cease, and have a height cert at 7 with the horses going into the relevent class and being judged accordingly
|
|
|
|
Post by jmbsec on Sept 14, 2009 13:47:55 GMT
"is there no professionalism or standards that you as chief exc impose"
I am not a chief exec
"i would have thought you and the jmb would have wanted to show a united front to be clear"
The JMB does, in my opinion, answer queries and make comments on HG in a clear and correct manner
I think you have a jmb steward commenting on this site
giving opinions and gossiping (over 60 a month)
forgive me if i,m wrong but in my day people in responsible positions did not gossip and spread rumour
looks like you are ok with this or "couldn,t care less"
do not turn a BLIND EYE to this get it stopped and impose a bit of disipline"
I have no idea who you are referring to and have no power over anybody who might want to post on HG
Would you give some examples of what you think are were "unprofessional" comments?
|
|
|
|
Post by jmbsec on Sept 14, 2009 13:50:18 GMT
"With regard to your last post JMB, I can't form an opinion as I don't know (and presumably others don't either) who or how many are measuring over and above their previous measurement and therefore out of their class.
So we can't see if there is a significant issue or not."
All such matters are considered by the Stewards before they are made public (their next meeting is in October) and may or may not be the subject of legal processes, hence I cannot comment.
|
|
|
|
Post by sageandonion on Sept 14, 2009 13:56:42 GMT
jellybabe, who are these 'jmb stewards' gossiping on this site, I haven't noticed a thing and am getting a bit worried that it is my age!
|
|
|
|
Post by jmbsec on Sept 14, 2009 14:16:01 GMT
"Please could you tell me if the "Stewards"are paid a fee by yourselves or by the Society they represent? "
The Stewards are not paid for being Stewards - the JMB's company structure (ie non-profit making) precludes this.
I think most/all of the Member Societies (eg BSJA, BSPS) are similarly structured and they do not pay there Stewards/council members/directors either.
|
|
|
|
Post by sallie on Sept 14, 2009 14:32:52 GMT
thank you for your reply Jmbsec, but are you saying that thewre is no money involved in being a jmb steward , so these people finance themselves go to the remeasurements? or are they paid "Expensives" and if so can you tell me how much this is?
|
|
|
|
Post by sallie on Sept 14, 2009 14:35:19 GMT
don't shoot me i pressed the send button instead of the spell check, all i want to establish is weather or not some of the "Stewards" are capable of making a "little" extra pocket money by going to all these re measurements
many thanks
Sallie
|
|
|
|
Post by jmbsec on Sept 14, 2009 15:10:47 GMT
The Stewards do claim expenses that are incurred when they are on JMB business.
Although we have done more re-m this year the average is not many and one would not want to rely on the expenses to pay for the daily crust.
|
|
|
|
Post by jellybabe on Sept 14, 2009 21:22:26 GMT
jmbsec
you said
page 13 "paid official you should say so" (i presume you mean you should not hide on this site behind names)
page 13 " couldn,t care less what they say" ( i presume stewards)
so which one is it?
have you put the question to your stewards
"are any of you commenting on this site"
just ask them the question and tell us the reply!!
YOU have nothing to hide!!
|
|
|
|
Post by jmbsec on Sept 14, 2009 22:06:39 GMT
"jmbsec you said (1) page 13 "paid official you should say so" (i presume you mean you should not hide on this site behind names) (2) page 13 " couldn,t care less what they say" ( i presume stewards) so which one is it?
Point 1 - I did not say this, you did, hence the quotation marks
Point 2: no, what anybody says really
"have you put the question to your stewards
"are any of you commenting on this site" just ask them the question and tell us the reply!!"
Not MY stewards! Would not so discourteous even to think about asking. As I said, I couldn't care less who comments, especially those who hide behind daft names.
Can you put me (and others?) out of our misery and tell us where this line of questioning is going? It is a long way from measuring ponies and re-measring some of them.
|
|
|
|
Post by sallie on Sept 15, 2009 9:18:52 GMT
thank you for your reply jmbsec
does the JMB have a code of conduct for "the stewards" and do they have to declare their interests , so that there can be no conflict of interest IE stewards who might judge etc
and what debar rs a person from being a jmb steward?
just would like to know as the whole remeasuring topic is very very emotive, and i think ( just my thoughts) that the "stewards should be totally visible
thank you Sallie
|
|
|
|
Post by jmbsec on Sept 15, 2009 9:37:05 GMT
There is no code of conduct other than that that all company directors have to adhere to. The Stewards who represent the Member Societies (eg BSJA, BSPS) are nominated by those societies and members will know what there interests are. The JMB have no control over who is nominated. Several things debar somebody from becominmg a Steward :(A) If a receiving order is made against him or he makes any arrangement or composition with his creditors.
(B) If he becomes of unsound mind.
(C) In the case of Member Stewards, if he ceases to be a Member Steward.
(D) If by notice in writing to the Board he resigns his office.
(E) If he becomes prohibited from holding office by reason of any order made under Section 188 of the Act or under Section 28 of the Companies Act 1976.
(F) If he is removed from office by a resolution duly passed by the Board pursuant to Section 184 of the Act.
(G) In the case of a co-opted member if he is removed from office by a resolution of the Management Committee duly passed
Would you tell us where you think their may have been problems this year with the re-m and how the JMB Stewards may have acted other than totally ethically?
|
|
|
|
Post by Guestless on Sept 15, 2009 9:39:11 GMT
jellybabe, I find it very interesting that you have joined this site recently and every single one of your posts is on this thread. If you have an axe to grind, then I suggest you go and do it elsewhere.
HG is happy to have JMBSec on the site to answer any sensible questions, but if you wish to carry on with your line of questions which seem very absurd, then please explain your reasoning or carry out your investigation by PM.
|
|
|
|
Post by sallie on Sept 15, 2009 9:47:07 GMT
thank you jmbsec, you have answered all my questions, i hope i have not offened you in any way and i will phone you to discuss this matter
agin many thanks jmbsec
sallie
|
|
|
|
Post by Artistic on Sept 15, 2009 11:43:25 GMT
I have said before that I find Jellybabe's whole tone incredibly rude.
Jellybabe, you have not answered the question YOU were asked re your own identity. jmbsec might not be interested, but I'm sure several others of us would love to know!
Surely it has been a great opportunity for us all to have jmbsec on here, giving regular and helpful answers. Presumably you haven't paid a special fee for this Jellybabe?
You might like to look up the fable re the sun and the wind, and in the meantime, stick to the point here. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
Post by jellybabe on Sept 16, 2009 11:25:05 GMT
jmbsec
i,m at a loss as to why you are taking umbridge
all we want to know is
is there a jmb steward responsible for measuring ponies commenting on a" gossip site" dedicated to measuring ponies
if there is; then as a steward (and not a member of the public ) don,t you think they should be honest with us and come clean (as you have; and i am impressed with your up front attitude)
no one is going to lose their shirt on this one
i won,t pursue this matter any further and leave it for the web site to comment
|
|
|
|
Post by Cefn farm Horses on Sept 16, 2009 11:32:11 GMT
Having read this thread off and on, I can see the point made by jellybabe. Indirectly the JMB is owned by us as we are members of the member societies that own/set up the JMB. Howard as placed himself in this position. There are lot of questions that people have asked and yes I would say the majority of which have been answered. Members are entitled to ask questions and receive answers. However, the problem with forums is that people can hide behind a "nickname". By not answering a question directly, then speculation occurs whether correct or not it will happen. I would like to point out that I am taking a neutral position on this subject. Why dont the JMB have a meeting for competitors to ask these questions?? as they issue Height Certs for the purpose of competition.
I ask the question - what happens if the expense of remeasurements exceeds funds held by the JMB - do they go cap in hand to the societies for more revenue?
|
|
|
|
Post by mandmgirl0164 on Sept 17, 2009 6:27:34 GMT
jmbsec i,m at a loss as to why you are taking umbridge all we want to know is is there a jmb steward responsible for measuring ponies commenting on a" gossip site" dedicated to measuring ponies if there is; then as a steward (and not a member of the public ) don,t you think they should be honest with us and come clean (as you have; and i am impressed with your up front attitude) no one is going to lose their shirt on this one i won,t pursue this matter any further and leave it for the web site to comment Jellybabe - How would jmbsec know if there was? Do you have a crystal ball that indicates to you that there is? |
|
Milliesmum
H G Addict
COCKERP00S RULE!!!
Posts: 23,901
|
Post by Milliesmum on Sept 17, 2009 6:32:47 GMT
I think the bottom line is, Jmbsec has chosen to come on here in an official capacity and answer questions, we are happy to have him as a member, it's more than a lot of the other societies choose to do or even allow their officials to do. If anyone else connected with the JMB chooses to come on here anonymously in their own time then that's their business - after all we don't know who you are jellybabe, or what your job is, and nor do we need to.
|
|
|
|
Post by girly on Sept 17, 2009 6:35:37 GMT
jmbsec i,m at a loss as to why you are taking umbridge all we want to know is is there a jmb steward responsible for measuring ponies commenting on a" gossip site" dedicated to measuring ponies if there is; then as a steward (and not a member of the public ) don,t you think they should be honest with us and come clean (as you have; and i am impressed with your up front attitude) no one is going to lose their shirt on this one i won,t pursue this matter any further and leave it for the web site to comment Is this a case of the Royal We you are using. I am not bothered. I am glad that jmbsec comes on here and explains things. he doesn't have to. I might not agree with all he says and I think that maybe somethings at jmb need changing They are making a stand against overheight animals which we were asking for. On this thread we can at least have a two way conversation about things. |
|
|
|
Post by Artistic on Sept 17, 2009 7:57:56 GMT
Well said, Girly
|
|
|
|
Post by jmbsec on Sept 17, 2009 8:30:11 GMT
"i,m at a loss as to why you are taking umbridge
all we want to know is is there a jmb steward responsible for measuring ponies commenting......"
Not taking umbridge, rather enjoy this knockabout stuff! We do not have any stewards who are responsible for meas ponies.
At a re-m the steward is only there to ensure that the correct procedure is adhered to, the referees are responsible for the measurement, condition of pony etc.
As regards the selection of animals for re-m, this is never down to the request of one steward. How they are selected it seems to be working well - the strike rate this year is excellent!
"i won,t pursue this matter any further"
Pity we will never know who you are or why you thought this issue, that you appear to think is so important and I think is so irrelevant, was worth pursuing
|
|
|
|
Post by jmbsec on Sept 17, 2009 8:42:29 GMT
"Why dont the JMB have a meeting for competitors to ask these questions?? as they issue Height Certs for the purpose of competition."
I would not mind attending such a meeting but I think the accepted communication channel is: members to society to member steward to JMB. Surely this forum can act as the vehicle for questions and reach a much wider and larger audience?
"I ask the question - what happens if the expense of remeasurements exceeds funds held by the JMB - do they go cap in hand to the societies for more revenue?"
No idea, JMB stewards would have to decide how to proceed. If the cheats stop getting their big animals measured by dodgy vets or stop presenting ringers or changing animal's names then there will no chance of this situation occurring.
|
|
|
|
Post by mf on Sept 17, 2009 8:43:37 GMT
"having had 5 four year olds over the last 3 years that they do grow. One went from 153 to 156cm in a year, one from 151 to 152cm and one from 158 to 163cm from one year to the next" Were these increases from 5yo to 6yo, and are you comparing like with like, ie all measurements under the JMB protocol? If so the 3cm and 5cm increases must be world records and represent 2% and 3% increases. All published surveys suggest only 0.6% growth between 4 and 5 year of age and less after that, so your rates are impressive for 4 to 5 yo and miraculous for 5 to 6yo. well clearly I must feed mine something very special then to achieve such world records  These measurements are from 4 to 5 year old and done by YOUR JMB measurers. I have sold horses one and 3 so no longer have their official records to publish on here. Number three did not have an official remeasure as not required for the large class. I took him along with my other one to see if he would remeasure at 158 to be told no way (I had suspected as much and would not have bothered taking him unless taking another anyway). I think this is why your records don't show many horses grow as if they grow into the large class then you don't need a certificate anyway. Your research is therefore skewed and would not stand up as a published paper. Number two I still own and have her JMB measurements showing growth from 151 to 152 cm from age 4 to age 5 and staying at 152 for her 6 year old measure. Maybe this is just measurers 'error' but would be a disaster for some people if it crossed the class boundary for heights All have been measured by JMB official measurers not by me in my backyard and I don't travel round the country for measurements, just go to whichever one can see me on my day off who is nearest I will publish number four when he is measured in january to see if he has exceeded a world record also if you like . |
|
|
|
Post by jmbsec on Sept 17, 2009 8:52:34 GMT
"having had 5 four year olds over the last 3 years that they do grow. One went from 153 to 156cm in a year, one from 151 to 152cm and one from 158 to 163cm from one year to the next" Were these increases from 5yo to 6yo, and are you comparing like with like, ie all measurements under the JMB protocol? If so the 3cm and 5cm increases must be world records and represent 2% and 3% increases. All published surveys suggest only 0.6% growth between 4 and 5 year of age and less after that, so your rates are impressive for 4 to 5 yo and miraculous for 5 to 6yo. well clearly I must feed mine something very special then to achieve such world records These measurements are from 4 to 5 year old and done by YOUR JMB measurers. I have sold horses one and 3 so no longer have their official records to publish on here. Number three did not have an official remeasure as not required for the large class. I took him along with my other one to see if he would remeasure at 158 to be told no way (I had suspected as much and would not have bothered taking him unless taking another anyway). I think this is why your records don't show many horses grow as if they grow into the large class then you don't need a certificate anyway. Your research is therefore skewed and would not stand up as a published paper. Number two I still own and have her JMB measurements showing growth from 151 to 152 cm from age 4 to age 5 and staying at 152 for her 6 year old measure. Maybe this is just measurers 'error' but would be a disaster for some people if it crossed the class boundary for heights All have been measured by JMB official measurers not by me in my backyard and I don't travel round the country for measurements, just go to whichever one can see me on my day off who is nearest I will publish number four when he is measured in january to see if he has exceeded a world record also if you like . Let me have the names of your animals so I can look them up. We may loose the horses over 158.0 but we get the ponies as they need a meas cert to do the next class up. Nice to get back onto proper postings! |
|
|
|
Post by whocares on Sept 17, 2009 12:05:16 GMT
Who is responsible for the "dodgy vets" is a mute point. Most probably their professional body.
But there is little doubt where responsibility for competing ponies under different names lies. The re-naming of horses is akin to running "ringers" and perhaps the JMB owning societies should adopt a similar practice to the racing authorities and ban such members for long periods of time. If they don't what deterrent is there for this practice.
|
|
