|
Post by sallyw on Jan 2, 2007 14:56:13 GMT
I agree entirely but whilst there are a small number of people who are are on this and that committee and judge and show and buy and sell ponies and they are all involved together in what we can only call equestrian incest, how will you stop it?
|
|
|
Post by digger on Jan 2, 2007 15:59:41 GMT
Stewards could be selected from the PUK/NPS stewards lists from those who have no direct interest in the breed.
|
|
|
Post by member on Jan 2, 2007 20:46:02 GMT
I am sorry fetherston but as a person who sits on various committees, judges, shows, breeds and buys the odd pony to sell I object to being called incestuous are you tarring everybody with the same brush?
|
|
|
Post by Guestless on Jan 2, 2007 21:37:21 GMT
I've stewarded at lots of shows (including the PUK Summer Champs at Peterborough twice and once at Newark) and have always had my expenses paid unless it was a really local show. Fetherston, I am disgusted that a large show asked for your assistance (I assume, or at least accepted your offer) and then failed to advise you in advance you weren't required. I'm also shocked that the show secretary permitted a judge to say who their steward was. Judges decision is final does not to me relate to organisational issues, but to the placings of the ponies! Maybe instead of moving qualifiers, the NPS requires another rule to say the show secretary is responsible for allocating stewards! I'm not saying Northleach should keep the qualifiers as I don't really know enough about it but I am shocked to read about the Section A class.
|
|
|
Post by coin on Jan 2, 2007 21:43:47 GMT
I am sorry fetherston but as a person who sits on various committees, judges, shows, breeds and buys the odd pony to sell I object to being called incestuous are you tarring everybody with the same brush? As long as you don't back slap, take finders fees or a % of the sale price behind the buyers back then all will be ok.
|
|
|
Post by competitor on Jan 2, 2007 22:13:24 GMT
Northleach has lost the qualifier purley because of RPS and her bent cronies. She should be removed from the show commitee and the wpcs
|
|
|
Post by Merlin on Jan 2, 2007 22:44:24 GMT
This is not a witch hunt! Be assured it would make little difference. It could be worse!
No show shjould lose a qualifier because one person. Instead the overall picture needs to be reviewed.
Northleach is a superb venue and as said elsewhere the going and timing have to be considered. Both are presently ideal and Laura Hutching has done wonderful job in moving the show.
Northleach has the potential to develop into a Superb event with nothing more than a little more thought and a change in stewards.
The idea of using NPS stewards from other breeds for qualifiers is very sound and should be considered as a way forward.
|
|
|
Post by Contiki on Jan 2, 2007 22:49:56 GMT
Can they introduce that at the Connemara Breed Show as well? ;D
|
|
|
Post by Infuriated on Jan 3, 2007 0:06:30 GMT
If it were that this was a one off lets face it blatantly corrupt(but also stupidly obvious)incident then I would be the first to admit that Northleach should perhaps not have the qualifier removed.I do not believe that was the only underhand or dodgy bit of judging that day and as a competitor there for numerous years have yet to leave the show without a bad taste in my mouth.It is sad that the likes of LH and others involved in the running or judging of what should be our highlight of the year as welsh competitors should be tarnished by those very sad individuals who will put pressure on them for a red rosette.I hope that the people involved and they will know who they are are utterly ashamed that they have been aparty to the demise of Northleach
|
|
judge oftensteward also
Guest
|
Post by judge oftensteward also on Jan 3, 2007 0:09:32 GMT
I have judged all over the country and the stewards have always been organised by the show secretary/committee. They have often been other judges who have always been polite, discrete, incredibly efficient and certainly haven't influenced my placings in any way. I have always thought both the competitors and I were incredibly lucky to have people who really knew what they were doing as stewards. (The only steward who ever nearly did influence my judging was a not-very-horsy farmer at a smallish county show. As a particular pony walked into the ring in every class, he would announce loudly "That'll be your winner" and then compounded the situation by calling competitors by their first names to pull them in. I had to work really hard not to ignore his 'selections' altogether because he annoyed me so much, and he couldn't keep quiet even when asked.) I also steward at quite a big show local to us annually, frequently for well-known judges, and I certainly don't influence them in any way. It is usually very educational and enjoyable, and I feel I am putting something back into showing when I steward. I really can't see a problem with this. Are there seriously enough of the already hard-worked superb NPS/PUK stewards who are not judges or on committees or breeders, with enough time on their hands, and sufficient interest if it's not a breed they are involved with, to travel to far-flung shows ? I am sure most of us judges are grown-up and confident enough to make up our own minds whoever the steward is. I am not sure where "corruption" or "incest" are meant to fit in, and such allegations seem strange and offensive, when we are doing our best to be absolutely fair on every occasion.
|
|
|
Post by Bystander2 on Jan 3, 2007 8:32:18 GMT
Shows cannot run without stewards, they are a dying breed, as are show sec, straight judges etc.
Unfortunately the "few" always manage to spoil if for the majority, & unless things improve, it will be the competitors who are the dying breed, & as they are the ones 'paying' for the privilege the whole world of showing will be in jeopardy.
No one is tarring ALL stewards with the same brush, but what happened at Northleach, was not only totally Wrong, but done so arrogantly.
Unless the people involved are made to face the consequences of their action, & this ought to be Northleach Committee speaking directly to the individuals concerned! The NPS will have no choice BUT to move the Olympia qualifiers elsewhere. There is no info that NPS has accepted Shrewsbury as an alternative?
In the old days, this probably also went on, but due to no forums like this, people were unaware of the whole picture, & the corruption went on unchallenged by enough voices to stop it, Nowadays they will find themselves policed by forums like this.
However, a word of warning, we all can't win all the time!!! & its impossible to please all the people all of the time. Keep the moans & groans to blatant corruption & don't moan & groan every time you don't win
All we want is to be seen to be judged fairly
|
|
|
Post by steward on Jan 3, 2007 8:38:14 GMT
Regarding your comment about stewards please don't run us down! We have opted nOT to judge and many of us have vast experience. Sadly the societies rarely recognise this and fail to call us up for the Breed shows instead they opt for those on judging panels to double up. Many of these have invested interests. Also we often have vastly more experience of stewarding than those at major shows. There are some stewards say at Olympia who it has been said by those stewarding with them rarely or never steward anywhere else.
If the societies got it right they should Star their stewards as well as their judges. This would help the show secretaries and give us who do not wish to judge something to aspire to. Perhaps this will be food for breakfast... and yes I would and do drive miles across the UK to Volunteer for an egg & bacon roll rahter than lunch!
|
|
judge
Junior Member
Posts: 154
|
Post by judge on Jan 3, 2007 9:26:58 GMT
What has the stewards at Olympia got to do with Northleach losing their qualifiers? If any of you bothered to notice the stewards at Olympia have been completeley changed from five years ago bar one person and I defy anybody to say that JS is corrupt. I predict that Northleach will keeep their qualifiers as a deal has been struck.
|
|
judge often steward rarely
Guest
|
Post by judge often steward rarely on Jan 3, 2007 9:51:43 GMT
My sincere apologies to "steward" - that was not what I meant to imply in my post. I was under the impression that many shows had to rely on local people, including judges, being willing to help. If there are enough stewards (prepared to travel) to cover all the shows with qualifiers, including breed shows, without having to use judges on occasion, then that's great for shows and show secretaries. The point I meant to put across is, in my experience, most judges are not going to be influenced in their placings, by their steward, whether they are judges or have other connections.
I have been incredibly lucky to have had fabulous stewards, incredibly on the ball, and I know from my one attempt a year, the skill and experience required. I think starring of stewards sounds a great idea.
I can't comment on Northleach, but I have stewarded for one of the individuals named, and thought them a very fair judge.
|
|
|
Post by ferret on Jan 3, 2007 10:35:11 GMT
I do think that if a judge is 'straight 'then no amount of steward influence will sway them to make a corrupt decision ...however if a judge is NOT ' straight' then this is where the problems start ... I think stewards do an invaluable job and we should concentrate on outing the' bent ' judges , supporting the fair and straight ones and leave the stewards alone !!
|
|
|
Post by jingle on Jan 3, 2007 12:24:12 GMT
What has the stewards at Olympia got to do with Northleach losing their qualifiers? If any of you bothered to notice the stewards at Olympia have been completeley changed from five years ago bar one person and I defy anybody to say that JS is corrupt. I predict that Northleach will keeep their qualifiers as a deal has been struck. JS, DS, AN are all star calibre stewards. JW has been spotted with clipboard at her show but the others?? Why not give the year's outstanding NPS stewards the chance to do the job they have vast experience of, are trained to do and excel at. They deserve a free ticket to Olympia.
|
|
|
Post by bystander2 on Jan 3, 2007 12:33:30 GMT
I don't think anyone, anywhere, has complained at the stwearding at Olympia!!! OR indeed stewards in general.
The casing point, at Northleach, was the replacement steward, who wasn't supposed to be stewarding the Sec A Olympia Qualifyer class, but did anyway, was the dominant figure in the ring. She is also a prominent judge herself. The gripe is that the winning pony, was produced by the person that produces ponies for this steward, and incidently the pony was also entered in the Fayre Oaks High Flyer sale, This Steward being strongly conected with trying to raise the prestige etc of Fayre oaks.
Non of the above reads as a very whiter than white qualification, esp as the pony was novicey, went novicey as was apparent by its placing and way of going at Olympia - where it was last.
The judge did not appear strong enough to stand up to the steward who is a force to be reckoned with.
So the moral of this story is the connections, & monetary benefit that could have been the result of this placing AT Northleach
|
|
|
Post by Stewards on Jan 3, 2007 12:40:28 GMT
I must say I find D. Spears to be one of the best sewards, she is clear in her directions and most of the time gets us to line up in the best way possible!!! ( its one of my pet hates when the judges say pull them in here and use 1/4 of the ring giving us a silly amount of space to do a show in!!!!)
I think it is absoutly right that stewards should be selected by the secretary to avoid this situation happening again.
I do believe the problem at northleach last year was down to RPS. I know there was a whole debate about the judge choosing to give its 2nd placed pony the championship ( thats not the issue here I know) but I believe it was RPS who entered the ring and told the judge he had to give the Olympia ticket to the reserve.
|
|
|
Post by sallyw on Jan 3, 2007 13:07:29 GMT
The word incestuous was used to mean a very close connection which would normally be frowned upon - not as in the most usual definition of incest - sexual relations between close relatives but as in the possibility of money and favours changing hands by people who would then be judged by those receiving the gift. In other words not to make offensive accusations about the persons thus described but to make clear the very close connections between SOME people in the showing world and to describe those connections as unacceptable. I agree with ferret that judges should not be influenced by stweards but when ones stweard is someone who has judged and shown at the highest level then I guess it may be hard to ignore them if they are "putting in their twopennorth".
|
|
|
Post by ferret on Jan 3, 2007 13:52:46 GMT
i agree featherstone , i suppose if a very experienced judge is Stewarding for a less experienced Judge then it could be hard to not listen to them ...but hopefully all the experienced 'straight' judges should know better than to try and influence the judges final decision! In an ideal world ...competitors would just compete ...Judges would just judge ...and Stewards would just steward ....but with lack of volunteers / entries / monetary rewards this would never be a realistic option !
|
|
|
Post by anna on Jan 3, 2007 15:16:24 GMT
I must say I find D. Spears to be one of the best sewards, she is clear in her directions and most of the time gets us to line up in the best way possible!!! ( its one of my pet hates when the judges say pull them in here and use 1/4 of the ring giving us a silly amount of space to do a show in!!!!) Here here and an excellent judge also.
|
|
|
Post by numpty on Jan 3, 2007 16:31:10 GMT
I see debbie Spears is advertising for staff at her highland pony stud, advert on horsequest, looks good, in view of the opportunity to ride and show her ponies i think i'll apply. ha ha
|
|
|
Post by anna on Jan 3, 2007 16:47:58 GMT
Well numpty you would certainly learn a lot. If I lived nearer I would apply too.
|
|
|
Post by eight on Jan 3, 2007 16:54:49 GMT
I don't think anyone, anywhere, has complained at the stwearding at Olympia!!! OR indeed stewards in general. The casing point, at Northleach, was the replacement steward, who wasn't supposed to be stewarding the Sec A Olympia Qualifyer class, but did anyway, was the dominant figure in the ring. She is also a prominent judge herself. The gripe is that the winning pony, was produced by the person that produces ponies for this steward, and incidently the pony was also entered in the Fayre Oaks High Flyer sale, This Steward being strongly conected with trying to raise the prestige etc of Fayre oaks. Non of the above reads as a very whiter than white qualification, esp as the pony was novicey, went novicey as was apparent by its placing and way of going at Olympia - where it was last. The judge did not appear strong enough to stand up to the steward who is a force to be reckoned with. So the moral of this story is the connections, & monetary benefit that could have been the result of this placing AT Northleach Had it been a stallion? It is eight years old.
|
|
|
Post by know all on Jan 3, 2007 17:29:55 GMT
Well, things should be looking up at PUK. Just heard Debbie Spears is now employed by PUK, in charge of running all the shows, if anyone can turn it around she can, Good Luck Debbie you have our support.
|
|
|
Post by Romany on Jan 3, 2007 21:05:50 GMT
She was trained up as the understudy. NPS chicks are on the way to join her.
|
|
|
Post by nps on Jan 3, 2007 21:28:20 GMT
That's right we are abandoning the tired old ship that has lost it's way.
|
|
|
Post by Guestless on Jan 3, 2007 21:49:34 GMT
Can we keep this thread on topic please. If Debbie Spears has been appointed by PUK, then that is perhaps worth a new thread altogether - but not as a personal crusade for or against Debbie.
|
|
|
Post by sallyw on Jan 4, 2007 8:11:33 GMT
Getting back to the thread, everyone who belives that things were not right in the ridden class at Northleach in 2006 should write to the NPS and say so, saying why - and naming names if they feel that is appropriate. I know peopel say they have written and been ignored but if everyone writes NOW when they are considering holding an enquiry then it may well have some weight. We have to get closer at least to Ferret's ideal of judges judging, competitors competing etc without complications - even if showing will never be without corruption whilst so much money is involved (ponies costing so much etc.)
|
|
|
Post by very sad on Jan 4, 2007 12:13:13 GMT
[ Had it been a stallion? It is eight years old.[/quote]
No, it was gelded as a foal and used by the previous owners daughter as a LR/FR pony, did a bit affiliated but nothing much till sent to be produced by MN in 2006. Its a shame that the success MN did have with him seems to be overshadowed by the event at Northleach and I'm sorry too that the new owners must upset over the re-raking of his "qualification". He did not go well at Olympia but his new rider is only young so hopefully they can make a better showing together next year. It is a great pity that one person's ego may have tarred a number of innocent competitors and for what in the end? Instead of raising the profile of the High Flyer (if that was the intention) surely it has done the opposite? Reputation is everything in life - hard to win and so easy to lose....... Let's hope that by the end of 2007 we wont have experienced as much so-called questionable judging as we seem to have had in the past few years and that the threads will be bemoaning the fact there is nothing much to gossip about.
|
|