Badminton XC!

[Mooseontheloose]

The problem OT has is that it's not the first time. People have been making excuses for his behaviour for years and for me that's the problem.

Every rider/owner has made mistakes but to repeatedly do it and seemingly not learn from it shows a lack of compassion and respect for his horses IMO. Yes I'm sure he does love his horses, but when his competitiveness takes over he makes bad decisions.

Personally I have heard some horror stories about him as a person so I will always be biased I admit, but even when trying to be objective I cant see past the fact he does stupid things and never seems genuine in his remorse.

I assume if you've heard 'horror stories' you've reported them to the relevant bodies - or is this just more unverifiable rumour.
As for questioning his remorse - how do you know? All this is supposition, rumour and opinion.
I hold no brief for OT but I really question this attitude where people 'know' something, or 'have heard' something - maybe the RSPCA should have been involved.
I'm signing off this board, this keyboard warrior stuff sickens me. If there really was worry about welfare, there was more than one person who needed hanging out to dry like OT has been.

 

[TGM]

I assume if you've heard 'horror stories' you've reported them to the relevant bodies - or is this just more unverifiable rumour.
As for questioning his remorse - how do you know?

How can you report 'horror stories' to the relevant bodies if you have no proof? If someone you know very well and trust tells you that they have witnessed something horrible it is natural to believe them, but frustratingly there is nothing you can do without proof. I have witnessed a certain event rider giving a horse a totally unacceptable beating, but I can't report him as it would be my word against his. Two people close to me have seen him being abusive in other situations as well, but again, frustratingly, there is nothing that can be done without proof. It is particularly frustrating as this one is much cannier than OT and does it out of view of event officials, plus is very good at posturing in front of the camera to make out he cares.

On the other hand, I do agree, the type of rumour that comes via a long chain of various slight acquaintances can be very unreliable and very damaging, especially as the stories tend to be embellished as they pass along the chain like Chinese whispers.

 

[YorkshireLady]

I am struggling with this one, as I have never been a fan of OT at all. I did not like how the grey was ridden in particular. However, the big issue then was his first two statements on it and also his response after the SJ on the bay.

He is by no means though they only rider who has or would act in this way but he is at the top of the sport and in the spotlight. I do think Ian Stark got it right in mentioning role models. I hate the trial by media aspect, but then part of me thinks that the pressure associated with the gran slam meant that the reformed character that has been on display lately, could not be maintained!

 

[caladria]

I am struggling with this one, as I have never been a fan of OT at all. I did not like how the grey was ridden in particular. However, the big issue then was his first two statements on it and also his response after the SJ on the bay.

He is by no means though they only rider who has or would act in this way but he is at the top of the sport and in the spotlight. I do think Ian Stark got it right in mentioning role models. I hate the trial by media aspect, but then part of me thinks that the pressure associated with the gran slam meant that the reformed character that has been on display lately, could not be maintained!

Well, that's the thing isn't it? It's not so much that he did it (many do it, it probably was that $350,000 going to his head), it's that he got caught doing it, and social media picked it up, and it meant that bodies/sponsors have given up the struggle of pretending that it didn't happen. Because most of the time it can be ignored, because - unlike racing - no one pays attention to eventing except those that like eventing.

There's two appropriate responses to it, really. Either point out that lots of riders do it and mostly get away with it and say he was unlucky that he got picked up on it, leave it at that. Or point out that most of the time riders get away with it, and that maybe they shouldn't, and that perhaps the rules ought to be applied more consistently.

At the end of the day, it is a PR thing. It's a sport that gets outside interest three times yearly max (Badminton, championship, Burghley), and sporting organisations will know that would have been a great PR story for the sport (first female winner in 11 years, Townend bravely defeated in quest for Grand Slam, young Brits shine) has become an ugly one, and that's one out of three chances ruined for the year. For a sport that's struggling to push its image forward, a series of ugly stories might be very, very expensive.

It's not so much that Townend told the world that you have to win ugly to be no.1, it's that most of the people hearing it won't have seen the previous world no.1 proving that statement wrong and will be inclined to believe him!

 

[YorkshireLady]

Please believe me when I say that others should not get away with it either. I would also say it is a world media thing....and it came on the back of the Kentucky issue.

Rolex I am sure are NOT happy

 

[ester]

I've still not really seen anything I would consider witch hunty so must be looking in the wrong places, I've seen more by way of reasoned argument and discussion about what is most important in situations like this, I also struggle with the difference between trial by media and discussion by the general public about things and events that are important to them.

Just because a GJ do or don't do something about it on the day shouldn't mean that's it no further discussion about the situation should or needs to happen, I think it's important for the sport to know how people feel about it, there is no point in them existing in a bubble.

 

[teapot]

I watched practically all of the XC live feed, and there were several riders who behaved in the exact same way as OT. I don't see them receiving the same sort of vitriol on here or anywhere else for that matter.

Others didn't receive official warnings though. The ground jury may well have seen something that wasn't seen on the red button screen - they have access to far more footage plus any referrals from stewards than the public do. They clearly saw something that warranted the warnings that others didn't receive.


Unfortunately eventing as a sport now has to play a massive PR game these days - it's hanging on in the Olympics by a thread, WEG I think is now a 3*, not a 4*, the OT debacle comes only a weekend after Marilyn Little losing sponsors at Kentucky etc. So while witch hunts don't help, raising concern about welfare, or the yellow card system is needed. The sport has to be shown moving with the times and that includes the media and social media. Whoever does the Team GBR media training was probably cringing during that interview, especially if you compare how say how Gemma T and Tina C interview. While they're personal, they're very professional too.

 

[caladria]

Others didn't receive official warnings though. The ground jury may well have seen something that wasn't seen on the red button screen - they have access to far more footage plus any referrals from stewards than the public do. They clearly saw something that warranted the warnings that others didn't receive.


Unfortunately eventing as a sport now has to play a massive PR game these days - it's hanging on in the Olympics by a thread, WEG I think is now a 3*, not a 4*, the OT debacle comes only a weekend after Marilyn Little losing sponsors at Kentucky etc. So while witch hunts don't help, raising concern about welfare, or the yellow card system is needed. The sport has to be shown moving with the times and that includes the media and social media. Whoever does the Team GBR media training was probably cringing during that interview, especially if you compare how say how Gemma T and Tina C interview. While they're personal, they're very professional too.

Hmm. Well. Did they? There's always the chance that a GJ will let something slide as "inexperience" and not officially penalise, or pay more attention to the Big Names, or pay more attention to the things that receive more social media attention.

I think as well as your point about raising concerns about welfare, the sport also has to be seen to do something when others raise concern about welfare. Whether that's education (no, that's actually fine because... let me show you this...) or actually changing.

And as well as welfare the other big thing in the sport is safety... and three of the four sanctions in 2016 and 2017 at Badminton were effectively for tired horses falling over jumps. Given that rider deaths on XC come from horse falls, then pushing tired horses on for completions (either too fast, or in some cases at all) becomes a safety thing as well (though let's not look too hard at how championships have reduced teams from four to three, and how that will encourage totally exhausted horses being nursed home when they should retire).

 

[Annagain]

yes, I guess I always think of hats, as they are so careful to show their names these days and I'd be gutted if I had to change a hat that fits

I remember a situation with a tennis plays (I think maybe Andre Agassi?) who got a new sponsorship deal with a racquet company and could not get on with their racquets at all. In the end the new company had to pay the old company a fortune to have their branding put on the old racquet for him to use. They forgot to write in a confidentiality clause though and the old company told everyone.

 

[Scarlett]

I assume if you've heard 'horror stories' you've reported them to the relevant bodies - or is this just more unverifiable rumour.
As for questioning his remorse - how do you know? All this is supposition, rumour and opinion.
I hold no brief for OT but I really question this attitude where people 'know' something, or 'have heard' something - maybe the RSPCA should have been involved.
I'm signing off this board, this keyboard warrior stuff sickens me. If there really was worry about welfare, there was more than one person who needed hanging out to dry like OT has been.

I have no reason to question the stories as the person who told me them has no reason to have any agenda or benefit from them, and yes the authorities were involved.

I'm old and ugly enough to form an opinion on someone from the information I am given and the things I see myself. There are plenty of his ex-staff out there with stories to tell. Some may not be genuine that I admit but there's too many stories, both related to how horses were treated and things that happened to people, to dismiss it all off hand. No smoke without fire and all that....

I also think it's interesting that there's not the same level of 'gossip' surrounding other eventers, certainly not to that level and that gets so personal. I completely understand that everyone have favourites - I train with a 4* rider and would defend him if I had too (though I've never had too) - but this has been going on for years around OT. He lost horses before because of it before IIRC and I wouldn't be surprised if he did again.

 

[fetlock]

No surprise really.

Jump 4 Joy statement on Twitter an hour ago.

"We have reviewed our involvement with Oliver Townend following the incident at Badminton Horse Trials & we can confirm that we have terminated our association with this rider. We take animal welfare very seriously and are committed to the highest standards of well-being"

 

[fburton]

Wow! Consequences indeed...

 

[popsdosh]

Wow! Consequences indeed...

What annoys me no end is so many jumping on the bandwagon and calling for blood when 99% of them cannot tell the difference between a tired horse and one thats slacking. Do you not know thats why the ground jury took the view they did ,they were closer to the action than all the keyboard warriors and their views were born out by the horse being fresh on Sunday.
Some of you want to be very careful making unfounded accusations as well now and you need reminding to be careful what you put otherwise I for one will start reporting some ,very reluctantly but it has become a witch hunt ,it is forums at there worst.

 

[popsdosh]

I also think it's interesting that there's not the same level of 'gossip' surrounding other eventers, certainly not to that level and that gets so personal.

You obviously move in a very small circle then !

 

[Leonor]

I cant stand faux outrage. The witch hunt has gone too far.

 

[Bob notacob]

What annoys me no end is so many jumping on the bandwagon and calling for blood when 99% of them cannot tell the difference between a tired horse and one thats slacking. Do you not know thats why the ground jury took the view they did ,they were closer to the action than all the keyboard warriors and their views were born out by the horse being fresh on Sunday.
Some of you want to be very careful making unfounded accusations as well now and you need reminding to be careful what you put otherwise I for one will start reporting some ,very reluctantly but it has become a witch hunt ,it is forums at there worst.

I couldnt agree more. Some times even a tired horse needs something to regain their attention.If only for the safety of the horse.

 

[JJS]

I've still not really seen anything I would consider witch hunty so must be looking in the wrong places, I've seen more by way of reasoned argument and discussion about what is most important in situations like this, I also struggle with the difference between trial by media and discussion by the general public about things and events that are important to them.

Just because a GJ do or don't do something about it on the day shouldn't mean that's it no further discussion about the situation should or needs to happen, I think it's important for the sport to know how people feel about it, there is no point in them existing in a bubble.

I absolutely agree with you. There are plenty who are very quick to label public discussion as a witch hunt when what's being said isn't in line with their own views. People are allowed to have opinions whether they've ridden at 4* or not. People are also allowed to think that there should be consequences when others behave in a certain way. There are times when change is needed in a sport, and when the best and most effective way to achieve it is by having it talked about by as many individuals as possible - at all levels.

Do I personally think that OT needs a lifetime ban? No, not at all. Do I think that a financial incentive to behave better in future is on some level deserved? Absolutely. There are plenty who'll agree with me, and plenty who'll disagree. That doesn't mean anyone is entirely wrong or entirely right in their assessment, yet there are those who seem completely unable to accept that differing opinions can exist without being a symptom of the evils of social media.

 

[popsdosh]

I absolutely agree with you. There are plenty who are very quick to label public discussion as a witch hunt when what's being said isn't in line with their own views. People are allowed to have opinions whether they've ridden at 4* or not. People are also allowed to think that there should be consequences when others behave in a certain way. There are times when change is needed in a sport, and when the best and most effective way to achieve it is by having it talked about by as many individuals as possible - at all levels.

Do I personally think that OT needs a lifetime ban? No, not at all. Do I think that a financial incentive to behave better in future is on some level deserved? Absolutely. There are plenty who'll agree with me, and plenty who'll disagree. That doesn't mean anyone is entirely wrong or entirely right in their assessment, yet there are those who seem completely unable to accept that differing opinions can exist without being a symptom of the evils of social media.

So why dont we do away with a ground jury of experienced riders! Who have sanctioned him !It has consequences, Why is that not good enough for you? . If its not you are questioning their judgement who saw more of it than you will have done there will have been vets who report at the finish ,do you know what they said? Doubt it ! There were people on the course who would have alerted any problems. Dont label those not with your view as not wanting to listen when you are not listening to the evidence and the fact he has been sanctioned. Im happy to go with the ground juries decision as thats what their there for.
I know lets replace the ground jury with a public phone in vote.
The reason it has turned into a witch hunt is because of who it was, If it had been WFP,MK etc do you really think we would be here now debating it and can I remind you MK was banned for 2 months for putting her horses welfare at risk in a lot worse situation.Do you want eventing run by the internet because I dont you have to trust those who run it and police it.

So what is your take on Jump4joy removing their sponsorship . Is it a company who takes horses welfare so seriously it has taken them until weds evening to act when they could have done that on their own on sunday! The cynic in me says they have just bowed to the pressure of the internet.

 

[Shooting Star]

So why dont we do away with a ground jury of experienced riders! Who have sanctioned him !It has consequences, Why is that not good enough for you? . If its not you are questioning their judgement who saw more of it than you will have done there will have been vets who report at the finish ,do you know what they said? Doubt it ! There were people on the course who would have alerted any problems. Dont label those not with your view as not wanting to listen when you are not listening to the evidence and the fact he has been sanctioned. Im happy to go with the ground juries decision as thats what their there for.
I know lets replace the ground jury with a public phone in vote.
The reason it has turned into a witch hunt is because of who it was, If it had been WFP,MK etc do you really think we would be here now debating it and can I remind you MK was banned for 2 months for putting her horses welfare at risk in a lot worse situation.Do you want eventing run by the internet because I dont you have to trust those who run it and police it.

So what is your take on Jump4joy removing their sponsorship . Is it a company who takes horses welfare so seriously it has taken them until weds evening to act when they could have done that on their own on sunday! The cynic in me says they have just bowed to the pressure of the internet.

Wow, lots of anger going on there!

The ground jury have acted according to the rules of the sport and have sanctioned based on the remit of those and those alone. The media reaction as I see it is at least in part, that for the minority in the sport the rules may not be tight enough or too open to interpretation and therefore are deemed to have been exploited.

I don’t see a witch hunt here, I see a discussion around the rules. nothing more, nothing less. Quite possibly social views on acceptability of behaviour towards animals has shifted and the current rules are now rather out dated in comparison to other sports. The discussion merely aids in the natural cycle of updating those rules.

 

[JJS]

So why dont we do away with a ground jury of experienced riders! Who have sanctioned him !It has consequences, Why is that not good enough for you? . If its not you are questioning their judgement who saw more of it than you will have done there will have been vets who report at the finish ,do you know what they said? Doubt it ! There were people on the course who would have alerted any problems. Dont label those not with your view as not wanting to listen when you are not listening to the evidence and the fact he has been sanctioned. Im happy to go with the ground juries decision as thats what their there for.
I know lets replace the ground jury with a public phone in vote.

This is exactly the sort of reaction I was talking about. If you read my response properly, you'll see that I never mentioned taking issue with the ground jury's verdict - what I actually said was that I thought losing sponsorship (i.e. a financial incentive) was fair punishment, and one that might actually make a rider like OT sit up and take notice. I never for one moment said that the public should replace the role of the ground jury. What I said was that the opinions of those speaking on public forums and social media are not incorrect just because they don't align with yours. I stand by that statement.

I also think that the only part of 'who he is' that's influencing the witch hunt is that OT has committed the same offence before. I don't hate him, I don't think he's an animal abuser, and I certainly don't believe my assessment of him is in any way biased, but actions have consequences. If you don't want to suffer them, you don't keep making the same mistakes. I'd say the same of anyone in his position.

 

[fetlock]

So why dont we do away with a ground jury of experienced riders! Who have sanctioned him !It has consequences, Why is that not good enough for you? . If its not you are questioning their judgement who saw more of it than you will have done there will have been vets who report at the finish ,do you know what they said? Doubt it ! There were people on the course who would have alerted any problems. Dont label those not with your view as not wanting to listen when you are not listening to the evidence and the fact he has been sanctioned. Im happy to go with the ground juries decision as thats what their there for.
I know lets replace the ground jury with a public phone in vote.
The reason it has turned into a witch hunt is because of who it was, If it had been WFP,MK etc do you really think we would be here now debating it and can I remind you MK was banned for 2 months for putting her horses welfare at risk in a lot worse situation.

So what is your take on Jump4joy removing their sponsorship . Is it a company who takes horses welfare so seriously it has taken them until weds evening to act when they could have done that on their own on sunday! The cynic in me says they have just bowed to the pressure of the internet.

Had Fred the Shed riding in his first Badminton thrashing his horse (s) round the course in the same way I'm sure there would have been exactly the same outrage from those who witnessed it, though it may not have attracted the same mainstream media interest had it been an unknown. Behave like that at one of the world's greatest equestrian events and expect backlash, regardless of who you are. In his case, particularly as the world's no 1, expect an even greater backlash. He only has himself to blame.

This is about Townend and "his" riding on the day. How anyone else has ridden in the past and disciplined for it- or not- isn't relevant. It doesn't excuse or lessen the way he chose to ride those horses. It's as daft as excusing a drink driver because 1) others do it 2) others have been more over the limit, and 3) well, the car and any passengers were perfectly fine the next day so what's the harm.

As for his sponsors or former sponsor, had they announced this on Sunday there would have been cries from some quarters that they reacted too hastily, so whether it was announced on Sunday or today criticism of their decision would no doubt have followed. Maybe Edward Goddard or Fleck will step in to sponsor him next.

 

[Sandstone1]

Had Fred the Shed riding in his first Badminton thrashing his horse (s) round the course in the same way I'm sure there would have been exactly the same outrage from those who witnessed it, though it may not have attracted the same mainstream media interest had it been an unknown. Behave like that at one of the world's greatest equestrian events and expect backlash, regardless of who you are. In his case, particularly as the world's no 1, expect an even greater backlash. He only has himself to blame.

This is about Townend and "his" riding on the day. How anyone else has ridden in the past and disciplined for it- or not- isn't relevant. It doesn't excuse or lessen the way he chose to ride those horses. It's as daft as excusing a drink driver because 1) others do it 2) others have been more over the limit, and 3) well, the car and any passengers were perfectly fine the next day so what's the harm.

As for his sponsors or former sponsor, had they announced this on Sunday there would have been cries from some quarters that they reacted too hastily, so whether it was announced on Sunday or today criticism of their decision would no doubt have followed. Maybe Edward Goddard or Fleck will step in to sponsor him next.

I agree. Its not the fact that it was Oliver Townend. Any rider at whatever level should not be treating his horses like that.
The fact that OT has been warned before for the same thing makes it worse, as does the fact that he rode the same way on two different horses.
I couldnt care less if hes Joe Bloggs or Oliver Townend. Treating a horse like thats not on.
Yes he was warned but in my opinion that didnt go far enough.
Warning him in the past clearly hasnt worked. The rules need to be stricter and be enforced 100% in all horse sports for all riders.

 

[Crazy_cat_lady]

I think.he didn't particularly help himself with his comments and behaviour after the sj round especially on the bay.

It was almost like he was playing the part of the pantomime villain by gesturing at the crowd and doing the hush and 1 signs after the bays sj round. yes he may have felt he had "justified" the previous days action as it was a lovely clear round however simply giving the horse a pat and leaving the arena would have looked a lot more professional even a fist pump as it potentially lead him closer to the grand slam but he almost looked like he was winding up the crowd.

Then his comments after the xc almost came across as him potentially knowing what was coming e.g. the bay was lazy the grey was napping if he had said something like he was keeping the horses attention to prevent a fall or similar it would have looked better the most unsavoury was the series of snacks the bay got after the vv. And no I'm not anti whip and yes I can understand the need for the bonus and could have understood say if he was backing off on the approach or they had a really hairy jump.

Also after the sj round it came across as he didn't really care, yes he issued the statement and yes it was a good one but you can't help but be cynical when his proceeding comments have been like that perhaps a better explanation would have helped and perhaps as acknowledging as world number 1 he is one of the main faces of the sport so can understand how everyone will be focussed on him etc.

Reading some of his fb posts it does sound like he has some sort of social media assistant as it says OT has rather than I have. Should think he will be employing one/ getting advice from someone for the future!

 

[AmyMay]

Another sponsor has dropped him. Jump 4 Joy.

 

[ycbm]

I couldnt agree more. Some times even a tired horse needs something to regain their attention.If only for the safety of the horse.

Or you could stop if the horse is tired or doesn't want to do the job, and accept that society no longer recognises the right to hit an animal in order to win money?

PD I had no idea who I was watching when I turned the telly on, but I saw a rider overusing a whip on a grey horse which was nowhere near a jump and turned to my husband and said it wasn't right. I switched channels and didn't know who it was until I read this thread much later.

I think the almost immediate BHS statement about the inadequacy of the punishment was spot on, and certainly not done because of the subsequent social media witch hunt. And the loss of sponsorship from J4J was deserved and welcome no matter what their ethical or commercial reasons are.

Regarding social media, it's a force almost entirely for the good in animal welfare. It was social comment that got racing to ban whipping racehorses who had given their all over the finish line, and caused the creation of the air cushioned whip which OT was, I think, using.

I think we have to accept that the rules on animal welfare have changed now that everyone has been given a voice to express their disapproval of things that are being done to animals to win money and kudos.

 

[Tiddlypom]

I see no witch hunt on here either. It's correct and refreshing that folk can hold different opinions on an issue, and rather tedious when some then keep whingeing and insisting that enough has been said.

I live fairly locally to OT, and it's fair to say that even those horsey professionals who would normally back a maverick who has pulled hmself up by talent and graft are not enamoured of his attitude in general to people or horses.

It is such a shame. I saw Oli warming up for his first dressage test at Badminton this year and was telling my OH that he had been a bit of a bad lad when younger with a rep for agressive riding, but had now matured into a much more polished and sympathetic rider. Oh dear.

 

[ester]

I'm fairly sure we also discussed the Mary King situation when that happened, as we have many others, it really isn't personal.

To me the calls of witch hunt get similar to the calls of clique and I rarely see either, sometimes I think it's just me seeing things oddly but I'm glad that others also don't see it this time. I don't understand why people don't want it discussed, and if they don't are they happy if the IOC pull the sport on welfare grounds?

Unlike the Marilyn Little situation where without any official sanction people were lobbying sponsors to pull out I've not seen people here say they were doing the same, it would be interesting to know if that has been the case.

 

[meleeka]

Are the rounds online anywhere? I missed him and would like to see for myself what all the drama is about.

 

[ester]

they are on the badminton website (as is all the footage) and the iplayer and these are the start times so you don't have to watch the full 6 hours
https://www.badminton-horse.co.uk/cross-country-start-list-2018/

 

[LaurenBay]

I also do not see a witch hunt. We are all entitled to our own opinions, there is no need to get so defensive about it and threatening to report peoples post for having a view that is not the same as yours. I do not care who the rider was, it is not acceptable to act like that. Yes the ground jury did not disqualify him, that is the decision that they took. It does not mean everyone has to agree with that though.

IMO OT was not easy to watch, the Grey in particular made me feel very uncomfortable. If your Horse is that tired then pull it up and retire, not keep belting it with a whip when the Horse is trying its heart out to jump clear. Oh and I was there so did see in person (not every jump obviously) the grey did look tired and not just lacking in concentration, it was an extremely hot day and the ground was not great in places. The Horse was noticeably tired compared to the others.

The Bay did seem like he could continue so I have no issue with that Horse.

I really hope that this will make OT think in future.