Clear name of Bertram Allen

I didn't see this on TV but heard about it on FB. My first thought to eliminate this situation happening again and to safe guard any future mishaps was perhaps riders ditching the spurs.
 
He was disqualified because what happened contravened the rules its as simple as ! Try looking at the olympia thread(in equestrian news) and you will find that on the whole you will be banging your head against a brick wall. If we have the rules they need to be enforced which they clearly have in this case. There is more evidence came out today that was even more damming for him not sure if you are aware of that. Sorry I for one wont be signing !
 
Agree with the above. Rules are Rules. There might be an argument to change that rule. But there is no point in petitioning anyone about a decision made within the rules.

What happened to Bertram was very sad - probably more so to him and to his owners. No-one says that he deliberately mistreated his horse. Accidents happen.

I don't see anyone petitioning to re-instate Victoria Guilksson eliminated after winning the six bar for an eligibility breach. Or for any of the several dressage riders eliminated this year for blood in the mouth. And rightly so. Not because those riders have necessarily done anything really wrong. But because those are the rules of the sport we compete in.

You can't have one rule for some and another for everyone else. Petition to change the rule is you want to - that would have value. Don't petition to break the rules.
 
This was obviously an accident, and I don't think for one minute that anyone believes Bertram is guilty of horse abuse. Howver, there is very clearly blood marks on the horses flanks, the rules state disqualification if this happens. If you let one minor relaxation of a rule where does it stop? "I was only a little bit over the alcohol limit" "I only stole a small amount of cash" I know this transgression of a rule isn't comparable to the above two examples, but rules 'should' be black/white, with no flexibility. So sorry, I will not be signing this petition, however, I think that Bertram is going to have a fantastic career ahead, and hopefully will have learnt something from this horrible event,
 
Realistically OP this wont help Bertram his name has not been tarnished at all he just contravened a rule on which there is no grey area. It will say a lot more about him if he just accepts what happened and learns from it. I suspect at this time he would rather forget about it which this wont help . If he doesnt and is still brewing on it he wont have much of a christmas.
 
Accidental or intentional, nice guy or not so nice guy, it doesn't matter - the rules are fairly black and white when it comes to horse welfare and whatever/however they happened, they were broken.

How it was handled possibly needs to be looked at, but the decision is the right one. 'Oh but he didn't mean too, it's only a tiny rub, please let him be the winner of the class, he rode so well' doesn't put the sport in the best light when there are spur marks on his horse.
 
teapot said:
Accidental or intentional, nice guy or not so nice guy, it doesn't matter - the rules are fairly black and white when it comes to horse welfare and whatever/however they happened, they were broken.

How it was handled possibly needs to be looked at, but the decision is the right one. 'Oh but he didn't mean too, it's only a tiny rub, please let him be the winner of the class, he rode so well' doesn't put the sport in the best light when there are spur marks on his horse.
Click to expand...

This.
 
Have you seen the horse, there is no mark, the whole event has been caused by another competitor, who we all know of, he comes from Essex and has a problem with Bertram's horses owners.
 
It is a rule made for horse welfare. Asking the stewards to decide how it happened during a competition is just not viable. I was sorry for him but certainly don't want to see a rule change.

I think the great majority of people have recognised it as an unfortunate accident and I don't feel he has been vilified in any way.
 
The Tank said:
Have you seen the horse, there is no mark, the whole event has been caused by another competitor, who we all know of, he comes from Essex and has a problem with Bertram's horses owners.
Click to expand...

There was definately blood, and even in Bertram's statement he has admitted that there was blood. It doesn't matter how much, but it was a breach of the rules.
 
There was blood, there is a rule. Very unfortunate but the rule was broken, irrelevant if it was an accident, a tiny bit of blood, nice guy, great round etc.
 
The Tank said:
Have you seen the horse, there is no mark, the whole event has been caused by another competitor, who we all know of, he comes from Essex and has a problem with Bertram's horses owners.
Click to expand...

I've looked at the picture posted by his groom and yes, you can still see the mark, even though it's small. And I imagine it would have been tidied up a bit. And yes, he seems like a really nice guy, and a much better rider than a lot of the others, so it's unfortunate for him. But it's a rule.

The whole event has been caused by a spur mark on a horse. Anything else is just hearsay and rumour unless you can substantiate that claim.
 
Lynn11 said:
For those of you who may of been following the happenings at Olympia and thought the decision of disqualifying Bertram Allen of his clean win.

Feel free to sign the petition below.

Im all for the rule that anyone should be eliminated for harming their horse etc but I think this time he didn't deserve it.

What do any of you think?

https://www.change.org/p/people-clear-name-of-bertram-allen
Click to expand...

So essentially you are arguing that its ok for a horse to have blood on its flanks if it clearly wasn't hammered. Im sorry, I do not hold with that and will not sign to that effect. Im in support of the decision. There is a reason most endurance riders use bitless bridles, its because they know that no matter how light their hands the horse can still get a cut mouth and therefore be disqualified, stop expecting people to bend rules and find another way. No blood = no disqualification, simple.
 
The Tank said:
Have you seen the horse, there is no mark, the whole event has been caused by another competitor, who we all know of, he comes from Essex and has a problem with Bertram's horses owners.
Click to expand...

There clearly was a mark. Are you saying all the vets and stewards were dodgy? Thats quite an accusation. I do not care if it was picked up by a vet, steward or rider... it was there, a mark, and blood. Thats disqualification in the rules. Bertram will get over it, so should others.
 
Another one here who thinks that rules are rules and the stewards did the right thing.

He broke the skin of the horse. There was blood. He had to be disqualified.
 
Bertram has no reason to "clear his name"; I don't think anyone anywhere has suggested that he has or would ever harm any of his horses intentionally. But regardless of intentions, the rules of the sport as they currently stand were broken which resulted in his disqualification from the competition, as it should. The rules prohibit blood on the flanks, regardless of the amount - the same way a football player attempting to play a ball from a "slightly" offside position is still offside.

I think the best thing that can happen from this is that Bertram can accept the consequences of the incident with good grace, learn from it and come back bigger and better; he is a very talented young rider and I think he has a bright future ahead of him.
 
I don't understand the uproar. It's undoubtedly disappointing for both the rider and the horse's owners. However, it's a breach of the rules. I'm glad someone has brought up Peters - exactly the same scenario and a much more dignified response. I will say though, I don't see much complaint from Allen himself. His statement was measured and fair. It's all the social media mouthpieces who are getting their knickers in a twist.

He broke a rule (albeit unintentionally...but there again only a sadist would deliberately cause the flank to bleed) and paid the price. I don't think it was handled particularly well by the stewards, leaving it to the last moment to inform him (when he'd already been told he'd won and was preparing to mount for the prizegiving) when the horse was inspected as he left the arena and it's incredibly disappointed for Allen, but the horse's welfare is paramount and that's why the rule is there. Perhaps the wording of the rule could be changed for the future to account for this scenario...I don't know. But as it stands, the rule is there and it was broken. Simple.

This is an utterly pointless petition. I do hate the present culture of drafting these terrible online petitions in response to everything.
 
The claim that Ben Maher was involved in this is COMPLETELY unfounded & appears to be based purely on rumours Ben's groom laughing in the background on the televised back stage fiasco & the fact he used to ride the horse.

None of the statements from Olympia or Bertram support this & all suggest it was the steward who spotted the blood.

I hate ridiculous social media Chinese whispers!
 
I felt it was sad that he was disqualified as he rode the horse so well, BUT the rules are there to protect the horses and the decision was absolutely correct and the owners and connections should have accepted the decision with good grace, and there wouldn't have been all the discussions in the collecting ring......i did notice his legs swung back and up a lot so maybe he needs to look at a different type of spur (if he really needs them), how sharp are the spurs they use? and should there be a ruling on the type of spurs allowed?
 
glamourpuss said:
Someone posted this on my Twitter.
Same ruling, similar scenario....very different & correct response to it. http://www.chronofhorse.com/article/steffen-peters-eliminated-reem-acra-fei-world-cup-final
Click to expand...

Thank you for this, yes, that is how I would feel too. TBH though, I have not seen a statement by Bertram Allen, so I don't know what his reaction has been.

The petition..... not sure what you are hoping to achieve? I don't think anyone has said he did this deliberately. He has not been accused of animal cruelty, as far as I am aware?

All anyone has said is that a horse he was riding, in a competition with a clear rule structure, had marks on its flanks, and there was blood present. I don't believe Bertram Allen has disputed this. There are rules covering that very scenario, and he loses his winnings, simple as.

If we had to decide what the intent was in every case of marks on a horse's side, if we had to establish mens rea, then it would be impossible. In every case people will have a different view, some people will think he did intend it, others that he did not intend it, no one would ever be pulled up as we can't see inside anyone's mind. I believe this would be a real backward step in horse welfare.

I too have had sensitive horses, it is difficult. But, I appreciate that the rules are clear, marks and blood is elination.

As for Geoff Billington, I was disappointed. If he does not like the rules then try to change them, or leave the organisation that uses them if he feels that strongly. But, to use such foul language, and to be so personally abusive to a steward doing his job, and enforcing a clear rule, that is upsetting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top