Clear name of Bertram Allen

12391044_928129537222233_5085293589158302211_n.jpg







Many people posting on this thread don't seem to have seen this photo. Three holes. Blood on three holes. Not a gentle scrape on an easily marked horse. Accidental or not, unacceptable, imo.
 
mle22 said:
It's an interesting and nuanced debate on there popsdosh but if you can't be bothered ...
Click to expand...

So whats your take on the small marks in the picture above ! They look obvious to me and very noticeable dont you think . Slightly different from the cleaned up version coming from Bertrams camp!

Have you no thoughts for the rider or do you all blindly assume this is what he wants!
 
Clear the name of Bertram Allen ? For god's sake he's hardly on death row. Can't believe someone has actually set up a petition for this. If BA wants to revoke the decision of the stewards he can do it himself via the appropriate chanels.
 
popsdosh said:
Lets be accurate 3 marks
Click to expand...

3 marks plus numerous wheals by the look of it. The wheals might not meet disqualification criteria but surely they help clarify that spur repeatedly met flank in an undesirable manner.

My mind is well and truly boggled by the number of people struggling against the decision to disqualify. I'm disappointed.
 
Orca said:
3 marks plus numerous wheals by the look of it. The wheals might not meet disqualification criteria but surely they help clarify that spur repeatedly met flank in an undesirable manner.

My mind is well and truly boggled by the number of people struggling against the decision to disqualify. I'm disappointed.
Click to expand...

I must admit I am a little disappointed by the lack of support for the decision from some of the more senior riders, however I try to make allowance for the fact they came into SJ when they cantered around white city in a cloth cap and a fag hanging out their mouths. I havent seen a lot of the younger generation of riders saying the same.
 
popsdosh said:
I must admit I am a little disappointed by the lack of support for the decision from some of the more senior riders, however I try to make allowance for the fact they came into SJ when they cantered around white city in a cloth cap and a fag hanging out their mouths. I havent seen a lot of the younger generation of riders saying the same.
Click to expand...

Oinks - eh !
 
I think that many people were surprised to hear of the disqualification, as Bertram Allen is known to be quite a sympathetic rider unlike some other riders who are known for not being so kind to their horses....but rules are rules there was blood therefore he is disqualified. I'm sure he'll learn from this, and make the appropriate changes to his regime.
 
ycbm said:
12391044_928129537222233_5085293589158302211_n.jpg


Many people posting on this thread don't seem to have seen this photo. Three holes. Blood on three holes. Not a gentle scrape on an easily marked horse. Accidental or not, unacceptable, imo.
Click to expand...

funny enough i made a post the other day about squares being left on where the spurs go and i noticed it on a few horses on this years olympia. its said times on both arguments that could be made when horses need an extra few bits of hair to prevent a spur mark.
 
Interesting. We are likely to be selling my son's horse next year. Maybe I shall ask potential buyers their view on Tbilisi issue because he sure seen shell won't be sold to someone who thinks it's acceptable to leave a horse cut after a round. I can appreciate the occasional accident but I would expect to see remorse.
 
The ruling that would have a rider disqualified should there be any blood seen on a horse, is in place to prevent abuse. Were the decision to be overturned on the grounds that the rider intended no harm to his horse, then that would set a precedence and would lead to any future disqualification for the same 'offence' being brought in to question, and were that to happen, then those who adjudicate at such events would be in the position of having to decide whether the rider was 'careless' or 'reckless'. If a horse bleeds from either abuse, neglect or any form of rider contact, then the decision has to be upheld.

A blanket ruling is the only way forward, even though that will carry along with it, those who have perhaps been no more than careless. We're quick enough to berate judges and juries who neglect to apply rulings, and when they do it seems, then they still can't get it right! :)

Alec.
 
Clear his name of what ?
This whole thing is ridiculous , the rule is clear , and it's not like he's been found guility of murder. I did not see the class but I have no difficuly in believing that the marks were not intentionally made or as a result of rough riding but stuff happens and it's bad luck for him .
He needs someone to buy him some rubber spurs for Christmas .
 
Alec Swan said:
The ruling that would have a rider disqualified should there be any blood seen on a horse, is in place to prevent abuse. Were the decision to be overturned on the grounds that the rider intended no harm to his horse, then that would set a precedence and would lead to any future disqualification for the same 'offence' being brought in to question, and were that to happen, then those who adjudicate at such events would be in the position of having to decide whether the rider was 'careless' or 'reckless'. If a horse bleeds from either abuse, neglect or any form of rider contact, then the decision has to be upheld.

A blanket ruling is the only way forward, even though that will carry along with it, those who have perhaps been no more than careless. We're quick enough to berate judges and juries who neglect to apply rulings, and when they do it seems, then they still can't get it right! :)

Alec.
Click to expand...
Exactly this ^^
 
I don't think leaving squares of unclipped hair will prevent spur damage such as seen on the photo above, but it will make it harder to see, thus masking the problem and allowing some riders to get away with it.

Why not ban rowled spurs?
 
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...

As a person who lived in Essex for the first 20 years of my life, I find this incredibly offensive. What does the riders origin have to do with his response to the OBVIOUS spur marks on the flanks of Bertram's horse?! You need to open your eyes and look at the pictures I'm afraid. Rules are rules, blood is blood. Simple.
 
I agree that rules need to be adhered to. I haven't researched this heavily but haven't seen anything from BA asking for this decision to be over turned. The only thing I can see that would need to be changed (if these facts are true) would be if he really was told it would be a yellow card and then it was changed. I do balance that by the fact that I am assuming there wouldn't be a lot of time to ponder on this as Olympia moves fast. Now I understand what some of these massive elastic strips are I have seen some riders wearing. I have marked a thin skinned chestnut with rubs, not blood so switched to covered spurs. Mare was so fine skinned everything marked easily.
 
Really lovely to see that the vast majority of people agree to the ruling.
And I'm another who was disappointed in Geoff's comments, especially the very harsh things he said about the stewards.
 
acorn92x said:
As a person who lived in Essex for the first 20 years of my life, I find this incredibly offensive. What does the riders origin have to do with his response to the OBVIOUS spur marks on the flanks of Bertram's horse?! You need to open your eyes and look at the pictures I'm afraid. Rules are rules, blood is blood. Simple.
Click to expand...

I think the reference to Essex was more to hint more strongly as to the identity of this other rider.

It is a shame for BA that this has happened, however rules need to be black and white for the sake of the horses. His comments seemed to be fairly accepting of this fact, it's the uproar from everyone else that is affecting perception of the incident. At the end of the day, if he has accepted the ruling then so should we, end of. It's a pity but he's only a youngster, he has a hell of a future ahead of him and hopefully this will be a real learning experience for him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top