Katie Jerram comment

S

scabby1

New User
Joined
28 May 2008
Messages
2
Visit site
Katie's comments about the integrity of the judging at Herts are a little off the mark both by Katie & H&H.
My first point is that there where TWO judges in both classes, so is Katie insinuating that the other judges had no opinion? As for entries not coming forward so be it, there have been many show this season with only one or two coming forward. we all choose and place our horses accordingly and there are no better planners of what horse to take where than the Jerrams. It is also very easy to be a ring side Judge. I have to say that had Katie's hunters behaved in the classes there may well of been a different result but that is a case of what if.
If the integrity of the judges was questioned, and the eventual winners never won a class again then I feel their integrity could be questioned but I understand that both Champions have gone on to win and will probably go on to win more classes.
 
I have to say, I was not at Herts so cannot comment on that particular incident, but in general things do need to change. I recently stood in a championship line up, and took reserve champion, only for the judge to comment to the winner (who is extremely well known in the showing world) "he is a little behind at the knee, and rather weak in the quaters". Well, if that was the case, why on earth did she place him as champion? Turns out, as their conversation progressed, the producer in question had been steward to that judge the previous week.

I was also told, by another producer that "to get ahead in showing, you need to steward for the big judges".

Whilst some areas of showing can be laughable, it is also amazing to see how the big producers can behave when their horses are not placed - almost sheer disbelief that the fact they were riding a misbehaving or under-developed horse should not matter because of who they are.

I enjoy showing incredibly, yes it can be disheartening when you are plaecd down the line to better-known, but not necessarily better horses, but then that is just how it goes some days.
 
Having worked for katie and knowing her well im sure that the article was not meant as a winge which is what it is being made to sound as here.
The coloumnists are asked for their opinions on things and thats what she felt therefore its very unjust for you to make out her opinion on the matter is wrong.
 
I couldn't agreeee more with Katie's comments. I wasn't at Herts county but I have to admit to doing a double take when I read about the situation in H & H .
At a recent major championship a cob who napped going in to the ring & again at least twice during what was a pretty poor individual show was placed reserve supreme over others who were foot perfect, & just as good when judged on their own merits as champions of their different sections.
 
Funnily enough, I have been looking back through old copies of H&H (as I can never throw them away) and found one from June 2007 with a comment from Katie, that was almost identical to her comment in this weeks issue.

I do agree with her (sorry if that wasn't clear in my post earlier) and I think things do need a shake up, multiple judges do help, but still more could be done I think.
 
On another forum, the other judge in the Hack class states that the winners of both classes were the best horses forward. Katie's comment about low numbers entered in the Hacks is short sighted, as in the cobs in one section 1 came forward, the ladies hunter only had 4 entered. In H&H report for surrey the same champion hunter won and again the comment about the horses ride been V good was made as the same was said at Herts. I feel Katie has used her column in the wrong way, her advise to the unnamed amateurs and professionals who allegedly had concerns should of been to point them in the direction of the individual societies and not to try to bring into question the integrity of all four judges.
 
I don't know much about showing, but surely no matter who is judging, they should have enough integrity to judge fairly?
I don't see why it matters unless the judge judges herself, there are some people who are honest and do their best to be fair.
As I see it in this case if anything the judging would be stiffer on the known person than otherwise to ensure fairness.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top