Pammy Hutton H & H column. Any Thoughts.

B

BBH

Well-Known Member
Joined
26 April 2007
Messages
9,357
Visit site
I thought her column yesterday was very brave as she could alienate people with her views. Personally I think she had some valid points.
 
In an edited version she basically said the Olympic dressage standard of our team was very disappointing, LB should have been earlier in the running and not the pathfinder, JB's horse not Olympic standard and selectors mad not to have taken CH as he would have at least got 68%.
 
She had some valid points but it is worth remembering that Jane did score highly in Europe and was consistent over a good few months. Lecantos was unproven after coming back from injury and Liebling had blown up a few times at "big" shows. Personally I'm surprised that no one seemed to have considered Active Walero who also had good form abroad and much more championship experience that Lucky Star.

Pammy was spot on about the pressure put on Laura B, she should have gone in first.
 
Leibling not mentioned at all in article so am assuming she didn't consider him a candidate, if only Anna could be found a less explosive horse, although also understand that on their day this attitude is what makes them so good.
 
Anna has a lovely Ferro son in the wings who should just be starting GP this year
wink.gif
. Watch this space LOL.
 
I personally would have taken a risk and chosen a horse that could produce a wow test rather than a consistent one that just would be able to get a safe score but not a fantastic one. They had nothing to lose by sending Anna and Lenny and it would have given us a chance. By Jane's own admission Lucky Star is a very good horse but not amazing and to go to the olympics you really need to be capable of scoring over 70% not around the 68% mark. But I do feel sorry for Jane as now the scores are all being pulled apart and she and Lucky Star still did their best and worked bloody hard to get there! I agree about the running order, was a lot to ask for Laura to go last when she'd never ridden at the Olympics before, I'd have put her in the middle (I think early on there was a bigger crowd and more electric atmosphere so Mistral would certainy have blown up)
 
that was my argument for william taking tam instead of Ed for the eventers, to win gold you need to take that risk. safe is not good enough as was proved by the eventers whose overall performance gave us a worse result than in athens.
i was well squashed by the forum on te whole for suggesting such a thing
wink.gif
 
Although hindsight is a wonderful thing I have to say I agree with pammy and various others on this thread-to win gold/a medal (in dressage's case) you have to take a risk; in athens 2004, Escapado was considered the 'risky horse' and he was best brit, this year Miner's Frolic was the 'unknown quantity' and the least experienced but came out top-also Rolette, the possibly risky bet for the showjumping team went and jumped superbly (we'll ignore the final round
wink.gif
).Also agree about the running order, it put too much pessure on Laura, especially after Jane's low score.Pleased that Pammy has had the guts to say what many people are probably thinking.
 
Completely agree about Laura, we were over in HK watching and that comment was made by a number of people.

However, not so sure that her comments were "brave" given that they were made with the benefit of hindsight. As she has such strong views and a platform to air them on it could be argued that it would have been braver to offer her opinion beforehand with the proviso that the selectors are of course the ones who ultimately have to make that decision.
 
I am only guessing but I think the team had to be announced by a certain date and on that date Carls horse was not in the running. Perhaps its the pressure put on the selectors to announce the team by a particular time is what should be changed. It they had not had to do this they could have said that Laura and Emma are definates, Jane and Maria are reserves and if Carls horse came sound in time he would go and one of the girs as reserve to be put in if Carls horse failed vet inspection out there and if not the two girls would go. Once the team had been announced it would have been hard to change it when Carls horse came right.

Lets look at the whole selection policy and make sure world class are not putting the selectors under pressure to announce a team so that the publicity circus can start.
 
i think there is something in what you say because i believe international entries work the same way in all the major disciplines that is entries in principal (short list) which are then confirmed as definate entries right before the start of the contest. some showjump teams for example didnt announce til the horses got on the plane. thats also why it was worth us quartining so many eventers, within the shortlist, they could change their mind right up til quarantine started. where there is no quarantine, the date is probably even closer. day before vet inspection or something.
 
Hello eveyone - I'm new here and have enjoyed reading all your thoughts. This is part of Laura B's blog (7/9) on http://www.horsehero.co.uk/celebrity-blog?CelebId=1670 which I thought would be of interest.

"We.... have decided to make a reader’s reply letter to what Pammy wrote in her commentary in H&H this week. Normally we would stand above something like that and ignore it but it was such a damning report on the whole team and all involved that we feel it cannot be left to stand when so much of its content is factually incorrect."

Horse Hero is another website I enjoy following for those of you who don't know about it. (No connection with me I hasten to add!)

Take care.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top