SHB new Hat ruling :(

stormox said:
Why can they not make a hat that looks like a traditional top hat or bowler, but gives protection like a skull cap?
Click to expand...
i think they did make a top hat that was a safety cap underneath but the riders did not like it and I have a feeling it looked wrong and very big externally. nothing to worry about though with the look in the show ring because everyone in the ring will be wearing a safety hat and so look the same
 
Millymincepie said:
I rarely do showing so have no personal axe to grind. But, you can reduce or eliminate risk by never doing anything at all. Risk assessments should be just that, an assessment of realistic risk, not a chance that the sky might fall down on us. And I am a nurse, a large proportion of our ills are self inflicted.
Click to expand...

If we do a risk assessment for horse riding properly (without a hat) then it would be say 2-3 (out of 5) for likelihood and a 4-5 for severity of injury, so you are looking at an 8-15 risk which is unacceptable for most H&S requirements. For work you would not be allowed to do it. So with a hat you change severity to 2-3 so you are now looking at 4-9 not great but now acceptable. So it's actually not a risk the sky might fall but pretty dangerous!

P.s I do Sooo much H&S at my work I think I'm now obsessed!
 
Millymincepie said:
Sorry SS99, but how do you get 2-3/5 as likelihood? Out of all the thousands of competitors each year?
Click to expand...

Because 1 means never going to happen or extremely unlikelu (as you don't use zero) so 2-3 means un-likely- fairly likely which is probably true! People are likely-ish to fall off!

Eta: and if they fall off without a hat then they are at a greater increase to a significant injury.
 
Personally think riding without head protection is stupid. I saw a horse throw a rider at a show out of the blue turned out stupid kids fired slingshots at it, you can stop stupid but you can get yourself a fighting chance if worse came to worse.
 
shortstuff99 said:
Because 1 means never going to happen or extremely unlikelu (as you don't use zero) so 2-3 means un-likely- fairly likely which is probably true! People are likely-ish to fall off!

Eta: and if they fall off without a hat then they are at a greater increase to a significant injury.
Click to expand...

But I have never seen anyone fall off in a showing class, a few (very few) warming up, so the likelihood is 1, extremely unlikely
 
I don't do showing but do compete in dressage. I would love to one day ride in a top hat, but realise that I have very little chance of this due to all the new rules and regulation coming in.

However I hate, with a passion, these shiny cycle looking helmets most top level riders insist on wearing! I think it ruins the whole smart look....fine on a show jumper...... But dressage at gp? Really??? I will always wear a velvet covered hat for dressage!

Personally I think hat companies would be wise in investing in makeing hats look 'nicer' and more elegant..... I would quite happily spend a bit more money on something that doesn't make my head look enormous!
 
Hats look the way they look for a reason. Do you not think if manufactures could make models that met safety standards and were even vaguely affordable but looked like more traditional hats that they wouldn't do it??

You can argue all day about tradition, personal responsibility, the nanny state blah blah blah but things change. Insurance almost certainly plays a part in decisions like this and why not? Insurance is all about risk assessment so if there is a way to minimise risk without stopping people from doing the activity completely, why would they not take that into consideration? The insurance industry would probably continue to provide coverage without the helmet rule but they would have to adjust their risk assessment accordingly, on the basis that they would more likely have to pay out for more serious injuries (helmets reduce risk, falling off is a separate risk and neither here nor there to the discussion). Obviously the premiums would be much higher. Why would the organisation not want to avoid that?

Re obesity etc. Ah, the joys of socialised medicine! If you had to get all of your medical care privately then you certainly WOULD be penalised for being overweight or a smoker or whatever. You would definitely be penalised for being a rider! Socialised medicine, by definition, does not punish people for their sins. But given the fragile, threatened state of socialised medicine in this day and age I really don't see how people can claim it's their right to not take an easy, cheap precaution that doesn't inconvenience them in any way?!
 
If a hat saves one life who needs stats. Why do people need evidence for everything and stats as to how many people have had their lives saved before they accept this actually might (from reading posts within this thread) be a good way forward for riding. You see people doing charity work to save lives everything is aimed at saving lives but objecting to wearing a hat that saves a life is not acceptable? I just don't get it?
 
Last edited:
Kaylum said:
If a hat saves one life who needs stats. Why do people need evidence for everything and stats as to how many people have had their lives saved before they accept this actually might (from reading posts within this thread) be a good way forward for riding. You see people doing charity work to save lives everything is aimed at saving lives but objecting to wearing a hat that saves a life is not acceptable? I just don't get it?
Click to expand...

Agree completely with this
 
The wife said:
Don't get me wrong I wear my crash hat every single time I get on a horse, even on the old hunter who nobody has ever fallen off when at home but the new rule is ridiculous. If should be entirely up to the rider what they wear. The sister shows throughout the season at top level and chooses to wear her hard hat for youngsters and the sharper animals but will always choose her beagler over the BS standard hat for the older animals, especially in championship classes as the whole picture is ruined by the glaring straps and none flattering fit of Standard hats, it's health and safety gone mad, why can't the rider choose what they wear based upon the animal they are riding? What next compulsory point 2 jackets while mounted?

Having to wear hard hats is H&S gone mad, but feeling that you are presenting a ruined picture because the hat straps are showing is perfectly reasonable now is it? :confused:
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Having to wear hard hats is H&S gone mad, but feeling that you are presenting a ruined picture because the hat straps are showing is perfectly reasonable now is it? :confused:
Click to expand...

My point was that it should be a riders choice. Can you imagine how ghastly it will look for a hard hats to be worn in championship classes? And yes I know those that don't support the ruling will come back and state not as ghastly as a mashed head but still it is my opinion only, everybody is entitled to their own.
 
Absolutely, everyone is entitled to their opinion. But in a debate the whole point is to prove why your point is more valid than the other side. There are good reasons to wear modern helmets and no valid reasons - other than vanity - not to. From the organisation's point of view they have real reasons to enforce the change and the only real risk is that a few disgruntled die hards might quit, although I'd hazard a guess not many people will give up all the prep they've done over this.

This isn't the same conversation as, say, the things riding schools are allowed to offer now. Some of the activities now endangered had real tangible benefits for students.

Society is full of things we're not allowed to choose. It's true the pool is expanding, but so are the costs and the possibilities. In the case of head injuries, when the rules were made there were few viable options and, if you did fall off, you were either more or less okay or dead. Now there are comfortable, affordable options and, should you fall off, the most likely assumption is you'll cost all of us a spectacular amount of money
 
But if its done mainly for insurance purposes for the Shows- what about Western classes,Iberian costume dress and others like that? It seems we re the only country in the world so obsessed with H&S.
 
The wife said:
My point was that it should be a riders choice. Can you imagine how ghastly it will look for a hard hats to be worn in championship classes? And yes I know those that don't support the ruling will come back and state not as ghastly as a mashed head but still it is my opinion only, everybody is entitled to their own.
Click to expand...

My YO won the Blair Riding Horse Championship wearing a helmet. She wasn't the only person in her class to wear them either so attitudes must be changing. If everyone has to wear a helmet then they are all in the same boat.
 
Well I personaly have fallen several times in the show ring (i've been showing for over 25yrs) and have seen lots of other fall as well. I had one rather spectacular fall this year warming up at derbyshire festival.

Anyone who refuses to wear a proper hat is IMO a selfish arse who couldnt give a damn about the affect of a major brain injury to themselves will have on thier family and the people who ultimatly end up wiping thier arses for the rest of the medicaly extended lives. I've been in the situation of the carer and had to watch the devistation done to the family, seeing a 35yr old young woman in a care home for the elderly not knowing her own name let alone the names of her young children is enough for me to ALWAYS wear a proper hat.
 
Last edited:
I was firmly in the 'elegant beaglers/bowlers' category until a few years ago. I wore my hunt cap for everything, hacking, hunting, exercise. I would defend my right to wear my lovely hat to the hilt.

But then I had a bad fall out hunting, when a very very safe horse slipped over on a hill at a fast canter and came down on me. I was in hospital with concussion and bad nerve damage to my neck, which still bothers me now.

I fully support the ruling. If it saves even one person from serious injury, it will be worth it.
 
Sigh! The differences in culture in European countries is amazing.
I wish more people over here would wear hats. There are a huge amount who only wear when when competing because they have to and the rest of the time don't bother. Getting them to wear a hat when showing would be virtually impossible.
We have ALWAYS worn ours and will continue to do so. When we 1st came over and started riding over here, my daughter was the only one wearing a body protector. Now a lot more children wear them and occassionally you wii, see an adult with one on.
I know H&S is out of control on a lot of things but this is one area where it is right.
 
Kaylum said:
If a hat saves one life who needs stats. Why do people need evidence for everything and stats as to how many people have had their lives saved before they accept this actually might (from reading posts within this thread) be a good way forward for riding. You see people doing charity work to save lives everything is aimed at saving lives but objecting to wearing a hat that saves a life is not acceptable? I just don't get it?
Click to expand...

You need stats because you cannot otherwise say that a hat has saved anyone. If there is not a problem, and if there are no records of head injuries caused in these showing classes then I don't believe there is a problem, what or who is being saved by removing the right of adults to make their own decisions regarding personal safety?
 
I understand why SHB have made the decision, but it's still ridiculous when it comes to grown ups - I am perfectly capable of making a decision when it comes to what to wear on my head.

What really does annoy me is that venues such as GYS enforced this rule a good few years ago, and everyone had to suck it up. But during the hound parade hunt staff were still mounted in Pateys. Complete double standard.
 
Now i'm not a 'showing' person, but i've never understood this 'i want to be able to take my own risks' when it comes to riding in a hat/safety hat - particaularly at shows - the organisers of these things have to pay insurance, and i'm guessing this goes a long way towards these kinds of rulings/decisions.

Personally anyone who chooses to get on a horse without suitable headwear is a little bit mad... you only get one go at life, and horses are unpredictable animals - i'm not going to preach, but i really dont see how a well fitting hat, that will provide protection will detract that much...

If you dont like it, find another showing organisation... or lump it...
 
If you want to take your own risks then sign a disclaimer that you won't be needing any medical attention if anything should hapoen to cause you a head injury. Somthing along the lines of a 'Do not resusitate' disclaimer.
 
I wish all thees "die hard traditionalists" would grow up, you are behaving like petulant children who have been told they are not allowed to eat every single sweet in the shop.(because its not good for them)...wearing a crash hat won't kill you

i don't do showing but last I checked its the horse being judged not you and we should all remember that a) horses are completely unpredictable animals adn b) they could cause you injury without it being their fault c0 you don't know every other horse in the ring

Besides you should be the ones setting the example...Charlotte Dujardin wore a crsah hat and still manged to get gold
 
Its a good ruling and has been a long time coming.

If you or any showing societies put vanity over your own safety then there is no point in you wearing a helmet as your brain is clearly damaged enough already.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top