SHB new Hat ruling :(

cornbrodolly said:
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.
Click to expand...

I show western and we have a rule introduced to comply with our insurance, that a hard hat must be worn unless you sign an insurance waiver - which means you are not insured at all for anything that happens at that show, your fault or someone elses. Sure, it 'spoils the picture' not wearing a stetson, but who gives a monkeys. My horse is a 'performance horse' and having a hard hat on makes me perform better.
 
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...

Your personal choice is to chose to compete under the ruling body. You can't then pick and chose the rules you want to adhere to. There are a variety of safety rules in place, some to protect the welfare of horses, some to protect the welfare of riders, some to protect the welfare of officials and the public - you don't get a personal choice on which rules you get to follow or not.

Of couse you are entitled to your opinion about what is ghastly (if you find hard hats more ghastly than brains and blood I suspect you have not seen a lot of head injuries), but you are not entitled to your opinion while competing under someone else's rules.
 
I'm surprised that showgrounds haven't already brought the rule in for their insurance. It is unfair on stewards, show staff etc to have to deal with injuries caused by inadequate head protection, we are not talking a broken bone but head injuries which can result in permanent problems or death. I appreciate it looks smart in the traditional turnout but there's nothing smart about head injuries.
 
Last edited:
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.
Click to expand...

So your happy to wear a hard hat at home but not at shows? surely the likely hood of falling off at a show is higher
 
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...



See no, I cannot imagine it looking ghastly at all! I don't think a velvet hat with a flesh coloured harness looks particularly awful myself.
 
I will happily agree with the rule if some evidence is produced that people are suffering head injuries in the show ring due purely to inadequate headgear. At the moment, it appears nobody is being damaged, therefore nobody will be saved by changing the rules but it is another nail in the coffin of personal choice and decision making.
 
Millymincepie said:
I will happily agree with the rule if some evidence is produced that people are suffering head injuries in the show ring due purely to inadequate headgear. At the moment, it appears nobody is being damaged, therefore nobody will be saved by changing the rules but it is another nail in the coffin of personal choice and decision making.
Click to expand...

Of course people fall off when showing!! I've done it myself - won the class, got reserve champion in the championship, then bloody thing bronked me off in the lap of honour because he wasn't in front... I've also witnessed a few very serious accidents in the show ring - the serious ones being people without adequate headgear generally.

Even if your horse is bombproof, in a different, highly charged environment, with other horses around whom you don't know, you are putting a ridiculous amount of faith in an animal who ultimately is unpredictable.

Also, have read a study recently done at Oxford where they stated that 3/5 of horse riding related accident seen in hospitals (not necessarily admitted) were head injuries, and 2/5 of admitted injuries where head injuries - the highest incident injury type. If your likelihood of a head injury is relatively high in the case of a fall, then protective head gear makes sense - body protectors etc are more necessary in sports with high incidence thoracic and lumbar spinal damage such as eventing, but for general riding, dressage and flat showing head injuries are the highest incident.
 
micramadam said:
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.
Click to expand...

Have you noticed more people with head injuries over there, by any chance?
 
I fully support the rule......If it were left to the individual then the die hard showman would always win in the ring/championships because "they will create a better picture on board" without the proper hat. Judges will favour the traditional look always. By EVERYONE having to adhear they are on a level playing field in the ring.
Plus I like my brain in one piece!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Millymincepie said:
I will happily agree with the rule if some evidence is produced that people are suffering head injuries in the show ring due purely to inadequate headgear. At the moment, it appears nobody is being damaged, therefore nobody will be saved by changing the rules but it is another nail in the coffin of personal choice and decision making.
Click to expand...

So the potential for harm counts for nothing?

And are show horses this other species so that accidents that have occurred in say dressage arenas have no bearing on the decision either?

Fwiw no I don't have the stats, I guess that showing societies must keep a log though, perhaps you could ask them?
 
To slightly paraphrase a previous post, if anyone still prefers to compete whilst wearing wholly inadequate head protection when there are numerous smart, safe and comfortable modern alternatives, then that person is clearly not of sound mind, rendering them incapable of making a rational judgement, and it falls to other responsible parties to do it for them.
 
ester said:
So the potential for harm counts for nothing?

And are show horses this other species so that accidents that have occurred in say dressage arenas have no bearing on the decision either?

Fwiw no I don't have the stats, I guess that showing societies must keep a log though, perhaps you could ask them?
Click to expand...
In the context of this thread, then dressage incidents don't count since the discussion is about the SHB. I would like to see what statistics this ruling is based on, looking up "horse related head injury" doesn't differentiate between different disciplines or even whether sustained riding or leading.
Don't get me wrong, if people prefer safety type helmets then fine, but I don't see a need here to be saving adults from themselves.
There was uproar a couple of years ago when schools banned conkers or made children wear goggles because of a potential for eye injury. Nobody wishes to see children damaged but what is an "acceptable" level of risk? How many kids had been injured to justify the rule? I personally think the tiny risk of severe head injury (to myself, not putting anyone else at risk) is a price worth paying if I wanted to wear my bowler hat in my hypothetical showing class.
 
TTK said:
I show western and we have a rule introduced to comply with our insurance, that a hard hat must be worn unless you sign an insurance waiver - which means you are not insured at all for anything that happens at that show, your fault or someone elses. Sure, it 'spoils the picture' not wearing a stetson, but who gives a monkeys. My horse is a 'performance horse' and having a hard hat on makes me perform better.
Click to expand...

Best reply on this thread and I bluddy love the last sentence (see, I highlighted it in red and everything!).

P
 
I think everyone moaning about having to wear a safety hat rather than a pretty hat with no straps is incredibly selfish.
Even if your horse is perfectly behaved, your riding skills are amazing and you've never fell before it could still happen! If you were to fall and become seriously injured due to lack of hat wearing, then it's your family who mainly pay the price! Think of those who love you having to see you lay in a hospital bed in a coma because you were too vain to wear a proper hat.

Absolutely ridiculous I don't even acknowledge the argument from the other side.
I value my life and my family's feelings far more than the style of hat I wear on my head.
 
Millymincepie said:
In the context of this thread, then dressage incidents don't count since the discussion is about the SHB. I would like to see what statistics this ruling is based on, looking up "horse related head injury" doesn't differentiate between different disciplines or even whether sustained riding or leading.
Don't get me wrong, if people prefer safety type helmets then fine, but I don't see a need here to be saving adults from themselves.
There was uproar a couple of years ago when schools banned conkers or made children wear goggles because of a potential for eye injury. Nobody wishes to see children damaged but what is an "acceptable" level of risk? How many kids had been injured to justify the rule? I personally think the tiny risk of severe head injury (to myself, not putting anyone else at risk) is a price worth paying if I wanted to wear my bowler hat in my hypothetical showing class.
Click to expand...

There may not be published statistics by the SHB, but you have had several anecdotes of people falling off in hunter classes on this thread alone... and surely if ANYONE is falling off, ruling for safety measures like hard hats is understandable? I much agree with the seatbelt example used earlier.
 
It came in in Australia YEARS ago. We all thought that all the dressage riders and show riders who had always worn bowlers and top hats would look ridiculous, but you know what - everyone got used to it and its just normal now.
 
Millymincepie said:
. . . At the moment, it appears nobody is being damaged, therefore nobody will be saved by changing the rules . . .
Click to expand...

Whoa - how on earth did you make that leap? Just because someone can't point you to the relevant statistics, doesn't mean that a) they don't exist; and/or b) that accidents don't, in fact, happen - even in a show ring ;).

I am sorry to be blunt, but I find your refusal to even acknowledge that getting on a horse - any horse, in any discipline - without wearing something suitably protective on your noggin beyond baffling, and actually quite stubborn and childish.

Yes, there are countries whose H&S restrictions are less stringent . . . and there are disciplines in which head safety is more lax (I'm thinking rodeo, reining, as an example) . . . but it doesn't mean those countries/sport governing bodies are necessarily right.

Oh, and to compare the ruling to the utterly bonkers H&S nonsense over conkers on playgrounds is to completely misunderstand and misconstrue the yawning chasm between the two dangers. Getting a bit of conker in your eye is a tad different to having permanent and life-changing brain damage. Even if the kid loses said eye, the impact on their life and that of their families is minimal compared with the impact on the family, extended family and the NHS (paid for by your taxes remember) incurred when someone is left irretrievably damaged following an avoidable brain injury.

Rant over ;).

P
 
Millymince - I fail to see how dressage injuries dont count? they are on the flat and some would argue less dangerous than showing as you are not having to compete or gallop horses as a group!
Certainly 1 of the falls I had I gave myself a concussion from but because mum is a nurse she kept an eye on me, it wasnt reported. The fragmented nature of showing will make it nigh on impossible to get meaningfull numbers but maybe you should request figures from SHBGB about thier accident logs?
Also hospital admissions dont generaly ask what you were doing when you were horse riding so breaking it down by discipline is nigh on impossible.

You seem to have a classic case of head in sand sydnrome, or "I'm all right jack". I would argue that an adult is not concidered a responsible adult unless they take all reasonable precautions when engaging in dangerous activities such as horse riding. I realy hope nothing happens to you, more for the sake of your family than anything but I fear it will take a major injury to make you see sense.

BTW the Conker thing never actualy happened. It was a head teacher trying to make a statement at school. He came accross 2 children playing conkers, handed them lab specs and told them " the way things are going, you will need to wear these soon" the Daily mail then got hold of the story, twisted it to suit thier needs and blew it out of all proportion!
 
Millymincepie said:
In the context of this thread, then dressage incidents don't count since the discussion is about the SHB. I would like to see what statistics this ruling is based on, looking up "horse related head injury" doesn't differentiate between different disciplines or even whether sustained riding or leading.
Don't get me wrong, if people prefer safety type helmets then fine, but I don't see a need here to be saving adults from themselves.
There was uproar a couple of years ago when schools banned conkers or made children wear goggles because of a potential for eye injury. Nobody wishes to see children damaged but what is an "acceptable" level of risk? How many kids had been injured to justify the rule? I personally think the tiny risk of severe head injury (to myself, not putting anyone else at risk) is a price worth paying if I wanted to wear my bowler hat in my hypothetical showing class.
Click to expand...

well with an attitude like this you obviously don't regard following rules.

Its not just the rider that could fall off what about the judges and that's been highlighted alot
 
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?

Don't even get me started on the silly 17% figure for go around markings for WH classes. Who came up with that? That's a whole new thread... ;)
Click to expand...

And if the choices you think should be allowed go through then should the NHS also have the choice not to treat you because you failed to make sure you were safe doing something that is known to be a high risk sport?

I'm sorry but I really don't have much time or patience for people who choose to put themselves at unecessary risk.
 
Millymincepie said:
Don't get me wrong, if people prefer safety type helmets then fine, but I don't see a need here to be saving adults from themselves. . . . I personally think the tiny risk of severe head injury (to myself, not putting anyone else at risk) is a price worth paying if I wanted to wear my bowler hat in my hypothetical showing class.
Click to expand...

But it's not just about you, though, is it? I am assuming you have a family of some sort . . . do you not take into consideration what would happen to them if you were incapacitated? Never mind the physical demands they would face taking care of you . . . what about the emotional toll? Are you really prepared to just dismiss their feelings out of hand?

P
 
I absolutely agree with the ruling.
Don't wear your hat at competitions , thats fine, when you hit the floor you may well be unconscious and won't notice the spectators, friends, family and young children screaming. You won't notice the class end or the paramedics run over and strap you to the board. You won't feel the scanner at the hospital assessing the damage to your brain and you won't hear your loved ones speak in hushed tones by your bedside about what will happen if that desicion needs to be made. You might make it and need 24 hour care to be dressed, fed and toileted but you may not remember the names of your carer, or children, husband or parents. And one day your family will hear that your carer keeps horses, sit down and tell your story to them.

It will affect the people you love more than you ever thought it could.
 
Thinking I need a tin hat, not a bowler.
The thread was specific, the SHB have introduced a ruling regarding head gear. I ask on what evidence of serious injury is this based, so serious that it overides the right of every adult to make their own decisions regarding risk? Obfuscating the issue by including all horseriding related injury does not affect the question.
Every day of our lives we all make decisions based on risk. The risk of serious injury in a showing class is very small, I do not deny that it exists, but as an adult I should be allowed to decide if I wish to possibly reduce it even further by changing from my preferred headwear.
 
Millymincepie said:
I personally think the tiny risk of severe head injury (to myself, not putting anyone else at risk) is a price worth paying if I wanted to wear my bowler hat in my hypothetical showing class.
Click to expand...


Well then you are a bloody idiot aren't you.

Not putting anyone else at risk? Maybe not but I'm pretty sure your close family wont be thrilled when they are spoon feeding you and wiping your arse for you owing to accident that could have been avoided had you not been so vain.

Hypothetically of course.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top