watching Olympia now.

AdorableAlice said:
It would take time for the stewards to refer the horse to the vets/ground jury to liaise with one another.
Click to expand...

But they said as soon as the horse leaves the arena it is checked. So they should have seen blood etc at that point and disqualified him straight away. They do that in dressage as soon as the horse leaves it's inspected. If blood is found you are out end of.

Makes me think either someone complained or more likely it's something other than blood or cuts.
 
Feeling Merry said:
Where has it said about blood on horses' flanks? I couldn't see anything when they led the horse around.

What gets me, is the 'delay' in telling us all, Bertram included. He should have been told soon as his round finished, if indeed it was that serious to DQ him.
Click to expand...

I was watching Eurosport, they were very clear that that was the issue being investigated on there :)
 
That seems a very harsh decision. I wonder if he had been 0.2 seconds faster rather than nearly 2 seconds faster if the stewards would have even picked him up on it??

Hard lesson learnt for him...leave patches on the side of that horse like some of the other riders do
 
asterope said:
Slightly off topic but there was some frankly atrocious riding at Olympia that I'm far more concerned about than a slight cut caused by the slip of a spur (that, in Bertram's case, were clearly not being overused). I'm not sure how Olympia - or any horse show - would put rules in place against bad riding, though!
Click to expand...


I dont know if it was the same on the Beeb, but I did comment earlier in the evening that Eurosport were showing no footage of the warm up arena, Ive lost count of the amount of times riders who have ridden impeccably and sympathetically in the ring have been slated for their 'warm up methods' You just never know. But I agree, I was particularly ticked off at that italian that kept proper gobsocking his horse - not something I want to watch on tv!
 
asterope said:
Just had a look - hardly Prince Harry's bloody polo pony, is it?
Click to expand...

Rafie said:
Not at all.
Click to expand...

Feeling Merry said:
Such bad luck. Really doesn't seem fair.
Click to expand...

BobbyMondeo said:
That seems a very harsh decision. I wonder if he had been 0.2 seconds faster rather than nearly 2 seconds faster if the stewards would have even picked him up on it??

Hard lesson learnt for him...leave patches on the side of that horse like some of the other riders do
Click to expand...

I don't know if I agree, rules are rules, the degree/severity is not the issue, it is the presence of the marks/blood, end of discussion. Just how much is too much? Is any spur mark acceptable? Now, Im no bunny hugger but to me, no, no mark/injury that draws blood should be acceptable, and as Bobby Mondeo says... numerous steps can be taken to prevent this happening.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but he is a young rider, Im sure he will make plenty more mistakes in his career, Im pretty sure that this wont be one he makes again. Harsh lesson yes, but the right one.
 
I just wouldn't even wear spurs if i was at this level not even blunt ones. Would carry a whip and that's it. Least then you won't be even unintentionally cutting the horse and being disqualified. Maybe he won't bother in future now his horse clearly doesn't needthem anyway haha little rocket that it is.
 
Prancer and Vixen said:
I don't know if I agree, rules are rules, the degree/severity is not the issue, it is the presence of the marks/blood, end of discussion. Just how much is too much? Is any spur mark acceptable? Now, Im no bunny hugger but to me, no, no mark/injury that draws blood should be acceptable, and as Bobby Mondeo says... numerous steps can be taken to prevent this happening.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but he is a young rider, Im sure he will make plenty more mistakes in his career, Im pretty sure that this wont be one he makes again. Harsh lesson yes, but the right one.
Click to expand...

I agree that rules are rules, but don't like the way that no one seemed to know what was going on.

if the photo on twitter is indeed the spur marks, I'd love to see a clearer version. It seems to have had a filter put over it and I'd be interested to see what they look like on the horse from side on.

I can't help but also wonder how many horses have had blood injuries in their mouths that haven't been picked up on. The very heavy handed italian rider wasn't nice to watch and I would be more concerned about his riding than Bertram's. Maybe it's time to reexamine the horse welfare/abusive riding part of the rules. Imo, one of the biggest problems is consistency in the rules and once Olympia and all other parties have made a statement, we will be able to know better about what has happened.

I do feel desperately for Bertram, the BBC kept cutting to him and he did look gutted as I'm sure the other showjumpers did as well.

Also wasn't impressed with one of the comments that was made when the leaderboard was shown along the lines of 'Oh, well we've had the good news for British hopes that Bertram Allen may have been disqualified!' - I know MT is an idiot but it's not very sporting to say that at all.
 
Frankly i have seen some riders at BS shows who were cruel to their animals, the whips and spurs should all be taken away then we would see who could ride. i thought Bertram's round was incredible and the whole thing was a badly handled mess.
 
Prancer and Vixen said:
I don't know if I agree, rules are rules, the degree/severity is not the issue, it is the presence of the marks/blood, end of discussion. Just how much is too much? Is any spur mark acceptable? Now, Im no bunny hugger but to me, no, no mark/injury that draws blood should be acceptable, and as Bobby Mondeo says... numerous steps can be taken to prevent this happening.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but he is a young rider, Im sure he will make plenty more mistakes in his career, Im pretty sure that this wont be one he makes again. Harsh lesson yes, but the right one.
Click to expand...

I couldn't agree more. I really cannot elaborate more on what you've said aside from how much I echo this!
 
rachk89 said:
I just wouldn't even wear spurs if i was at this level not even blunt ones. Would carry a whip and that's it. Least then you won't be even unintentionally cutting the horse and being disqualified. Maybe he won't bother in future now his horse clearly doesn't needthem anyway haha little rocket that it is.
Click to expand...

Do you genuinely believe this? Do you understand the top level of the sport? I don't think marking a horse is a good thing but I don't think many, if any of us are qualified to say that his horse doesn't need Spurs unless you have jumped it yourself at which point I apologise....
There is more chance of your average numpty cutting or rubbing the horses side particularly after a clip than of a professional doing it...
 
I don't think the situation was necessarily handled badly. BA's round was relatively early on in the competition and put pressure on each rider who came after him. The decision to eliminate is not made by the steward it is made by the ground jury, so can't be immediate before any other rider competes. If BA had been eliminated part way through the competition, those riders who came after the announcement of the elimination would have been at an advantage as they wouldn't have been chasing BA's time. It's a pity he was DQ but if there was a spur mark on the horse, I believe it was the right decision, however small, whether it drew blood or not, the rules are quite clear. It was a fantastic round though! what a talented rider!
 
I hope it doesn't affect his fantastic forward riding in future. The way he never once took a tug on that horse's mouth through out the round was brilliant. Compare with some of the other riders kicking and hauling. I was horrified to hear the commentators earlier in the week recommending watching one particular girl as a role model for pony club kids when she was yanking and kicking simultaneously through her round. I hope the poor lad doesn't become demonised by the PC (and I don't mean Pony Club!) brigade.
 
Mooseontheloose said:
I hope it doesn't affect his fantastic forward riding in future. The way he never once took a tug on that horse's mouth through out the round was brilliant. Compare with some of the other riders kicking and hauling. I was horrified to hear the commentators earlier in the week recommending watching one particular girl as a role model for pony club kids when she was yanking and kicking simultaneously through her round. I hope the poor lad doesn't become demonised by the PC (and I don't mean Pony Club!) brigade.
Click to expand...

I hope he doesn't go down as one of the riders known as 'controversial' as Cian O'Connor still is referred too, and Luca Monetta also gets.

He must be absolutely gutted, apparently his appeal has been rejected. I do think the steward who noticed deserves an applause for noticing the marks, however I also can't help but wonder if another steward may have missed them, and if so, have other horses in the competition managed to get away with spur marks.

I also am interested in if blood in the mouth of the horse can earn a disqualification, does anyone know or is it just flanks?
 
I really feel for Bertram Allen, to be euphoric one minute and then catapulted into the depths of despair the next at such a young age must be awful, he looked absolutely bewildered. I understand rules have to be adherred to but feel that when you watch his round he wasn't unduly harsh with the spurs at any point, there were others riders using far stronger leg aids but their horses obviously didn't have such sensitive skin. There was one horse in the puissance - I can't remember which one - that appeared to have much more noticeable spurs marks but presumably no blood drawn. I've had horses that mark very easily and others that don't at all, it's just sad that it happened at such a prestigous show for Bertram Allen. I suspect he'll reassess the type of spurs he wears in future and no doubt we'll hear a lot more about him in the future as his talent is undeniable.
 
sasquatch said:
I hope he doesn't go down as one of the riders known as 'controversial' as Cian O'Connor still is referred too, and Luca Monetta also gets.

He must be absolutely gutted, apparently his appeal has been rejected. I do think the steward who noticed deserves an applause for noticing the marks, however I also can't help but wonder if another steward may have missed them, and if so, have other horses in the competition managed to get away with spur marks.

I also am interested in if blood in the mouth of the horse can earn a disqualification, does anyone know or is it just flanks?
Click to expand...

Blood in the mouth is an instant disqualification.
 
Aleka81 said:
Do you genuinely believe this? Do you understand the top level of the sport? I don't think marking a horse is a good thing but I don't think many, if any of us are qualified to say that his horse doesn't need Spurs unless you have jumped it yourself at which point I apologise....
There is more chance of your average numpty cutting or rubbing the horses side particularly after a clip than of a professional doing it...
Click to expand...

Do you? Do you understand how sensitive these horses are? He even said his horse is sensitive and that he wasn't even using the spurs and must have accidentally touched him so why bother wearing them in the first place? If you aren't going to use them then why wear them? He got disqualified when if he had left them off he would have won.

The professionals may not do it often but why are they now leaving unclipped parts of the horse on there to hide any slight cuts? They know it will happen and try to hide it. That's worse in my opinion. I stand by what I said I would not use spurs so that I could avoid cutting the horse and losing. There's a big difference between being a winner and a loser and Bertram unfortunately found that put last night. For him it was €25,000.
 
rachk89 said:
why are they now leaving unclipped parts of the horse on there to hide any slight cuts? They know it will happen and try to hide it. That's worse in my opinion.
Click to expand...

And that's a hell of an assumption in my opinion! Surely if the horse has thin, sensitive skin, wouldn't you think leaving the area unclipped would be to protect it from rubs? You know, like the other areas that are traditionally left unclipped...

I'd like to think that if they're inspected afterwards, that's what happens - a patch of long hair isn't just overlooked.
 
rachk89 said:
The professionals may not do it often but why are they now leaving unclipped parts of the horse on there to hide any slight cuts? They know it will happen and try to hide it. That's worse in my opinion.
Click to expand...

It's not to try and hide it, it's to try and give the horse more protection where the spurs usually sit. When horses are fully clipped there is nothing to stop rub marks (which are what most spur marks are from, if the spurs are used properly) and when you have a particularly thin skinned horse it helps to leave a patch of hair on as it stops the spurs rubbing. I used to work for a pro rider and we had a few horses we would leave patches on as they had very sensitive skin (they were the ones who were also susceptible to rugs rubbing and things like that), but the rest of the horses didn't have them. And I know that the patches weren't there to hide anything because I was the one who clipped them off again in the Spring when the horses' coats started to come through.
 
I was there yesterday and saw it all and the best bit was the horse guard display was fantastic made you really patriotic....had a good day.....now totally knackered and just travelled back as stayed with friend hence not been on 'ere much....go every year :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top