| Author | Message | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
     Jane Wilson |
So many different issues, where to jump in?! I think I would like to start by picking up on something Rosemary said, concerning correctness. This is something which should be sought after and developed by progressive training - as happens more often than not in ridden dressage. I think that in the driving world people are too often placed in a position of trying to look for a "quick fix" and this is why we see things like stiffness and resistance. Like Patti I too judge at club level and always try to watch with a judge's eye where ever I am, at all levels. I don't think that as a sport - and I'm sticking my neck out here - we are encouraging progression in the dressage. I think the pre-novice test is too basic, there is not enough of a gap between pre-novice and novice and too great a gap between novice and open. The way the system works as a whole, taking into account everyone's marathon and cones results, means that often ponies and horses are moving up to the next level before correctness in the dressage is established. We reap the whirlwind from this, as comes to light most often on the international stage. On the subject of judges, well, I think we're getting there. 15 years or more ago, I think we were often judged by people who knew a hell of a lot about driving but precious little about dressage! This does not happen so much now. There are still anomalies - a friend of mine at Thoresby this year was given an 8 for her collection by one judge and a 4 for the same movement by the other. I'm sure she won't mind me telling you that in all honesty, the 4 was nearer the mark! This is not an acceptable situation and should be addressed. However, I don't want to tackle the subject of collection in this post - it probably deserves a thread all of it's own. Do I think judge's training could be improved? Certainly. We should all seek to improve ourselves constantly - as should those who train us and so on ad infinitum. The same goes for driver training, which I think could also be improved. The clubs play a huge part here, organising training for their individual members but I also think that those members themselves need to be more open to this. We suffer on a huge scale - as a nation, throughout most equestrian spheres, not just in carriage driving - with our "go it alone" attitude. I think in other countries there is a much greater emphasis on training than on competition and again, this shows internationally. Answers on a postcard please! Jane Wilson | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Chris Atkins |
As a dressage writer and at one time a committee member for a national event, I would like to point out that for selection classes an international judge (home grown or guest) will be used, if there is one. People may have noticed at Lowther that there were 5 judges for the horses using the newer judging positions. Having compared national judges marks with internationals, our judges are not so inept as has been suggested. I would also remind everyone that they go through a two year training program before they are approved and even then are only allowed to judge certain classes until they are further approved. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Fiona Powell |
I think, in an ideal world, yes, of course, getting the opinion of international judges in competitions here and having experience competing abroad would be worthwhile. I'd love to do it - but it's a very expensive and time-consuming business. Results would have to be weighted and compared somehow and most of us wouldn't be able to (afford to) go abroad. A simple and transparent selection process is what we need most. Aren't our best drivers going to win the most points in a points system? Four out of six selection events isn't going to tire any pony or horse worth selecting, is it? And how about an open-to-all planned training programme over the next two years - starting now? Doing something like videoing the best performances of the international stars could be done so we could all see what gets good marks. Train our judges to judge on international standards (if they aren't already) - that alone would surely benefit everyone in the entire sport within a season. And, of course, keep up the fund raising. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Julie Hoskyns |
Maybe we should make sure that we used three international judges at every selection event (assuming we continue with selection events, have we looked at the alternatives?). This way although more expensive we would have a true reflection of our strengths and weaknesses. We would know what to aim for and maybe get a better understanding of what is required to 'reach the top', and they couldn't be accused of judging faces. I believe that all those interested in being on a team should compete at international events abroad and although expensive I believe it should be a requirement to complete at least one international event (abroad) per year running up to a world championships. These results should be considered in the final selection process. As someone very rightly pointed out in an earlier post 'it is very easy to be a big fish in a small pond'. For all those who have constructive critisum I believe there will be a wash up meeting at the Nationals however I would strongly reccommend that anyone attending focuses on how to improve the process for next time and doesn't use it to 'have a go' at individuals. We MUST remember everyone did their best, NO ONE had an instruction booklet on how to do this difficult job and ALOT of people gave up their valuable time to try and make a difference. If we (the BHDTA and the members) got it wrong then lets look at why, and then how to go forwards. Lets be positive and above all honest without getting personal. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Patti Atkinson |
81.5% in a ridden test is incredible.. brilliant to watch... and if you watch very carefully you can see a bad transition near the beginning, quarters trailing on one of the lateral movements and a lot of travel on the piaffe. I wonder what the score would have been without those? Doesnt this prove that judging dressage (ridden or driven) is not a science? When videos are replayed you can always see where the judges went wrong and your friends on the sidelines will always tell you how they would have given you better marks. I judge at club level and am not afraid to give a 1 or a 10 but ask me afterwards what your animal went like and I would be very hard pushed to remember - unless it was a disaster! I dont 'see' the driver - just the way the animal is going. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Mike Watts |
Rosemary, thank you for the measured response on selection. As regards dressage judging, I have sympathy for our dressage judges - it must be hard work watching a high number of tests and then being very open to criticism on something hard to quantify. Any suggestions for improving the uniformity (and constructivenesss?) of judging need to be quite clever to be practical and avoid putting too much extra load on volunteers. Chrissie Nash's posting below is very interesting [and brave] and highlights need for improvement. We've found it very helpful when judges, trainee judges and interested competitors (us) can attend workshops on judging - videos of tests or real tests by volunteers, analysis and discussion of the movements and marking. One way of helping standardise somewhat would be a series of videos of real tests marked by international judges; video at C, you mark it from the video, compare your mark with the judge at C, etc. It could be a training aid if used for discussion, or a competence test if marked and compared with the standard. Maybe such aids or tests already exist? We could put it online too, like the car license theory test?! I think we have a long way to go in driven dressage; take a look at this: astonishing dressage test. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rosemary Neale |
Mike, thanks for this it, makes the confusion in people's minds a whole lot clearer. I think the central issue is that, in my mind at least, the selection procedure was never going to be set in stone for time to come. It was an attempt to try a different way of selecting to address some of the very real problems which occurred at the last two worlds. Ponies did arrive exhausted and lame - you should have been there to see Viki Anderson running around trying to get several of our team ponies through the vetting at Catton (fortunately not team ponies, but individuals). But I return to my point about dressage judging and the selection in 2007 as I think the two are inextricably linked. You see it appears to me that the selectors clearly did not agree with the dressage judging at a number of selection events and Sue Denney can be forgiven for being a bit sore about her position. Now anyone is going to believe the assessment of the judge who puts them first and argue with the one who puts them down, and in the absence of a standard to which all dressage judges are trained, they find it hard to understand how one judge can 'like' their pony and another marks them down. With no opportunity to discuss and question, what is one to think - yes that there is a conspiracy afoot and that one's face does not fit. (Interestingly, you may like to know that this discussion is being read closely by many of our international colleagues who on more than one occasion have commented to me that British judges clearly judge faces not paces - but since we don't have any kind of judges assessment scheme how can we argue with this?) I put forward my own case as an example of the confusion - as you know I drove Ruckham Chester who also does ridden dressage.Over the last two years he has competed in both disciplines - in ridden dressage he has never scored less than 60% (no mean feat for those not used to ridden scoring) and has been complimented by the judges on his exceptional way of going - correct (although not perfect) and obedient. However in driven dressage he was regularly torn apart in the judging and I know it is different but please, not that different, and if different, how is it different? No one could answer me. I saw other competitors being given much better scores than me and still making the same or similar mistakes to me - and I checked this on video with my friends and trainers. I then had a choice - try to drive my pony in a way I felt was correct for his development and not get well marked by driven judges or change it to his detriment and get better scores. Sue I think (although i hasten to add that I haven't spoken to her personally about this but take my comments from her quoted remarks in Horse and Hound) felt she lost out on selection because she was marked down at a number of events and felt that there was some kind of skullduggery going on - I don't think it was that but just a result of their not being a widely accepted standard and judges you feel you can trust. The other point you raise I do agree with and that is what were the selection criteria - was the selection for the team score first and foremost with individual aspirations taking a back seat? - I think this is actually what happened but I also agree that this was not made clear enough to all those selection hopefulls. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Mike Watts |
There are two separate subjects in this thread; dressage judging and the pony selection process. This post is about the selection process; refutes some arguments and suggests we use the simple open points selection system going forward and put the work/time saved into training and mentoring.. Thanks to Rosemary for her clear points on the pony selection process. I am glad that we’re looking at the arguments rather than personalities; I hope that, provided I explain, it won’t seem rude if I reach very different conclusions. You say “there is a problem with the quality and competence of the dressage judges in horse driving trials, and that this was a factor in the confusion over the selection for the team.” Surely if you doubt the ability of dressage judges to judge dressage it makes no sense to ask them to judge the other two phases as well, and choose a team, making the whole thing subjective? I feel the pony selection process caused considerable controversy, was divisive of competitors and judges, took place behind closed doors based on unspecified criteria seen by many as ‘if your face fits’ and has no guarantee of producing the best team or individual entries. The selection process was not transparent, in that the decisions were made on unpublished and unexplained criteria. The whole process was anything but open. If this process were used again, competitors would not know how to get selected on any performance basis. On the specific issues: 1 The decision not to select Sue, the person with the best single results in two phases, cannot be explained in terms of the world championships scoring. If you have someone who gets the best score in two phases, by the worlds arithmetic you would expect to get the best team score by using that person. Further the ‘all rounder’ argument is entirely irrelevant to choosing individual entries – individuals are scored as individuals like any other hdt. There may or may not have been a convincing reason for the choices [as the process was not open, we don’t know what it may have been] but it can’t be the world’s scoring system that cut out Sue. The BHDTA announcement on the selection talks about trotting up ponies, at some length, which doesn’t clarify for me. 2 By scoring the best 4 out of 6 selection events (or 3 out of 4 like the horse scheme) you allow people to make a mistake or have a mechanical breakdown without affecting their result. They discard the event with the breakdown. The horse system did at least manage to send Paul Sidwell to the world championships. If the horse system had been on the pony alleged ‘if your face fits’ basis, he might not have been selected to go to the championships at all. 3 It probably makes sense for singles selection to class each driver/pony combination individually. If multiple single horses for one singles competitor are really an issue we could give points for h/c entries or similar, rather than basing the whole scheme around exceptional cases. 4 There’s something wrong if we’re competing ponies which can’t stand a requirement to do four selection events over two years. The welfare issue to me is; if doing a small number of events exhausts them, they should not be under this pressure or going to the world championships. A main point of the sport of horse driving trials is to do horse driving trials. 5 It’s important to separate the functions of training and selection so that competitors can have a proper relationship with their trainers [for example, frankly discuss areas where they feel they are weak]. It’s a great idea to have training and mentoring available and organised, but it emphatically should not be mixed up with the selectors. Let’s ask the people with experience to do the really useful work of team building and driver development without the role ambiguity and conflict of interest of also selecting. You talk about how the selection process was selected. Selection of selection may be an interesting (meta) argument but it doesn’t necessarily indicate whether the resulting selection process is good. Actually I think selection of a closed and unaccountable selection process by the people involved in the previous system is likely to make a self perpetuating clique. That’s how it seemed to newcomers. Can the next pony selection use the same scheme as that being used for horse; it is simple, objective and open, probably gives the best results in an imperfect world and everyone knows where they stand. I think quite separately we should continue training and set up mentoring – open to all, but by all means with some focussed ‘worlds’ sessions where people who have put themselves forward for selection get first call on the training places. If our aim is to get excellent results in world competition we need to train at all levels to build depth of ability/competitors. Lastly, can I reiterate that this is about the process, not the competitors who all ‘did great’. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Dawn Emmerson |
What a fantastic topic this is, I for many years felt hard done by from the dressage judges as I always came last or second last and even more upset when I saw the huge difference in the scoring. It wasn't till later that I realised my dressage wasn't really that good and worked to improve myself the best I could. However .... One incident that stays wth me is in repsect of questioning a score. I was given a 6 and a comment of "good straight entry". I questioned why I was given a 6, not argumentive just curious. The vice chairman came back to me, thrust my sheet in my face, and said in a not so friendly voice, "The judge says that is what she put" and went to storm off. Friends saw what happened and told my partner who then challenged the vice chairman 1) about his appalling behaviour and 2) the scoring system. The vice chairman argued at first and his manner was arrogant and extremely rude. He eventually said that he'd look into having marks and comments written to reflect each other. Whether he did or not I don't know. I agree that there needs to be more constructive teaching in the process of dressage judging but not to the extent of ridden dressage. I think it would get too technical or maybe it wouldn't. I find through lack of experience some judges comments (if they can be bothered to write comments) don't reflect their marks and often or not the collective marks don't tally either. With dressage making the most impact on a competitors final placing, should a more constructive judging proceedure be undertaken? I know judges give up their free time for little reward but people pay a lot of money to enter events and to be judged inconsistantly can be upsetting for a lot of people, and more so when it can mean the difference of being placed or not. Most judges I have spoke to or sat in with have been really nice people trying there best and there will always be competitors that are either smiling or cursing when they receive their score sheets no matter how good the judges are. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Chrissie Nash |
I just had to write in response to Rosemary's post regarding Dressage Judging. Not many drivers will comment about the competence or lack of competence of the driven dressage judge in fear it will affect their marks in the future. This may be laughed at but you can talk to many top drivers and they will all agree that the marks DO reflect on who you are as you go down the centre line. It is unbelievable that in this up and coming sport we have judges that are untrained, sometimes have no driving experience and at times actually fall asleep whilst judging. In ridden dressage any judge can be approached to explain a remark on a sheet where in driving very few judges are willing to explain a comment or mark, they actually hide away sometimes. Why? Because they have no logical explaination. The judges that are confident and capable of judging are always available for question but sadly they are in the minority. In ridden dressage if you are unhappy with a judges marks, you have a right to appeal and it is dealt with property and fairly. Where do you go in Horse Driving Trails? I felt I had to comment on this subject, but also now, as I don't compete any more I feel I can comment. I have learnt a lot more about dressage over the past few years and now looking back realise that I gained marks on many occassions for the wrong reasons, because my ponies were very eyecatching, very busy in their movement and were always turned out to the highest standard. Looking back I now realise that I should have not got the marks that I did because the ponies were tense, one of them was like a plant of wood and the other one looked pretty but was not really going forward properly - but I got 8s and 9s and lots of red rosettes which at the time was fantastic but if I had ever tried to compete abroad would have been very disappointed because they were never established in a correct way of going. I believe that our judges in this country are misleading our competitors due to their own lack of knowledge and up to date training.. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Andy Poole |
I do disagree with you I dont believe there was a level playing field. I also dont see how the proceedure used can be said to be better. The position achieved this championship was worse than the bronze medal. The same selection proceedure used on single pony doesn't seem to have been used on pony teams What was the criteria for choosing the best individuals? My concern posted initially was the conduct of individuals though the process. It was these things which brought up concerns. I think we are now going in circles. I think there are two sides to this discussion, lets hope we can learn from this! | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Nic Castle |
I agree with everything you say about the dressage. My understanding is that there is a box which states what each part of the test should be marked on. From what I hear contestants say when they get there sheets is that when judging the movement, often personal preference comes into play with regards breeding etc. For example on a free walk is it supposed to be that the horse should be walking freely or is the style of the walk important (What are the points the scores are given for). Looking from outside it looks like the process may be being over complicated and being viewed the same as with ridden dressage, over complicating it. If the judge is to look at the movements in more detail should more guidance be given on the sheet, giving more structure to the judging of a test instead of leaving so much open to interpretation and personal prefference. I have seen results vary from judge to judge, differences 25 to 30 points. Even seeing the test from different angles if there is a scoring structure surley there should be more correlation of the results from the three judges. I know very little about dressage, I hope this view is not to critical, it is just as interretate it being a relative newcomer to these competitions. One quick question I hope can answer, with these discrepencies in the scoring at times, is there an appeal process. I would have thought most tests are now filmed and could be reviewed in an appeal. Non of us are perfect and I would have thought an appeal process would add strength to the sport. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rosemary Neale |
Have just reread what I have posted and would like to add that in my opinion there is no problem at all with the selection procedure - I do believe however that there is a problem with the quality and competence of the dressage judges in horse driving trials, and that this was a factor in the confusion over the selection for the team. Dressage is becoming a deciding factor in most of the competitions and it is just not good enough that our judges have no training scheme other than a once a year one day conference (which they only have to attend every two years) and which is just a talking shop. I know it's a thankless task and they do it for very little reward and noone likes them but the winner but on the other hand we all pay a lot of money to compete and do expect some competence. Ridden dressage judges have to undergo a comprehensive training process before they are let loose on the lowest levels of dressage and have to continually prove and improve their competence at every level. Dressage judging of course is not an exact science and is at the end of the day subjective but a level playing field would be nice. I think this would be a much more fruitful area for discussion - what do others think? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rosemary Neale |
Andy, You keep on accusing people of ignoring the facts and brushing things under the carpet but in fact nothing has been hidden and the selection process was transparent from the very beginning as I have outlined in previous posts. But lets' reiterate: the current selection process was the result of consultation with all the pony competitors (everyone was sent a copy of the proposals and were able to comment on and influence the ultimate decision - Douglas Strachans' post bears witness to this even if he did not agree with the process - I still have a copy of his detailed objections which were taken into very serious consideration). All the potential team members who were thinking of and subsequently did put their names forward knew right from the outset that first past the post was discarded and the current selection process was adopted in order to specifically address a number of issues viz: 1. The first past the post selection procedure was not producing best in each phase but rather good allrounders which did not help with the scoring system at the world championships 2. First past the post penalised competitors who may have had an unfortunate mechanical breakdown in a selection event - this happened to Chrissie Nash in 2005 and as a result she was not selected for the team. Paul Sidwell was not selected for the Single Horse team because of one unfortunate result the year prior to the world championships - he went on to become National and World Champion 3. First past the post did not recognise that a competitor could have more than one turnout/pony who they would wish to be considered for selection - this was the case for anna Grayston, Sarah Howe and Julie Camm who presented two ponies for consideration at the initial selection clinic - you can't drive two at an event and get points - and after consultation with the selectors agreed to concentrate on one pony rather than another, switching for the 2007 season. 4. Ponies were arriving at the Worlds exhausted (and in some cases unsound)from having to chase points to get selected and therefore could not perform at their best - the current selection procedure allowed for competitors, in consultation with the selectors, to 'save' their ponies at any event ie if they knew your marathon was good then there was no need to go hell for leather and risk injury in one of the last competitions. Viki Andersons' post bears witness to the improved condition of all the ponies in 2007 - I would have thought horse welfare to be of paramount importance and if a selection procedure can be seen to be putting the horse first then surely competitors' aspirations are of secondary importance 5. Competitors could work with the selectors all through the two seasons leading up to the championships and were able to get feedback on performance - some chose not to do this and this was their prerogative but they missed out on valuable advice and discussion. There are very few competitors who were not aware of how they were being viewed by the selectors and what their chances were of being selected - the fact that spectators such as yourself did not appear to know is also, I submit, of secondary importance. You could have asked for the council papers which described the process, you could have questioned it at the beginning when it was first published. No we didn't get another Bronze medal we only came 6th but the selectors could only choose from the competitors they had available. Julie Hoskyns has already said that it would have been likely that the same team would have gone if it had been first past the post and I have already said that it was not the performance of the singles which was the issue but the performance of the multiples - and you don't seem to have an issue with their selection! So Andy, fess up, what exactly is your agenda? Are you just sore that Sue Denney did not get selected, or perhaps Liz Rowe? It seems to me that it is you who is ignoring the facts Andy. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Andy Poole |
Well Jane you seem to have done what has been done masny times in this thread and taken just the bits you wanted. Yes my PHD is irrelevant to this thread but so is my ability to write and your derogatory remarks about my intelligence. If you would rather ignore my positive remarks and ignore facts which are put forward not by me but published on this site. You mention coming back to this after competing. It was suggested on this forum that the topic should not be discussed before the competition because it was unfair on the competitors, so that is what happened now there is another reason why this debate should not take place. As other people in this thread have stated the FACTS that is what is recorded on this site and events witnessed by anyone watching in this sport lead to questions being asked. One being that the selectors said they had chosen this team to improve on their last performance of a Bronze. That didn't happen. So did this untransparent method which is open to questions about its integrity do what it was supposed to do. The answer has to be no 6th is worse than a bronze. Many people have said they wont try to represent there country because of how they saw the selection process go. So we have to look at it. The competitors did there best but it has to be said that many people have said not just me, that the team selected didn't appear to be the logical one. The result obtained reiforces that and make the question be answered again. Trying to brush the debate under the carpet by being rude about peoples ability to read and write is not the way forward. looking at the FACT is the way forwaqrd and listening to whatr peoples views are on the matter. I notice you are not big enough to appologise for your rude remarks about myself and ignored my mention of that and just mentioned my standard of education. You have taken a relevent detate and taken it to the gutter. This was one of the points raised at the beginning of this debate and you have proven this is the way certain elements consuct themselves. It would be good if the original post could be returned as it would show how you have clarified matters. The bottom line is this is not about should we be having this debate it is about looking at the facts as they have been presented. Which is all I have done. The people who do not want this debate to go on seem to want to try changing the focus of the discussion everytime a question is raised about the selection process. This will only make people wonder why do these people not want an open discussion about what went on in the selection process. So can we please just keep to the facts and not sink to the depths of playground name calling? I am sincere about congratulating Sarah Howe for her bronze medal, you can make up your fantasy about my insincerity, which is completly unfounded. Andy | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Fiona Powell |
Douglas raised some interesting and important questions which no-one has answered yet. And how does one go about getting selected for the next Pony World Championships? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Jane Wilson |
Oh dear, I do seem to have ruffled some feathers. (Before anyone gets excited about cruelty to birds or deems that I am disrespectfuly of our feathered brethren in any way, shape or form - it's just a figure of speech!) Andy Poole, congratulations on your Phd, great acievement and all, but unless it was in "Driving Team Selection" I feel it's irrelevant here. Of course you are as entitled to your opinion as I am to mine, and this forum is for the likes of us both to express it. But don't try and deny that the tone of your posts has been anything other than censorious - a couple of "well done Sarahs" will not be enough oil to pour on the waters you have recented troubled. As for your first post, well, I didn't see it as it had been removed before I had the chance. I am sure that everyone involved in the pony team that went to Denmark wanted to come home with a medal - your criticism in this thread makes it sound like you think certain people were not picked on purpose either to spite them or else to wrongly promote others who did not deserve it. Do you really believe that to be the case? Do you really think the selectors chose a team they were'nt sure would have the best chance of success? Come on now! And Mike, I'm not sure I agree that no one has intended to criticise the team, certainly not if you take the word "team" in it's broadest sense. After all their hard work - and I mean everybody's hard work, not just the drivers, how must they have felt coming home to this debate? With regard to my comments about kilts fluttering, I know for a fact that Douglas is extremely proud of his Scottish heritage and would, I'm sure, not consider a comment about his wearing of a kilt with anything other than pride! You see, I've known Douglas for a lot of years now - he's a great bloke who lives just up the road and I would have thought that the fact I knew his name, his nationality, the fact that he had retired and his wife's name might have given you a bit of a clue to that! I'm proud to consider him a friend but that doesn't mean I have to agree with him, nor, I can assure you, he with me! Hopefully, this will be the last post on this subject and we can all move on. Jane Wilson. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Mike Watts |
Would it be possible for us to concentrate on driving/competition issues and not get personal? This isn't the place to criticise people's arguments on the grounds of their ethnicity, age, disabilities etc, if indeed anywhere is - talking about retired people getting their kilts in a flutter comes close to racist ageist abuse these days. I don't think anyone on this forum has intended to criticise our team. However, it seems fair to me to ask what is the best selection process to use next time and to see how well the 2006/7 way of pony selecting worked; that doesn't imply any unkind criticism of anyone involved, selectors or team. It seems to have been unpopular for Andy Poole to point out the BHDTA statement that the process was intended to improve on the team bronze medal last time, and that it didn't. Of course there can be lots of reasons for UK 2007 performance, from how things went on the day, to the particular range of competitors available, to the actual training at team and grass roots level - but if we don't acknowledge the aims and how we did, and evaluate our work, any progress will be a matter of luck. This year's selection process left many people wondering what on earth you have to do to get selected; after Sue Denney won 3 selection events and wasn't selected for team nor as the individual open pony [it was later discovered that we couldn't send individuals, but the announcement had been made]. This did not appear to be in accordance with most people's understanding of the published criteria. Of course different people may reach different conclusions on who's likely to do best, but there's been no attempt to clarify what is looked for. How will people train for the future [getting good results in hdt might seem a good criterion, where the aim is to get good results in an hdt championship...]? Lastly, the points league. A note crept into the small print of the website after Dorthealyst: "Pony World Championships - Council have decided that as team members did not have to miss any national events additional points will not be awarded." These were the rules before Dorthealyst: "In any calendar year, if a Competitor represents Great Britain at a World or Continental Championship, as a team member or individual and, as a result of their attendance at the Championship is unable to compete in one or more British National events, they will receive a maximum of ten extra points in the Points League for that year, subject to confirmation by the BHDTA Council." In this case all the team members felt unable to compete in the Sandringham national so close to Dorthealyst and they had been recommended not to compete. Seems like a case of changing the rules after the event - I just wondered why the council thought the team members deserved no points? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Andy Poole |
Jane Wilson, You have slumped to the depths of what I mentioned in my initial post which was removed. It mentioned about the remarks made by certain people, they were derogatory and personal and cause offence. I have read the rules of the forum and know where does it say you have to write in perfect english. It also doesn't say people with disabilities cant post on here. You criticise my ability to write and insinuate it makes me of leeser intelligence therefore couldn't judge for selection. Well I suffer from severe dyslexia, but still managed to get a PHD. I wonder where that leaves me in the hierachy of your narrow mind. It is the behaviour of people like you that tarnishes this sport as I initially posted n this site. I dont see eany relevance in what you wrote to the selection proceedure about me. I have only wrote about what I have seen and heard and read. I have praised people in my posts which people like you would rather ignore. An appology would be gratefully recieved from you but i guess you would rather put your poisonous pen to writting more nasty and offensive comments about eople on this site. I should also add it is against the rules of this forum to write offensive unfounded remarks about people. I should add just incase you are unable to follow my poor English I am disgusted by you attitude as I was when I heard the remarks made by people I mentioned in an earlier post. I am not mentioning there names in respect to a request by the bhdta for the removal of the post. Andy POOLE | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Dawn Emmerson |
The technical side to the selection of competitors is way beyond me but I have been reading the posts with great interest. I have only touched the side lines of attending National events and realise I would never be in a position to attend international events due to lack of experience and finances. This makes me realise just how good the competitors are that go out and represent our country. I don't think they are an embarrasement at all and to go out and compete with their injures is true dedication to representing their country and the sport of driving. I'd like to say a huge congratulations to all the competitors for their dedication and hope that they feel proud of what they achieved. Well done all... | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Jane Wilson |
Oh dear, it seems as if this subject is going to rattle on a little longer. Douglas, I don't know why you're getting your kilt in such a flutter about this - is it that retirement is leaving you with too much time on your hands? Poor Doreen! It seems that the focus of attention with regard to selection is still being centred upon the choice of single drivers - who, surely no one could argue, fulfilled their potential in Denmark? Finishing 3rd and 4th individually is no mean feat at international level and must surely justify their selection? If our pairs and teams fared less well then perhaps we are suffering from a lack of experience at international level - our sport in this country is small and insular - very easy to become a big fish in a small pond at this level. On this basis, I applaud Julie Camm for taking the opportunity to compete at Conte and gain this valuable experience away from our tight-knit little world. There will never be a system of selection which pleases all of the people all of the time and a first-past-the-post system will still throw up anomalies and not necessarily make the job any easier. I applaud whoever had the idea of cohesive training for the potential team members this year - you can bet your bottom dollar that Germany, the Netherlands and the USA have good training systems in place, rather than their individual drivers all going off and doing their own thing separately! And I bet they don't make use of it just when there's a world championship coming round! On this point I find myself agreeing with Douglas here, it's no good waiting until late 2008/2009 to start improving our medal prospects, it needs to be now and on-going. So, I'm sorry Andy Poole felt the need to say "I told you so" - perhaps we should make him chief selector so that he can teach us the error of our ways (presumably after someone has taught him how to post with correct punctuation and grammar). Well done to all involved in the trip to Denmark - I can't begin to imagine how Julie Camm felt seeing her pony and carriage disappearing over the horizon, and to be able to come back from that and drive a competitve marathon beggars belief. Jane Wilson | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Harry Luff |
I would like to say most importantly a big well done and congratulations to the British Team including all the people who helped at any level to get them to the Worlds and back!!!! Everyone has the right to their opinion and everyone has the right to represent their country, being able to do so is the single biggest honour any person can have and should not be rubbished because they did not please everyones hopes! Winning medals is wonderful but you can have the best team in the world and all they can do is their best and this is what our team did! I would have like to seen all team members come back with a medal but I am proud that they went out and gave it ago even more so after hearing problems they encountered, this shows more I feel of a winning team than any medal could ever do! Why is it in this country that the only thing we seem to be able to do is rip our national teams to bits maybe if all the critics out there who feel they are experts in any sport spent as much time and effort in supporting and helping they might help motivate and build team spirit. In a way the critics are right this sport is going to die if we keep fighting amongst ourselves but maybe if you dont like it, make some positive helpful feed back rather than trying to change the past and amazing hard work of a great team!!!! Once again well done everyone and I along with so many people are very proud of you! Harry Luff | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Douglas Strachan |
Thoughts of O.A.P. Douglas Strachan on Pony Team Selection 2007/2009 And should we have Selectors in the Future To Julie H. I am one who has put his head above the parapet and I did so out of a sense of fairness to two groups. i)The 2007 contenders, Sue Denny, Liz Rowe and Sue Mart who are unable to comment on the 2007 Selection, and ii) to possible aspirants for 2009 who may incur substantial expense in trying to be selected yet fall at the last hurdle In response to the BHDTA Council Representative’s letter of the 5 November 2005 to All Pony Drivers on “Pony Selection for World 2007 Championships” I replied on the 7 November 2005 with a three page letter expressing my concern with the proposals. These concerns included Composition of the Panel itself, the role of “professional trainers”, and the nomination of a judge to the panel. It also raised the question of Funding My notes of the 27 November 2005 elicited a response on the status of Conty in any assessment for the 2007 team.(You will no doubt, remember that Julie C elected to go to Conty in Spring 2007 rather than the British Selection event at Brighton) From the above I feel justified in asking that, to eliminate any future disharmony in the Association, we should abandon the idea of Selectors and revert back to “First Past the Post”. Funding In my letter of 7 November 2005 I raised the question of Funding of International Teams but, until the Association is very much stronger financially, this will not happen to any significant extent I note the comments about putting my money where my mouth is. Our sport is virtually dependent on volunteers and I would question why I should contribute to team training. Any training, which I paid for when competing, was to selfishly improve my performance so that I could perhaps beat other competitors whether at Club, National (or International.) Any thoughts of paying for training for the benefit of Queen and Country would have been a very low priority for this Royalist. I prefer to help encourage Newcomers / Novices to enter our sport as they are the life-blood of the future The Selectors, the team and their many helpers, all volunteered to participate in the event and did so in the knowledge of the vast expense in time and money required. It was their choice, no one was press-ganged into going. I therefore think that demanding that critics should pay up or shut up is inappropriate O.A.P. Douglas Strachan 31.07.07 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Julie Hoskyns |
First of all to all you protesters out there! Had the pony team been chosen by the first past the post method the same drivers would have gone except for Julie C, however I think she more than justified her place by producing the BEST British dressage score and comming 4th overall. Are you sure someone else could have done any better other than Sarah who got an individual bronze? Secondly those that wish to critisize should be prepared to put their money where their mouth is and help us to get a better result next time by either contributing to training costs or raising money to help 'train' a good strong team, just as other nations do. We as individuals had to pay for our own 'team training' on an hourly basis, I am sure the Germans don't have to do that. Were you out there supporting us and cheering us on? Had you been there you would have been up to date on what was happening. Julie C had a tip up and ripped her hand open but she was brave enough to continue and complete so her admirable dressage score would count. Rachel had been unwell with a stomach bug and I had crushed my right hand in the lorry the night before leaving. I ended up in hospital until 4 hours before leaving home for Denmark. Having crushed my hand I have no feeling in my thumb, back of my hand and ring finger. Try driving with a boxing glove on. If all you protesters out there think you can do a better job than the team or selectors did, stand up and be counted, put your name forward as a selector and be prepared to take all the insults that are thrown at you and remain dignified as our selectors have done. Remember NO selection process is perfect but unless you are prepared to put your head above the parapet and try something new we will never find out if there is a better way forward. It only remains for me to thank the following; all those grooms, backsteppers and support crews that had a positive effect on the teams performance. The supporters who took the time and effort to travel to Denmark to support us and cheer us on. Our Chef d'equipes Jill and Ursula, Nicola the physio, Claire the vet, Robert and Karen the trainers, Liza and Sydney the selectors who came to offer support and advice, Jullian as team dogsbody, Rosemary for her blog, Keith for his harness repairs and every one else in the British camp. Thank you, you were all amazing!!! | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Yogi Howe |
How sad it is when we can't praise what the British team achieved without keep going back to what might have been. As far as I can see the selectors chose the best from what they had. The team had succsess Demark and it's hard to see how much better thing could have been with the turnouts that were availible for selection. And ofcause should anyone feel that they can do better next time,they only have to come out and get themselves selected. I also notice that there are many comments but not many people who are willing to put there names to these comments! How easy it is to be a Guest or an intial. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Guest |
It may be "an insult to the team to critise the selectors choice" (Yogi Howe)but it is certainly not an insult to question it in the light of the first result following the implementation of the new selection procedure. How, when the revised procedures were to improve the team's performance, have Britain slipped from their previous Bronze medal position in 2005 to an embarrassing 6th place in Denmark? Does anyone else feel that the previous system may be worth revisiting? I cannot help but feel that the discussion re the singles selection has been blown out of all proportion, however, it does throw up a number of interesting questions. If, as the selectors state, Julie was selected on the basis of her dressage score rather than her marathon performance in order to produce a strong result in each phase (and she certainly justified their choice here)why was Faith overlooked for her abilty to post a really stong dressage mark in the pony fours? Would it not be possible to combine the two systems if the need for a good result in all three phases is preferred and look at the dressage, marathon and cones separately at each selection event and use the "first past the post" system while not applying it to the overall result? It is almost becoming the dressage and cones that now appear to be the most influential phases of the competition but no doubt someone else will disagree. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Andy Poole |
People said wait until after the competition. It has now finished and there are still the same questions to be raised about selection. So that the same situation doesn't arise again. There should be transparency and intregrity in the system being used by the selector and there wasn't. We were tolds to wait and watch. Which has been done. I send my congratulations to the team as I did previously. All that seems to be happening is that now the championships are over we will brush the comments about the selection proceedure under the carpet and move on to the next set of selection events. For the good of the sport we need to ensure there is integrity and transparency in all or selection proceedures so that they are seen to be fair from the outside. Which not one person can say they did prior to the event except for the people involved in the selection proceedure and they would say they did it fairly. Brushing things under the carpet is not the answer for this sport to grow and develop. We must look at ways to improve the selection. Ag congratulations to the team, especially Sarah Howe. Looking back at what happened with the selecion. It is embarrassing what was seem to happen at the selection events for the singles. I cant comment on the rest of the team due to not following it. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Yogi Howe |
Congratulations to Sara and to all the British team. I agree it's an insult to the team to critise the selectors choice.The team was selected and they did a great job on the day. They achieved a fantastic result and once again congratulations to them all and lets not forget Jill Holah and all the behind the scenes people who played there part in this great result. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Douglas Strachan |
Some thoughts from a Rain Drenched Old Man 2007 First and foremost congratulations to Sarah Howe on an excellent performance worthy of our National Champion. Secondly many thanks to the Organisers of the Championships for their efficiency in getting the results on to my old computer so quickly Thirdly many thanks to Rosemary for her graphic and enlightening reports which highlighted the pleasures and difficulties that the team experienced. Results Medal Table
Summary of Positions of the Medal Winners
Thoughts on the above It would appear to this Simple Soul that the Danish Federation got the balance right with the marathon being the major phase in determining the final placings. The Dressage judging again showed some strange anomalies as one judge had Sarah 5th and another 25th !!!! In the cones there were 3 double clear round in singles, 1 in pairs, and 6 in the 4’s. Perhaps the FEI should review the times/speeds. From the results it would appear that there were critical “minor” movements in final positions but no “major” disasters. Thoughts for 2009 Selection 1) Does the BHDTA revert to ”first past the post” system which proved so successful for the Single Horse and is being used for the approaching Horse Pairs 2) Does the BHDTA keep to the “selection” system used for 2007 mindful of the following Is their priority to pick a team of six, concentrating on the Team Medal whilst recognising the realities of the resources available at the time Or to select individuals who might stand a chance of winning Individual Medals whilst contributing to the Team score 3) Does the BHDTA have the luxury of choice ( as the Germans or Dutch do for the Team Medal) to select a specialist in dressage and a specialist in marathon 4) If the BHDTA stick to the “selection” method should they appoint the Team Manager NOW who becomes the Chef d’Equipe at the event. There would be no selection panel and the Team Manager picks the team for ratification by the BHDTA I am sure Alex Ferguson or Jose Mourinho do not have a committee to select their teams !!! I wish it would stop raining !!!!! Douglas Strachan | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Guest |
I need to reply to Andy.I compete at club level and have a great time. At levels above this I listen to other experts but it appears that everyone other than a selector is an expert. Did the selectors of the GB team make a good choice - who knows, could the selectors have made a better choice - who knows. It is an insult to the team and those not selected to critise the selectors choice.The team was selected and they did their best on the day in the conditions. They achieved what they achieved, and congratulations to them.The event is over, let's concentrate on improving our scores in the next event.Hindsight never did anyone any good, be it Cricket, Football, Rugby or Carriage driving Duncan | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rosemary Neale |
Andy Poole your attitude is beyond belief, goodness knows why I or indeed anyone should reply to such ignorance, but anyway here goes - actually our top singles drivers were there and achieved a medal in the dressage and a medal in the marathon and an overall medal. Clearly you do not or have not bothered to try to understand the scoring but the reason we didn't get a team medal was because of the performance of the multiples - if it had been scored on just the singles we would have got the gold as we were the only nation to have two singles in the top six. Now give it a rest and move on dear - if you really are interested in team medals then you should sponsor someone to put together a pony four in preparation for 2009! | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Andy Poole |
everyone said wait and see we have and well done sarah, you deserve the success. As for the selectors, no one like to say I told you so, but, Where is the Team medal you said we were going for. Maybe if you kept to the selection proceedure and taken our top singles drivers we may have had more single medals. Well Done Sarah. |