Rule change proposal: Fall on XC=E

[3Day-Eventer]

What does everyone think of this rule? For? Against?
At all levels, or should it teir BN-T vs Prelim and above?

[Kementari]

There is a LOT of discussion of this here: http://www.chronicleforums.com/Forum/showthread.php?t=144530

[3Day-Eventer]

Yea, I've seen that. I was more curious about this specific rule change proposal, not all of them.

[Kementari]

Well, a decent portion of that thread discussed this particular rule change, which is why I linked it.

You will find therein that I, at any rate, think it's a fine idea. :yes:

[lbennet6]

I think it is a great idea...I was at a recent event where this girl hit her face on her horse and then fell into the water, was knocked unconscious. Then, after she came to the situation she tried to get back on her horse! Luckily the jump judge told her that it was a bad idea and eliminated her...

[Janet]

I think it is the most sensible of the proposed rule changes.

it has been shown time after time that a fallen rider is not equipped to make a rational decision about whether to continue.

Anyone who falls has enough penalties to be compeltely out of contention. I see no real benefit, and lots of bad consequences, to allowing the rider to remount and continue.

It would actually save some horses and roders from further injury.

[Dr. Doolittle]

I agree with Janet, though I've been holding my opinion back until now (I think many people still believe that this rule change somehow "goes against the spirit of eventing"--but there are *many* good arguments and evidence to support this decision...:yes:)

[CANTEREOIN]

I'm a Beginner Novice Rider beginning my second year. Last year, my horse spooked hard and caught me off guard and I came off... it was questionable if it was in relation to the jump. (I'm an experienced jump judge and I would have questioned it.)

Anyway, brushed the fresh poop off my britches, used the jump to mount and off we went.... embarrassed and a bit smelly but safe and sound.

So, not so sure if an elimation at a fall is good for all circumstances... if in relation to jumping... maybe I'd lean more toward yes.

The reason I'm not so sure I'm against it is that an E does take the guess work out of it for a jump judge. There would be no bad decision for them. For that I think its good.

And there is the argument that if a spook caught me - a Beginner Novice Rider - off guard and I got dumped... maybe I wasn't as tight in the saddle as I should be. But, sometimes sh-t happens... one relaxed moment and someone coming out of the woods suddenly - a spook and plop off you go...

Not sure... kind of ambivalent.

[spirithorse22]

I think it is a great idea...I was at a recent event where this girl hit her face on her horse and then fell into the water, was knocked unconscious. Then, after she came to the situation she tried to get back on her horse! Luckily the jump judge told her that it was a bad idea and eliminated her...

Yeah, but what happens to the girl whose horse trips and she pops off his shoulder, both are A.O.K. and she's told to go back to the barn: she's just lost her three hundred dollars, gas $$, full xc experience, etc. and gets a big E on her record? :no:

That happened to me once on a BN course when I was a little girl. We were trotting across a pasture and whoops, he tripped and I was caught off guard-popped off, landed on my feet holding the reins, remounted and carried on merrily. Should I have been E? :confused: Would have really disappointed my thirteen year old heart...and now it would really piss me off. lol

But, have also had a terrible fall where my horse and I both went down at arrow heads and man, that jump judge should never let us continue-I was fifteen and just knew my parents would KILL me if I didn't keep going. So, remounted and scrambled my way through the rest of a max training course. Yuck. I don't know why that jump judge let me go-my horse practically fell over the top of that thing. Had grass in his bridle, dirt in his ears...pretty nasty, imo. Should not have been allowed to continue.

[Janet]

Yeah, but what happens to the girl whose horse trips and she pops off his shoulder, both are A.O.K. and she's told to go back to the barn: she's just lost her three hundred dollars, gas $$, full xc experience, etc. and gets a big E on her record? :no:

That happened to me once on a BN course when I was a little girl. We were trotting across a pasture and whoops, he tripped and I was caught off guard-popped off, landed on my feet holding the reins, remounted and carried on merrily. Should I have been E? :confused:
I think the rule change only applies to a fall related to a fence.

[RiverBendPol]

Put me down for an avid disagree. There are MANY different kinds of falls, they cannot all fit under the same umbrella.
The more rules we add to this sport the more absurd it will become. Rider responsibility is the key.

[Kementari]

What happens now if that happens on stadium? You go home.

What happens if your horse spooks and jumps out of the dressage arena in the middle of a test that would have been straight 8s? You go home.

What happens if stadium is first and you screw up and miss a fence? You go home.

You pays your money; you takes your chances. If you aren't willing to accept that you might have to go home without finishing, then you should stay home to begin with.

[Kementari]

I think the rule change only applies to a fall related to a fence.

The original one does, but I think that as proposed in DOC's and KB's letter it is ANY fall on course - though since they don't reference the rule number, it's hard to say. Still, their wording is, "If a rider falls off on the course they are eliminated," which sure sounds like anywhere, not just jump-related...

[spirithorse22]

What happens now if that happens on stadium? You go home..

Isn't that a fairly recent rule? I don't care for that one either.

What happens if your horse spooks and jumps out of the dressage arena in the middle of a test that would have been straight 8s? You go home.

You left the competitive arena-I understand that rule. That one doesn't make me scratch my head.

What happens if stadium is first and you screw up and miss a fence? You go home.

IMO, that doesn't really make an accurate comparision. :confused:

You pays your money; you takes your chances. If you aren't willing to accept that you might have to go home without finishing, then you should stay home to begin with.

Guess I just see it differently still; everyone is certainly entitled to their different opinions. Thanks for being polite...:rolleyes:

[Kementari]

Sure, everyone can have their opinions. I was just pointing out that if the argument is that it's not fair to send someone home before they've completed the event (for something that isn't a safety issue), then there are a lot of other rules that are going to need to be changed, too.

(And I think the stadium fall was changed two years ago? But I could be wrong...)

[dgm]

I have to say I am not a fan of the fall = E proposal. I do think that I understand the reasoning behind it (that it is possible for a rider to whack his or her head and not be able to rationally evaluate his/her own condition at that point). However, that is a judgment call that each rider makes any time they fall off, even when schooling at home. And if I get the big E for a fall XC but I am of the opinion that I am fine, I am probably going to go back to the warmup area and school a couple more jumps before I head home anyways, just so my reasonably smart horse doesn't learn that his pulling a stunt that results in my falling off is the fastest route back to the trailer. Honestly, if I never fell off, I guess I wouldn't be concerned about this potential rule change. But... I do, and it's usually one of those stupid ones where I land on my feet and all is fine. And I would like to get to go ahead and finish my ride, and not have a big "E" on my record for something silly.

[JER]

How is this proposed rule change related to the recent deaths/injuries of horses and riders?

[Gnep]

Faire, well that is the most stupid argument in the world.

If this rule is for X-C I am for it, all the way, because I know from my own experiance, I will get back on as long as they do not haul me of in the meatwagon, broken bones, head injuries the whole nine yards, done it over and over again, its stupid, but shock and the ingrained mentality, you can walk you get back on, does it, and did get on the next horse and next horse. In the eving sitting in the trailer with double vision, spliting head achs, ice packs, tylonol, bandages and lots of duck tape., pretty stupid.
I like it because it protects my horses and me from myself.

[Granada]

What happens now if that happens on stadium? You go home.

What happens if your horse spooks and jumps out of the dressage arena in the middle of a test that would have been straight 8s? You go home.

What happens if stadium is first and you screw up and miss a fence? You go home.

You pays your money; you takes your chances. If you aren't willing to accept that you might have to go home without finishing, then you should stay home to begin with.

Ditto what Kementari said.

Also, IMO, If you can't stay on your horse when it spooks, that day isn't good for you to be jumping solid fences. If your horse trips over the grass nomes then it isn't his day to be jumping solid fences either. Go home and school xc for the experience.

[beeblebrox]

NOT agreeing with it for every instance.

I along with other colleagues have come of babies who prop or spook at something in the field or some even trip in the lower levels. The worst was a young OTTB left the box and propped and I landed on my feet and ran clean, the horse has never had a cross country penalty either ;-)

Saw a lady fall off last year when a fence judge stood up and open her umbrella and the horse stopped and spooked well away from jump, so what that lady would be eliminated?

Also many of the bad accidents do not come after a fall so not sure and do not agree that a lot of folks who have a unfortunate ugly jump or loose into water should receive the big E.

"Granada
Working Hunter

Also, IMO, If you can't stay on your horse when it spooks, that day isn't good for you to be jumping solid fences. If your horse trips over the grass nomes then it isn't his day to be jumping solid fences either. Go home and school xc for the experience."


BABIES DO SOME WEIRD GREEN THINGS AND YOU KNOW WHAT, IT DOES NOT MEAN YOU SHOULD NOT BE OUT THERE! I am sorry you but your statement is ignorant! Most of the dumb things spooks have less to do with the jumps Granada and more to do with the flags, announcer, spectators, jump judges, water trucks and about 20 other things that are not out there when you school, you would know that if you rode more babies out there. Schooling in a empty XC is not the same charged environment as a show, some school like quiet lambs when you school and they get to a show and leave 20 horses in warm up and are like OH WOW!

[Nancy!]

I'm not sure about this rule. I've come off a few times (okay well maybe more than a few) but mostly riding young horses. I know it puts me out of the competition but I think it is important (if you aren't injured) to get back on and continue and school.

Last summer my young mare spooked at her first real ditch. I kindly checked out the footing for her, got back on and continued on. She was quite spooky about different looking jumps but she continued on and I think it was important.

I did fall off a few years back at a ditch (can you tell my phobia?:D) The TD caught up to me and told me I was eliminated because I had two falls. So then I was really wondering - did I hit my head and not realize? :eek:

No, just senility at work.:lol: For both me and who ever reported it. The TD kindly apologized and let me continue. I was out of competition anyways but it was good to finish schooling the course.

And I will admit to falling on my young mare in stadium the 1st year of competing her. It was a 2 stride and we hadn't really done that and she went right and I booted her left but I kept going right. Thought I was eliminated but asked to finish and did. Found out weeks later I ended up in 5th place. :lol:

So, I can see the little falls that happen but the bigger falls are the ones that I worry about. Again, I believe it is rider responsiblity. We need to be aware for both us and our mounts.

Nancy!

[J. Turner]

On the Rolex broadcast there was a graphic that read that first fall of rider is "so many" faults. I didn't know in eventing stadium you could fall off and get back on.

I think I was watching Spruce Meadows once and someone fell off in the Nations Cup, the horse ran across the field to the clock tower. She was allowed to get back on and finish, but I guess that rule only applies to Nations Cups.

In falls for horses, they designate part of the body hitting the ground, yes? Why not with humans? If someone lands on their feet, especially if it is not part of a jump complex, let them continue. Hands and knees ok. Any part of torso, bottom or head - nope, you're out.

[CoolMeadows]

How is this proposed rule change related to the recent deaths/injuries of horses and riders?

I posted this on another thread, but it strikes me as a possible preventative measure.

I'm so glad to see #3. In the recent case of Corinne, brave soul as she obviously is, she WAS riding compromised. Over a huge track. I know the "kick on" mentality runs high in a good event rider but truly, this type of situation - a rider continuing the course with a significant injury is a fatality (horse and/or rider) waiting to happen.

[blackwly]

What is really irking me about this issue is the fact that we hear a lot of voices saying, "There's terrible riding out there! These riders don't take responsibility! They have to be stopped!" and then we have an equally loud group of voices saying "but that's not me! I fall off on course but I'm smart and safe and good and so I should be allowed to continue!"

We can't have it both ways. If you truly want to make some changes to make the sport SAFER, this rule makes sense. We have to stop looking at these things from a selfish perspective.

Anyone who has evented for any length of time has had stupid minor falls and scary major ones. Let's step outside our own experiences for a minute and think about what we can do to help the riders that are NOT "getting it."

[spirithorse22]

Also, IMO, If you can't stay on your horse when it spooks, that day isn't good for you to be jumping solid fences.

Dunno. Its never happened to me out there...seen my friends get dumped though for a nasty spin spook and they're usually cracking up b/c their horse is being SUCH A GREENIE/chicken s%it!

If your horse trips over the grass nomes then it isn't his day to be jumping solid fences either. Go home and school xc for the experience.

Wow. So, your horses never trip, huh? :rolleyes: I guess it goes with NEVER coming off at a spook. You must be the coolest, stickiest rider ever to grace the horse world.

Its always amazing to me how many uber talented, sticky, hard riding, put together riders grace this forum with their posts. Maybe it'll rub off on me-I must need help if my horse occasionally trips (so do race horses, should they not run that day if they trip in the post parade?) or my friends who occasionally get the odd toss off at spooks...we're a pathetic lot that probably shouldn't be eventing, eh. I'll go hang up my spurs, and I'll relate the message to my BNT who was tossed the other day too-he must be incompetent. :rolleyes:

[Jumphigh83]

IF you fall off FOR ANY reason in any phase but esp on xc you should be eliminated...are you kidding me that you fall off if your horse SPOOKS then you want to keep going on MY insurance(if I am an event host)????!!!! Competent riders don't fall off when their horse spooks. Incompetent ones do and therefore they need to be eliminated until they master the course and that INCLUDES staying ON for whatever reason!! I cant believe this is even open for discussion!! (so go ahead and call me a troll but when show riders fall off they get the hook...not another go at showing their incompetence!!!)Litigiously this is a really REALLY bad idea.

[Granada]

:confused:I don't understand why everyone is assuming I've never ridden a greenie, or never come off at a spook, or never had a horse trip. I just don't think it should be all hunky dory if we fall off in competition, we ARE trying to make it safer, and this seems like a fair way across the board. Also, most of the falls I've seen were the horse spooked or "propped" or tripped, the rider could have stayed on had they had a stronger position. Every time I've fallen off I've always automatically blamed myself for doing something wrong or stupid, there is always something I could have done to stay on the horse even in the most out of the blue spook, dive, spin. Why is it so bad to have the sport emphasize that you have to STAY ON your horse to compete?

And why is it TERRIBLE to have a BIG "E" on your horse's record? Is it like getting a big "F" on your report card? No it sounds like it's even worse to most people on this board. Go ahead and argue resale value, it's just another manifestation of overemphasis on placing and doesn't contribute to safety one iota.

I understand the OH WOW i'm at a show nut case syndrome, I have one with that particular disability, but why does that make it allowable to fall off? And I could think of quite a few ways to school greenies and babies for shows without it being a training catastrophe just because you get eliminated on xc one day. I guess I just disagree with those who want to sacrafice safety so that they can fall off, because *they* know how to fall off safely... oh and it was only because the horse had a bad moment. I feel you should take responsibility for your falls no matter how they occur.

I am honestly perplexed at the out lash over my statement. Go ahead and call me ignorant, but like I said it's MY opinion and it wasn't directed at people I think shouldn't be out there in the first place, it was directed at instances when people FALL OFF. And *I personally think* if you fall off, it isn't your day to jump solid fences, because I think that when you are in a competition you should stay on your horse.

[beeblebrox]

"Granada

I don't understand why everyone is assuming I've never ridden a greenie, or never come off at a spook, or never had a horse trip. I just don't think it should be all hunky dory if we fall off in competition, we ARE trying to make it safer, and this seems like a fair way across the board. Also, most of the falls I've seen were the horse spooked or "propped" or tripped, the rider could have stayed on had they had a stronger position."

First you need to see a few more falls in the open divisions at the baby levels.
When I had the baby leave the box he saw a loose horse running at the box and was so surprised as he had never left the box before, in fact he had left a racing gate last. Literally he spun and I was back on and the horse never never even hiccuped after he was able to get over the jitters of leaving the box, so NO I GUESS I do not agree that a fall at the baby levels by a pro needs to be a wrap it up put them away day. Hell I have seen some pro's who should have with a lot of scary stops which did not result in falls but clearly the horse was over faced or not prepared. So to me a fall and that scenario do not always go hand in hand!

ON a different note I have retired babies who are so over jumping or feel scared who have not stopped or fallen because it is a feel one has. Patted them on the neck and walked in half way around the course.

MORE than anything it is a feel that is lost out there with a lot of riders and NOW everyone will be punished because riders can not be responsible and NO WHEN TO call it a day. I have seen some very big name riders come off over some silly thing or a horse who slipped on the grass coming around a corner (not with a fence involved) and your saying that is it, put the team to bed and give the the BIG E? Sorry we can agree to disagree!

[DLee]

But we're ALREADY being punished when riders don't know "when to call it a day."

[saje]

So what happens to the rider who comes off the 1st of the two or three horses he/she is competing? Would the other horses be allowed to start with an "impaired" rider? Would there have to be medical clearance to ride the other horses?

I can understand the desire to keep riders and their mounts safe and performing at their physical best always, but there are too many kinds of falls to call them all automatically detrimental (rider falls, that is). I wonder though if keeping track of each rider's falls and recording them in
the way that faults at obstacles are would be beneficial? Perhaps to be incorporated into requirements for move ups or competing at certain levels and/or Championships?

[J. Turner]

IF you fall off FOR ANY reason in any phase but esp on xc you should be eliminated...are you kidding me that you fall off if your horse SPOOKS then you want to keep going on MY insurance(if I am an event host)????!!!! Competent riders don't fall off when their horse spooks. Incompetent ones do and therefore they need to be eliminated until they master the course and that INCLUDES staying ON for whatever reason!! I cant believe this is even open for discussion!! (so go ahead and call me a troll but when show riders fall off they get the hook...not another go at showing their incompetence!!!)Litigiously this is a really REALLY bad idea.


Big Brown's jockey fell off when he spooked. Another one fell off in the tunnel when the colt spooked. I just read an article where an Olympic level pro got tossed by a particularly vehement horse.

And there must be a reason behind allowing falls in the original rules. Maybe we should look at WHY they were allowed, consider, debate whether the reasoning is still valid, then make the decision.

[IFG]

I have fallen off more times than I care to admit at events on XC. My standard MO is to land on my feet in the ditch while my horse looks at me and asks, "Does it look safe for me to jump over?"

Now, should I be tighter and stay in the tack? H*ll Yes! Am I unsafe to continue? H*ll No!

I really don't think that I should be sent home for such a small slip off. Perhaps there should be a dichotomy between BN-T and P-A on this one.

[Dawnd]

Scenario A - One fall related to a jump - rider (me) was a bit intimidated by a jump I "knew" was going to be trouble. Because I "knew" it, I let my horse run out and I "bailed". Landed on my feet laughing at my own stupidity. (what is funny is the weeds where I fell stuck into my spurs basically keeping my from moving my feet until I pulled some shrubbery out)

Scenario B - Different time - no where near a jump but between fences in the woods. Horse stumbled to his knees and I went flying into a tree. Absolutely cleaned my clock - saw those cute little birds that you see in cartoons flying around my head. I got back on and I don't remember much of anything and no one within clear view of the fall - there was a bend on the course that kept this section out of view of closest JJ. In hindsight, I should not have continued on.

Any fall = E. There are falls like A and there are falls like B. Hopefully the rule will keep B's from continuing. Perhaps it will keep A's from happening, too.

[Emstah]

A BNT who I have known for a long time was in Aiken this winter. She has ridden successfully through advanced and is MORE than competent. When she came up north to teach and when I asked her how her winter was going, she said she had fallen off of one of the horses there for training 14 times in the last two months.

Now, this woman is a very strong, tough rider who is training a very difficult horse for a client. I would like to see someone try to tell her that she's eliminated after one fall- I don't know if she would have gotten him around one event this winter if she got eliminated after one fall! I can't imagine the horse would have ever progressed or that the client would have been terribly pleased to put in all that money for "E" after "E" after "E". But instead what happened was she was able to teach the horse that he couldn't get away with the cr@p and that she would keep going no matter what he pulled with her, and low and behold, by the end of the winter, he was winning events! And yes, she certainly got beaten up in the process and it was a VERY long winter for her, but she got the job done. And for many, it is a JOB and they aren't riding horses that canter along and jump the jumps- they are riding naughty, fresh greenies or horses with issues that others cannot stay on!

Perhaps the 1 fall you're out could apply to the restricted rider divisions or the junior divisions but not the open divisions? I don't know what the answer is, but I do know that I don't agree with one fall=E applying to everyone in every circumstance.

[Pixie Dust]

NOT agreeing with it for every instance.

Also, IMO, If you can't stay on your horse when it spooks, that day isn't good for you to be jumping solid fences. If your horse trips over the grass nomes then it isn't his day to be jumping solid fences either. Go home and school xc for the experience."



I resemble that statement. Have you ever gotten into 2-point and galloped across a field only to have your horse stop suddenly (no fence anywere near us, just a change in the grass color). BN *is* schooling. All the schooling in the world isn't going to rid my horse of his skillfull spook, though it does help, but he never spooks at the fences. Thankfully, I do stay on 99% of the time (after 8 years with him). I have known horses who have enough spook in them to dump UL riders, and I'm not going to name names.

In answer to the question, I don't know. I've jump judged a lot and we are always instructed to pull a rider out if there is ANY chance at all that they have bumped their head or appear disoriented. Sometimes riders land on their feet. But it wouldn't hurt to just take that judgement call off the responsibilities of the jump judge.

[mjedge808]

In the end, this comes down to the old adage "Better safe than sorry". I think it's in the best interest of everyone. Yes, things do happen that cause riders to pop off and not be injured. Horses can fall and not be injured, but if they fall, they are eliminated (MR). Some things are not worth taking chances.

[Fence2Fence]

I'm for the rule. Yeah, it sucks if you come off and land on your feet, or the horse spooks or trips, so I wouldn't mind seeing the rule modified so that the fall has to be in relation to the jumping effort. Either way, I'll support it. What is Wofford's saying---"90% of success is just staying on?"

When I was reading the prior replies on this topic, I kept thinking of an accident I witnessed several years ago. It was Novice, the fourth fence. I watched the rider start, and over the first jumps you knew she wasn't prepared to be out there. On the approach to the fourth fence, the horse was just running and she was just holding on. It was obvious that an accident about to happen. He stopped/ran out at fence four, and she came off and hit hard. Knocked her out and she was carted off in the ambulance.

The rules need teeth to make us all stop and think. I don't mind seeing a rule that's going to make me double check my own fitness and stickability.

Denny says that successful eventers are cowboys that have gone on to embrace showjumping and dressage (even wrote about it in his March COTH commentary I believe). I used to think he meant we had too many showjumpers and dressage riders out there. I'm starting to wonder if we the cowboys need to embrace dressage and show jumping a little more.

[Reds-n-Greys]

After reading these posts, I think some valid points are being made as to why * maybe* it should not be a blanket rule for every level, even though I posted in another thread that I thought it was a good idea. For P and up, I think it's a good thing ~ with the addendum that if you have another horse later, you get cleared by the med staff before leavng the box.

But part of what seems to be a point of concern is, "What if ol' Sparkplug spooks as we are galloping, or the jump has nothing to do with it", ~ anybody out there remember "Penalty Zones"?? Falls only counted inside the penalty zone ~ granted there were many harrowing moments as riders clung to ol' Sparkplug's neck, ears, tail, (insert any other equine body part as needed here) to stay on, but if the rider hit the ground outside that line ~ no penalty. Maybe the penalty zone should come back in a new and improved form. (as I recall, they were 11mx11mx22m). That would remove the "yikes I've never seen one of those before,mom!!":eek: moments.

[Hilary]

I don't like this rule because I AM a competent rider with a horse who spooks like no other I've ridden. She's growing out of it, but not completely.

I think that like the "horse fall" rule it should allow you to continue if you land on your feet. Head? no.


Also if it's not related to a fence, it shouldn't count.


For every competent rider who comes off when their greenie wheels around at the umbrella, there are 10 complete disasters out there on saintly horses who don't fall off.

AND this rule isn't going to make a difference for any of the fatal accidents we've had this year.

[ponyjumper4]

I really don't see what the big deal is. I'm not an eventer now, but I played around up to Novice growing up. In the jumpers and hunters where I've spent most of time, you fall off during your round, you're disqualified from that class. You don't get back on finish--although I did that once at a schooling show and shouldn't have because I did get a concussion (albeit a slight line) from that fall. I fell off in back to back classes one year at an A show (and once in schooling)--didn't get to finish any of my courses that day as I only had my one pony there. Had a nasty stop in the first round, then pony got excited off the inside line and started rodeo bucking. If you fall off in any phase of eventing, you're not going to win, and probably not pin well at all either, so why continue? I know it's not like H/J as we can come in another class, but the premise is the same. Save your horse for another day and go back home and work on the issue. It just wasn't your day.

I do like the idea of having to be cleared by the medical box if you've had a fall and have other horses to ride, or if you have fallen and want to continue, you have also have to be cleared to do so.

[Kementari]

What is really irking me about this issue is the fact that we hear a lot of voices saying, "There's terrible riding out there! These riders don't take responsibility! They have to be stopped!" and then we have an equally loud group of voices saying "but that's not me! I fall off on course but I'm smart and safe and good and so I should be allowed to continue!"

We can't have it both ways. If you truly want to make some changes to make the sport SAFER, this rule makes sense. We have to stop looking at these things from a selfish perspective.

Anyone who has evented for any length of time has had stupid minor falls and scary major ones. Let's step outside our own experiences for a minute and think about what we can do to help the riders that are NOT "getting it."

This is spot on. :yes:

I ride a greenie who has certainly dumped my butt in creative and unexpected ways, so I do understand that aspect. But, honestly, this is a competition. What other discipline doesn't penalize people for falling off in competition?! It really is the pinnacle of failure in a sport that is supposed to involve riding your horse, ya know? And the fact that it happens to the best of us doesn't affect the basic fact that it does constitute a failure (albeit - we hope! - not a long-term one). The top riders in the sport get eliminated for refusals sometimes, too: that doesn't mean that we should allow more refusals, does it?

But to get back to blackwly's excellent point, the fact of the matter is that we cannot invent any rule that only catches "those dangerous people" and doesn't catch anyone who "doesn't deserve it," "was completely safe," or "could have continued." I know as soon as we actually have a concrete proposal to ramp up qualifications, we'll hear the same things: "But I moved up without xyz, and I was perfectly safe." And I'm not saying that's not true; I'm just saying that if we want the sport to be reasonably safe, we're going to have to accept that it puts a crimp in our personal style on occasion.

And though certainly this rule wouldn't have prevented the current spate of accidents, we should be looking to make eventing safer overall. I have faith that we will eventually figure out what to do to prevent accidents like those we've seen recently - and wouldn't it have been better if we had figured it out before this ever happened? Does it have to take a horse or rider dead or seriously injured in order to make a rule change worthwhile?

[beeblebrox]

ultimately this is about rider responsibility.

Maybe some juniors do not possess this and the rule should apply to Juniors and senior riders but i'll be damned if eventing should be punished for riders not seeing reality. Or maybe all level should be more susceptible to yellow cards or we need to have a better system warning riders but to punish everyone is wrong. NOT every kind of fall means your out for the day.

Your drive your car like a ass and are reckless and drive into a wall and die you do not see the rest of us punished.

Same goes for all kinds of extreme sports, just how safe do people think you can make a solid fence made of wood on a thousand pound animal with flight or fight responses.

Lastly I wonder how much of this is about money too and bias. I am sure many of you have seen the race horse death statistics for the last 20 years? They lose a hell of a lot more horses and just now maybe this eight Belles horse will cause some trouble but in the end hundreds of race horses will die a year on tracks.

LASTLY FOR THE MILLON DOLLAR QUESTION:

1) IF YOU FALL OF ON WAY TO WARM UP RING SHOULD YOU COMPETE. Spook, buck, whatever

2) IF YOU TAKE A FALL AT A WARM UP JUMP SHOULD YOU BE ALLOWED TO GO IN RING, THIS HAPPENS ALL THE TIME. SCARY HEADERS INTO JUMPS IN H/J AND EVENTS shows.

If you are allowed to compete after falling off on way to ring or taking out every rail of a oxer how is that different? YOU HAVE FALLEN. Many on this thread have said IF YOU FALL OFF it is a "sign from GOD" that you should be done for the day? People coming of young horses and colliding, tripping in ring etc. In my opinion IF those who are for this rule you can not have it both ways as the warm up rings have stewards. From the moment the show starts and you are entered you are in a controlled show environment, so should not every fall count towards your competency?

[tle]

In the end, this comes down to the old adage "Better safe than sorry". I think it's in the best interest of everyone. Yes, things do happen that cause riders to pop off and not be injured. Horses can fall and not be injured, but if they fall, they are eliminated (MR). Some things are not worth taking chances.

Sorry but I see this as falling into a category where someone is trying to dispute this quote...

"You can't regulate stupidity"

Try to make something idiot proof and someone will simply create a better idiot.

[Kementari]

Honestly? I think if you fall in the warmup you should at least have to be checked out by medical personnel before you are allowed to proceed. You are right: in the safety aspect, a fall is a fall.

However, in the competition aspect - again, you are supposed to be riding your horse in this competition (and the warmup is not part of the competition). If you fall off, you have clearly failed in that - rather key - aspect. Why should you not be penalized for it?

[beeblebrox]

"Kementari
However, in the competition aspect - again, you are supposed to be riding your horse in this competition (and the warmup is not part of the competition). If you fall off, you have clearly failed in that - rather key - aspect. Why should you not be penalized for it?"

Anytime you mount or handle your horse you are part of the competition at a USEA event. My point those saying that if you fall off you may be unfit (physically or mentally or hell both) to continue. I have seen fall after fall in the warm up for cross country and stadium. I am just saying where do you draw the line? A fall is a fall for many of you, if you fell in warm up or on way to start box does that count? Seriously and if not WHY, you can not be damaged outside the actual course? It is a slippery slope people!

It's called good trainers who say this is not your day or let's call it a day and clients who listen. This is economics and I have cried (yes cried) when I lost students (lost 2 in 8 years over saying NO) and it hurt those monthly training and show fees lost hurt and it hurt my pride that they left but I have never had another trainer said I did the wrong thing for saying NO.

It's family members saying wow, hey loving mother or father is you fall hard or something does not feel 100% could you think about us and maybe call it a day! It's about good parenting and being realistic with kids.

It's about thinking about your sport as a WHOLE and thinking wow yea I would like to get around but this may not be my day or this horse's (this is so much harder for many riders to wrap their minds around, sometimes the horse is not as ON as he should be)

It's about a rider THINKING and BEING responsible not a sport micro managing people who are not thinking. Does not work for car speeders, skiing speeders or a myriad of other places you can kill yourselves.

Fine make the rule but if the rule is there because a fall can impairs ones judgment and you put that in writing as a reason for the rule and then you have someone take two headers in this oxer (saw it at a the last event in senior novice and a bad fall in junior training) in warm up for XC. Then this person goes out (these did not) and gets hurt and you have already admitted in your policy that falls constitute a danger of mind or body or both are you not in a liable position or the sport. I am not saying do not make the rule but there are lots of different kinds of falls, if a lady loses control of her kid and it goes running across the lane and your horse props and wheels are you eliminated because of someone else's stupidity? Does she pay your entry? Saw a dog get a person dumped on XC course in Oregon as it bolted across lane behind rider, does rider get punished? ALL I would like to say there are a lot of things to consider.

[Pixie Dust]

I think the intent of XC is quite different from hunter/jumper or stadium. It's like a trail ride with jumps. You can get off, and get back on if you want. The penalty is time (or points for a fall.)

Are endurance riders eliminated for falling?

[asterix]

Well, I agree with Kementari and blackwly, I have to say. The only time I have fallen off in competition was exactly one of those "oops, exit left, slowmo, land on feet, reins in hand" -- totally a non-event, got back on, kept going, etc etc.

But so what? We accept a whole boatload of rules like no boots in dressage, don't cross the start line before you start in sj, etc etc etc. None of these are for safety, but if we do them, we roll our eyes, nod to the judge, and leave.

This rule would absolutely, no doubt about it, prevent some number of folks who fall off, SEEM fine, but are NOT, from getting back on and riding when they should not.

Why is this unacceptable regulation?

Gnep and others on this thread have said this has happened to them. I have a good friend who had this happen. I bet most of you do. Happened with Boyd and Heidi AND Corrinne at Rolex. Boyd went on to showjump the next day on his other horse. I assume he would have ridden his other horse XC after his fall had that other horse been yet to go.

At prelim and above you are already E if you get tipped off in SJ. Sucks. But reasonable. We cannot possibly ask jump judges OR EMTs (the latter have training but rarely see the fall, the former, the other way around) to "assess" whether someone is OK to continue and expect them to be right all of the time. We know that's not what happens.

If we could really make a rule about landing on your feet being an exception, I'd be ok with that, but we'd all have to understand that if the jump judge could NOT see exactly how you landed you would be eliminated.

I do feel for the pros and other who ride lots of greenbeans at events. What did they do in the days when we didn't have Bn/N/T? Did horses that completely green go out straight at prelim or did they get competition mileage some other way first (seriously, I am wondering this, not trying to be difficult)?

[Kementari]

Are endurance riders eliminated for falling?

No. But endurance riders are expected not to ride the entire time - they intentionally get off and walk (well, run) to give their horses breaks. So being mounted isn't quite as integral a part of their sport. ;)

For those who are falling off so frequently that this rule is an issue, would you accept having to stop and being examined by medical personnel after any fall (and, heck, we'll include the warm-up and the parking lot and the walk to the start box and wherever just to be consistent) before being allowed to continue?

[Jazzy Lady]

There's a difference between falling off on course and having your adrenaline pumping so hard that you don't know you're not okay and wanting to jump back on at that instant and then sitting down before your next horse and going "woah, I really hit my head".

I don't mind the fall rule. Ya, crap happens when your horse exits stage left and you aren't preparred, but if your horse spooks at the judge in stadium you leave, so why is cross any different? I think it's reasonable and could help prevent some bad riding. How many people have you seen fall off, get pissed, get back on and ride hell bent for leather? I sure have. I'd rather see those folks go back and school some fences in the warmup.

[snoopy]

[QUOTE=Jazzy Lady;3211175]There's a difference between falling off on course and having your adrenaline pumping so hard that you don't know you're not okay and wanting to jump back on
QUOTE]



Yes and this happened to a very good friend of mine this year at Rolex. In hindsight she should have not continued.


I am for the rule. If it happens in another jumping phase (SJ) it should happen on XC. A fall is a fall. I think the rule should be consistant across the board and all three phases.

[SparklePlenty]

Flame suit zipped -

Perhaps the 1 fall you're out could apply to the restricted rider divisions or the junior divisions but not the open divisions? I don't know what the answer is, but I do know that I don't agree with one fall=E applying to everyone in every circumstance.

So what then everyone goes OPEN just in case they fall and dont get elminated??

My goodness... this thread has just gone sour. Eventers are crying for safer events and yet so many people on here are sitting back and are OUTRAGED that because YOU paid 200dollars to event and fall off xcountry you should be allowed to continue. Why, under what reason? because your horse spooked? or wait, you had a "miscue" .. whatever..so much for a unified group, eveyone should be ashamed of themselves.

Seriously.. it's only MONEY, you made the wager now play the game by the rules. Respect what is being proposed and what is being inforced. Stop crying over something you can control and unless yoru part of the USEA board or are going to be attending their meetings i'm tired of hearing the complaining regarding different propsed rules. (and no worries i will STOP reading this thread as well :sigh:)

FTR - i feel that if you fall xcountry you shouldn't be allowed to continue.. ULR or Smurf, doesnt matter. and i would graciously give up my event entry if i fall because that's a way of saying "today is not my day". I'm not to proud to know myself and my horse..

It's a shame that this board has become no negative and is pinning people against each other especially us eventers. I guess one can only just hope and pray for a unified organization, but i dont see that in the near future. Not after threads like the ones on here recently :sigh::no:

[JER]

So what happens to the rider who comes off the 1st of the two or three horses he/she is competing? Would the other horses be allowed to start with an "impaired" rider? Would there have to be medical clearance to ride the other horses?


These are excellent questions.

Medically speaking, if you are not ok to ride one horse, you are not ok to ride any horse. Probably not even the coin-op horse in the K-Mart parking lot.

If we can't be sure that you're not impaired/injured by a fall -- any type of fall -- off Horse #1, why should you be allowed to get on Horse #2? And why should you be allowed to showjump tomorrow?

And who is your medical direction? EMTs are in the packing and shipping business. Our job is to get you to the ER in the best possible condition. We fill out a report but do not diagnose. EMTs always have medical direction (an MD) but the MD is not onsite. Do HTs plan to have a medical officer -- someone with a license -- to 'clear' people for further competition?

From the responses on this thread, it sounds like people think fallers-who-get-back-on are a big problem in eventing. Are they really? At what levels? We're talking about a USEA rule change, not an FEI rule change, so this wouldn't stop the Boyd's and the Dornin's from getting back on.

Personally, I think falling is part of riding. I'd rather see a relaxed, soft rider go around a course with an innocuous fall than see a tense rider hauling on the horse's mouth, spurring it every stride and lurching around over every fence. We should be trying to fix what's broken and I'm not at all sure that banning fallers will help in this regard.

[tle]

eveyone should be ashamed of themselves.

Why? because we believe in personal responsibility and enforcement of rules already in play instead of instituting MORE rules?? Hardly anything to be "ashamed" of.

Respect what is being proposed and what is being inforced. Stop crying over something you can control and unless yoru part of the USEA board or are going to be attending their meetings i'm tired of hearing the complaining regarding different propsed rules. (and no worries i will STOP reading this thread as well :sigh:)

So if we're not part of the board, we should have no say int he matter? We're not allowed to comment on proposals to a sport in which we participate, love and yes, spend a shiiteload of money on (both in terms of entry fees, memberships as well as horse upkeep and care)??? What a load of crap. I agree.. respect is needed... but respect goes both ways. I am an adult. I don't mind the rules in place now, but this one seems a little too knee-jerk for my liking (as well as way too Big Brother). I can certainly respect where it's comign from without liking the rule and it IS well within my right to complain or protest the proposal -- it's not yet a rule afterall.

[Sandy M]

I'm a Beginner Novice Rider beginning my second year. Last year, my horse spooked hard and caught me off guard and I came off... it was questionable if it was in relation to the jump. (I'm an experienced jump judge and I would have questioned it.)

Anyway, brushed the fresh poop off my britches, used the jump to mount and off we went.... embarrassed and a bit smelly but safe and sound.

So, not so sure if an elimation at a fall is good for all circumstances... if in relation to jumping... maybe I'd lean more toward yes.

The reason I'm not so sure I'm against it is that an E does take the guess work out of it for a jump judge. There would be no bad decision for them. For that I think its good.

And there is the argument that if a spook caught me - a Beginner Novice Rider - off guard and I got dumped... maybe I wasn't as tight in the saddle as I should be. But, sometimes sh-t happens... one relaxed moment and someone coming out of the woods suddenly - a spook and plop off you go...

Not sure... kind of ambivalent.

Yeah, a real FALL fall is one thing, an OOPS! is another. I remember once when I was competing at Prelim, and my we did a down hill approach, jumped fence, galloped on, turned, hit a slick spot, horse "sat" when his hind legs slid out from under him, sudden disappearance of horse's entire rear end made me slide off, I ended up standing next to him, popped back on and continued, trotting him a bit first to make sure he hadn't hurt himself. Not the kind of thing I would expect to be eliminated for and happened many strides AFTER the fence. In general, I'd say yes to the rule change, but then I think about that "fall" and how upset I'd be to be eliminated for something like that that reflected neither bad riding nor any serious lapse on the part of horse or rider.

[Kementari]

Personally, I think falling is part of riding. I'd rather see a relaxed, soft rider go around a course with an innocuous fall than see a tense rider hauling on the horse's mouth, spurring it every stride and lurching around over every fence. We should be trying to fix what's broken and I'm not at all sure that banning fallers will help in this regard.

I don't disagree - I just don't think that falling (and continuing) has to be a part of competing. And I would much, much rather see Choice C: a relaxed, soft rider go around a course without falling. ;)

I completely agree that EMTs aren't necessarily the ones to be making such calls, and maybe we do need some sort of "medical officer" on call (because you are certainly correct that if you aren't fit to ride the horse you fell off of, you aren't fit to be riding any others!). Of course, that's more expense and more headaches - but then, didn't pretty much everyone agree a few weeks ago that we'd be willing to pay a little more at an event if it specifically went to making that event safer?

[eponacowgirl]

I don't know... I'm at a toss up about this. My horse currently has a "dirty stopping" problem. He doesn't do it while schooling, only at shows. I don't think hes over-faced. We school at Training and show at BN, my next show is the 2'3" division to try to gain some confidence. I came off of him on XC last year, stadium at a schooling show this year. Both times I got back on an competed clean and clear. My thought is that the only way to get him through it is milage, milage and more milage. If I get "E" every time I go to a show, how am I going to fix the problem?

As far as falling off in warmup, I was cantering around one day in warmup, number on my bridle, avoiding other horses and having a great time. My horse is partially sighted in one eye. His number flew off his bridle on his "bad" side. He spooked BIG. I fell off in a mud puddle. I stood up, caught my horse, re-affixed his number and went around clean. Should I have been eliminated? I don't think so.

[asterix]

I don't think this rule is any more "knee jerk" than one fall and you are out in SJ, personally.

There are zillions of examples of the "oops" fall -- I know, one of them was me. But that is not the point. The point is that it is VERY common for someone to fall, for the fall to LOOK innocuous, and for the rider to honestly BELIEVE (and tell the jump judge and EMTs) that she is fine, and for that rider to in fact be impaired. Adrenaline will do that to you.

There is no really good way to fairly and consistently weed out the "oops" from the "oh, I got back on but now I am having trouble focusing my eyes..."

This is not really a question, IMO, of personal responsibility. Your ability to MAKE good decisions can itself be impaired by a fall.

[Jealoushe]

My thought is that the only way to get him through it is milage, milage and more milage. If I get "E" every time I go to a show, how am I going to fix the problem?



excuses, excuses. SCHOOL SCHOOL SCHOOL, clinics, hunter paces, lessons ETC thats how you fix problems, NOT AT SHOWS! GRRRRRRRRRRR:mad:

[Jumphigh83]

Big Brown's jockey fell off when he spooked. Another one fell off in the tunnel when the colt spooked. I just read an article where an Olympic level pro got tossed by a particularly vehement horse.

And there must be a reason behind allowing falls in the original rules. Maybe we should look at WHY they were allowed, consider, debate whether the reasoning is still valid, then make the decision.

BB's jock spooked at a DOWN horse NOT something that a horse sees very often IF EVER on a track...good excuse...Event horses spook at trees and squirrels and jumps (something they see on a daily basis) and event riders should be able to ride through the spook. Again you are starting to compare apple to oranges

Any fall should be elimination for that horse/rider combination. I wonder what attorneys think about this...??? Allowing them to continue implies that you support them continuing IN SPITE OF THE FACT that they have shown incompetence to continue. So who is liable and at what percentage?

[SparklePlenty]

Why? because we believe in personal responsibility and enforcement of rules already in play instead of instituting MORE rules?? Hardly anything to be "ashamed" of.

.

I should have clarified that i feel everyone should be ashamed if themselves because our group as "eventers" have turned against each other and instead of accepting that there are changes to be made (for the better of our sport)are pinning ideas against each other.

As as far as the comment about not being on the board therefore having no say in what goes on in our sport - at some point we can bi**h and complain all we want but at somepoint there has to be a realization that we here on COTH dont have the end all say all opinion and that really was all i was trying to say.

I want our sport to be safer...The rule is a good one :yes: and should be implemented in all 3 phases IMO.

[riverpup]

I disagree with that rule change. You can fall off your horse and be just fine. If it looks like a bad one, just stop the clock and have the medics check the rider.

[Pixie Dust]

No. But endurance riders are expected not to ride the entire time - they intentionally get off and walk (well, run) to give their horses breaks. So being mounted isn't quite as integral a part of their sport. ;)


Yes, but we can all tell the difference between a fall and a dismount (usually) and falling off is still falling off, which means it isn't intentional.

I believe XC bike racing allows you to get back on after falling, but I am not certain.

Someone said something about what did people do before BN-T. I think people hunted and had a lot more open land available. Hunting is definitly way out of my budget (or interest frankly.)

[Granada]

As I stated earlier, I agree with the rule change. I think everyone can agree that changes need to be made to make eventing safer, and also that the changes need to keep the sport as close to the eventing competition that we all know and love. With this in mind here is my reasoning for supporting the fall=E.

1. The rules of the sport (any sport) should reflect the ideals of the competitors and reward those who come closest to those ideals. In cross country, I believe these ideals include a well trained, athletic, well conditioned, and 'in tune' horse and rider combination. I see falling off in any circumstance a far cry from this ideal (in that instance of falling off the horse and rider are not athletic, not 'in tune', conditioning may lead to a fall, and certainly not well trained), and this new rule would reflect that. I think that is fair, and I think it reflects the ideals of our sport without changing the game too much. It's not about policing the sport, it's about reflecting higher standards.

2. By emphasizing "staying in the tack" in the rules we will emphasize it at home, and it becomes part of our list of most important things to focus on while riding. Now I know it seems like everyone does this already. Nobody rides to fall off right? but really, how many times have you heard an instructor or rider after the fall just blame it on the horse, get back on and change nothing about their own riding? I've seen it a lot, I think riders should take responsibility for their riding even ULR and BNTs, in that instant when they fell off, there is almost always something they could have done to avoid it, and if not it is certainly a lack of training/'in tune'/conditioning/athleticism. Why shouldn't they take responsibility for a fall too? They aren't 100% perfect riders 100% of the time, just because they are ULRs doesn't give them immunity from making mistakes. Sure sometimes we fall for out-of-the-blue reasons. Sometimes ULRs and BNTs fall out of the blue (my friend has the funniest pic of David OConnor falling midair in a demo next to a 3' fence) but it is still a moment where horse and rider completely fail to be a team. This rule only supports good riding. That is a good thing, not a bad thing (think Bill Parcells voice lol)

3. Safety. On course it keeps the rider from making their own judgement, in a timed situation when they may or may not be shook up, to keep going. The argument has been made that when a rider has more horses to ride, one fall also compromises their safety to ride the next horse. Well, I think a rider and their instructor, family, friends can make that decision for themselves back at the barn between rides when they are not on the clock and on the course by themselves. I don't see the need for a MD to be required to check everyone who falls, hopefully people can make their own medical decisions for themselves, but why expect them to do it on course?

4. Falls are THE major contributor to injuries. There are many confounding factors to creating a fall, but every fall has the potential for injury. Some are higher risk falls, but on the whole, falls are the major factor contributing to injury. So lets discourage falls. This is not closing the barn after the horses get out. Rules are there for a reason. Sure you get penalized AFTER you do them, but this is the nature of rules. Once my horse spooked a little in the dressage court and nearly jumped into the judges booth. I got eliminated. We were having a fun relaxed test up till that point and it happened out of the blue. But I went back to the warmup and practiced using my outside aids, I went home and worked on being straight through my corners. My point is, even though it was a spook, because I got eliminated I didn't want that ever to happen again and our riding and communication got better because of it. It doesn't matter if it was just a little mis-hap, a fall should be taken seriously by a rider as a major lapse in horse/rider communication no matter how silly or goofy it is. I think this rule reflects that, and I do think that it will effectively decrease the number of falls on xc. And since falls are related to injuries, there should also be an effect on decreasing the number of injuries.

For me, this reasoning justifies elimination even in extreme cases such as falling on ones feet. If we need to be able to fall during competition to make it worth our wile to go to the competition, then IMO maybe this sport really isn't very safe.

[LLDM]

What happens now if that happens on stadium? You go home.

What happens if your horse spooks and jumps out of the dressage arena in the middle of a test that would have been straight 8s? You go home.

What happens if stadium is first and you screw up and miss a fence? You go home.

You pays your money; you takes your chances. If you aren't willing to accept that you might have to go home without finishing, then you should stay home to begin with.

Faire, well that is the most stupid argument in the world.

If this rule is for X-C I am for it, all the way, because I know from my own experiance, I will get back on as long as they do not haul me of in the meatwagon, broken bones, head injuries the whole nine yards, done it over and over again, its stupid, but shock and the ingrained mentality, you can walk you get back on, does it, and did get on the next horse and next horse. In the eving sitting in the trailer with double vision, spliting head achs, ice packs, tylonol, bandages and lots of duck tape., pretty stupid.
I like it because it protects my horses and me from myself.

What is really irking me about this issue is the fact that we hear a lot of voices saying, "There's terrible riding out there! These riders don't take responsibility! They have to be stopped!" and then we have an equally loud group of voices saying "but that's not me! I fall off on course but I'm smart and safe and good and so I should be allowed to continue!"

We can't have it both ways. If you truly want to make some changes to make the sport SAFER, this rule makes sense. We have to stop looking at these things from a selfish perspective.

Anyone who has evented for any length of time has had stupid minor falls and scary major ones. Let's step outside our own experiences for a minute and think about what we can do to help the riders that are NOT "getting it."

I Love you guys!

Look, I know it sucks to land on you feet and still have to walk home. I work with geenies too. And I am very familiar with the problem of getting XC experience in a *live* (not schooling) environment. But maybe we need a different answer for this . One that might work for everyone from organizers to better qualification systems.

I am thinking of proposing an "unrated schooling track" at USEA events. One could enter any combination of phases (one each, from 1 to 3 phases total) maybe even at different levels (for each of which they must be qualified). It would be at the SOLE discretion of the organizers. Rounds would be judged but not placed - jumps could be skipped with no penalties and have a limit of tries per jump with the understanding that ANY jump judge or stadium judge/ring steward could require them to move on at their own discretion.

Maybe this is a stupid idea. But what I am trying to get at is a mechanism for green horses to get *real* experience (with the whole event atmosphere) without the pressure. And to have organizers benefit from filling the empty spaces (I.E. dressage rings and judges at the end of the day, XC and SJ while only dressage is running). Organizers would be in total control of the schedule and how many training rides they would take, so they could phase it in as they learn how it would impact everything.

Just a thought trying to be outside the box. :lol:

SCFarm

[Granada]

I Love you guys!

Look, I know it sucks to land on you feet and still have to walk home. I work with geenies too. And I am very familiar with the problem of getting XC experience in a *live* (not schooling) environment. But maybe we need a different answer for this . One that might work for everyone from organizers to better qualification systems.

I am thinking of proposing an "unrated schooling track" at USEA events. One could enter any combination of phases (one each, from 1 to 3 phases total) maybe even at different levels (for each of which they must be qualified). It would be at the SOLE discretion of the organizers. Rounds would be judged but not placed - jumps could be skipped with no penalties and have a limit of tries per jump with the understanding that ANY jump judge or stadium judge/ring steward could require them to move on at their own discretion.

Maybe this is a stupid idea. But what I am trying to get at is a mechanism for green horses to get *real* experience (with the whole event atmosphere) without the pressure. And to have organizers benefit from filling the empty spaces (I.E. dressage rings and judges at the end of the day, XC and SJ while only dressage is running). Organizers would be in total control of the schedule and how many training rides they would take, so they could phase it in as they learn how it would impact everything.

Just a thought trying to be outside the box. :lol:

SCFarm

I love this idea, then you could have a rated show environment with the flexibility of a schooling show, and since it isn't placed the show hopefully wouldn't have a difficult time running the few lower level schooling classes.

I would enter a schooling class:yes:

[JaiPai]

Do I think the rule is a good one? Yes. Do I think the rule should be a blanket rule? No. Not every fall is the same. I couple of years a ago a rider in my barn was competing at her first Prelim event. She was riding the saefest horse you can imagine. A couple of strides after a fence there was a tree. She had been told when walking the course that she needed to decide which side of the tree she was going to go on after the fence. She didn't she let the horse decide. And he ran too close to the tree and she brushed up against some branches and slid off. Landed on her feet, it wasn't in relation to the jump so she didn't receive any penalties. She climbed back on and finished the course. Yeah she had some time penalties but she still finished in the ribbons. Should she have been eliminated for that? No way.

I'd like to point out to that had this rule been in effect it would not have changed the outcome of any of the recent fatalities we've had.

[eponacowgirl]

excuses, excuses. SCHOOL SCHOOL SCHOOL, clinics, hunter paces, lessons ETC thats how you fix problems, NOT AT SHOWS! GRRRRRRRRRRR:mad:

I'm not saying I'm RIGHT. I'm saying that this is MY current situation.

And he doesn't stop in lessons, clinics, hunter paces. He stops at SHOWS. Probably because of ME. I guess I should mention that I stopped going to recognized shows after fall number one and the remaining stops have been at unrecognized. Does that make a difference?

[Kementari]

How are we supposed to sort out the "good falls" from the "bad falls," though?

And this sort of rule (though at the FEI level) would very much have stopped one of the recent fatalities: Sarah had a fall off Quiet Man prior to their fall at the footbridge.

[TeddyRocks]

There are MANY different kinds of falls, they cannot all fit under the same umbrella.
The more rules we add to this sport the more absurd it will become. Rider responsibility is the key.

:yes: Well said... RIDER RESPONSIBILITY is the key!

[bambam]

What is really irking me about this issue is the fact that we hear a lot of voices saying, "There's terrible riding out there! These riders don't take responsibility! They have to be stopped!" and then we have an equally loud group of voices saying "but that's not me! I fall off on course but I'm smart and safe and good and so I should be allowed to continue!"

We can't have it both ways. If you truly want to make some changes to make the sport SAFER, this rule makes sense. We have to stop looking at these things from a selfish perspective.

Anyone who has evented for any length of time has had stupid minor falls and scary major ones. Let's step outside our own experiences for a minute and think about what we can do to help the riders that are NOT "getting it."
well said! So we are only willing to institute safety reform if it is not inconvenient to us on occasion?:no: How serious can we claim to be about safety then?
No one can truly contend that such a rule would not advance safety because there are undoubtedly riders who have continued when they should not have because of the physical effects of a fall (Corrine, Boyd, Heidi?? ring a bell??) and that their continuing was unsafe. Yes, the rule will also knock out some riders that are fine to continue but it will also undeniably advance safety for those riders who either do not have the capability because of physcial injury or experience or common sense to not continue. So does the one fall in stadium rule. No difference.
The stories of "once I fell off and I was fine to continue" are irrelevant in my opinion. I have a couple of those too and stopping would not have helped my greenish mare at the time but so what? My ability to school my mare is not the horse trial's responsibility or priority nor is it a valid reason to not institute a rule that would increase safety (nor is my disappointment at getting eliminated).
If there is a way to carve out some exceptions (i.e. landed on feet) that are easily applied by volunteer jump judges- fine but it cannot just be only falls where you hit your head. Heidi broke her arm and continued when she should not have- no hitting of head necessary to make the unsafe decision to ride one-handed over four star fences.

[Pixie Dust]

I don't object the rule as written, meaning if the fall was a result of the obstacle, you are eliminated.

[JER]

And this sort of rule (though at the FEI level) would very much have stopped one of the recent fatalities: Sarah had a fall off Quiet Man prior to their fall at the footbridge.

No, she didn't. I think you're confusing her with another rider.

[useventers]

Heidi broke her arm and continued when she should not have- no hitting of head necessary to make the unsafe decision to ride one-handed over four star fences.

I agree with the new rule change. Not only for the riders welfare, but also the horses. Using Heidi as an example...her horse hit the duck fence at Rolex VERY HARD. There is no way to ascertain in a few seconds/minutes that the horse is fine to continue on. Horses can be initially sound on a hairline fracture or soft tissue injury and continuing on could make the injury far worse or life threatening. At the upper levels it seems especially important to protect the horses as many of the rider falls do involve horses falling, hitting jumps, twisting and hyper-extending joints. It's probably a good idea to just call it a day and make sure you and your horse are fine back at the barn.

[luise]

When I first started eventing, I thought it was odd that it was a new rule that you got eliminated if you fell in SJ. In other words I thought this was already a rule! I came from showing in college, where if you fell off during your round you were eliminated. I feel like the same should hold true for XC. One example--junior rider I know fell off when her horse bucked as she approached some water on a XC course (not flagged). She was okay, but then when she got back on, she rode hell bent for leather because she wanted to make the time! Not smart! So falls that aren't associated with jumps may still be dangerous in that the rider may ride more dangerously in an effort to make up for lost time.

[tle]

excuses, excuses. SCHOOL SCHOOL SCHOOL, clinics, hunter paces, lessons ETC thats how you fix problems, NOT AT SHOWS! GRRRRRRRRRRR:mad:


Said by someone who has a lot of XC facilities at their disposal. A Show for you might be to be competitive, but in some places int he country, let's not forget that shows are few and far between... as are schooling venues.

This is not really a question, IMO, of personal responsibility. Your ability to MAKE good decisions can itself be impaired by a fall.

the key word here being CAN. I fell TWICE during a recent clinic... once when the tricky pony dropped his shoulder and ducked (at the VERY first fence), the other when he landed and started bucking. NEITHER left me with anything other than a bruised ego and equally bruised backside.

There are quite a few problems in this sport today... why is this being pushed when it doesn't really address any of the pressing existing problems? THAT is why I think it's a bit knee-jerk. Because while we want to make it SAFER, blanket rules and regulations that penalize non-threatening mistakes (on the part of horse OR rider) aren't making it safer.

How are we supposed to sort out the "good falls" from the "bad falls," though?

And this sort of rule (though at the FEI level) would very much have stopped one of the recent fatalities: Sarah had a fall off Quiet Man prior to their fall at the footbridge.

1) the same way we do now. Make the horse & rider take a time out (extend teh time if needed to slow the adrenaline) and have them checked out.

2) yes, but this rule is NOT going through the FEI, so no it wouldn't have done anything. As much as I have complained in the past about us adopting FEI rules simply because they're FEI (ie: the change in penalties for knockdowns, refusals and timing in SJ -- which at the BN-T levels is just plain stupid), this is one that I think SHOULD come from the FEI if at all. I still don't agree with it, but there is a world of difference (USUALLY) between a rider fall at Rolex and one at your local BN. MOST of the time, the squirrelly things that everyone is using as examples of how this is a bad rule don't happen at the upper levels. Fine... then leave those of us with possible squirrelly moments with at least a chance to prove we're ok and can continue. It's not the money but IMHO it is the opportunity to finish what you started... to continue to get the training in even if we aren't "competitive". Hell, if that's all it is about then everyone who gets more than 60 points in dressage at Rolex should just forget running XC... they obviously have no chance of winning. *insert rolling eyes here*

[Pixie Dust]

So falls that aren't associated with jumps may still be dangerous in that the rider may ride more dangerously in an effort to make up for lost time.


As a jump judge you are required to report any dangerous riding. I have seen the TD reprimand and pull people out.

[IFG]

Mea Culpa. My last comment was based on anecdote. I know better than that. Let me restate my argument based on my day-job expertise as a researcher.

In order to ensure that there is a higher level of safety in our sport in the coming years, I (and I can only speak for myself here) believe that the best approach is to enact policies based on research. That is, new policies should be based on data analyses that demonstrate that their institution will prevent further tragedies. In this case, if data analysis demonstrates that there are a higher number of accidents among those who have had a prior fall on the XC course than among those without a fall, then the institution of a rule eliminating riders with one fall on XC makes sense. Otherwise, it does not.

The problem is that the USEA and the USEF are between a rock and a hard place to enact policies now. Research takes time. Some may ask, "Why does it take so long to run data analyses on available data?" You asked, so I will tell you. This is reality based on experience:

1. Frame the research question. To do this best, you want to get input from multiple sources and from multiple stake holders.

2. Figure out how to perform the analyses to answer the question. This means determining the outcome variable, the risk factors, and any other potential factors associated with the problem.

3. Identify whether or not these data are available from the current data archive.

4. Even if the data are available. Getting them into a format that is amenable to import into statistical software can be time-consuming. Often it involves manual labor to cull the necessary variables.

5. Find someone to perform the data analysis. If that person is a volunteer, that person has a day job that he/she will need to work around. If that person is at a University, he/she will need to get approval from his or her Institutional Review Board.

6. Doing the analysis can be quick or time-consuming depending on how clean the data are and what analyses are done.

So, that is why data analysis takes time.

How do we enact policy based on research in the necessary time-frame?

I don't know. That is why I do research rather than policy.

[JaiPai]

And this sort of rule (though at the FEI level) would very much have stopped one of the recent fatalities: Sarah had a fall off Quiet Man prior to their fall at the footbridge.

Sarah did not have a previous fall on course. That was the first RIDER who fell at the footbridge, Dornin Anne North. She had a fall at fence 7 and then continued on. She fell off the horse at the footbridge. The horse was uninjured.

[JER]

Thank you, IFG.

Also, tle, you made some very good points, especially about schooling opportunities. If we're going to have BN be a recognized division, we should accept that it's a starter division and everybody has to start somewhere.

I'm still curious about the actual reasoning behind this proposal. Is it really about safety? If so, like IFG said, where is the data this decision is based on? Is it about scoring -- you're not gonna win so pack it in? Or is it just about PR and putting on our safety face? Does anyone know?

And FWIW, there's a trauma term for a fall in which you land feet-first. It's called Don Juan syndrome. Really.

[Fence2Fence]

And FWIW, there's a trauma term for a fall in which you land feet-first. It's called Don Juan syndrome. Really.

Landing feet first can cause brain/head/neck/spinal injury?

I find dismounting on hard ground (or even in the arena when it's winter) very jarring. I guess I wouldn't be surprised to know that landing feet first from an involuntary dismount could cause injury.

[bambam]

Thank you, IFG.

I'm still curious about the actual reasoning behind this proposal. Is it really about safety? If so, like IFG said, where is the data this decision is based on?
This just seems to me to be one rule change that does not need to be researched to death before implemented- it is common sense. Someone riding x-country impaired (whether because of head injury or other physical injury) is not safe. Whether someone has died up to this point after continuing is largely irrelevant in my opinion since not only is riding with injury unsafe, if no one has died or been seriously injured while riding with an injury, that is plain dumb luck that we should not count on to prevent injuries in the future. Not every rule change geared towards safety needs to have been able to prevent one of the deaths in the last 2 years to be a valid rule change.

[Kementari]

No, she didn't. I think you're confusing her with another rider.

Mea culpa. I think I was remembering that she had some trouble earlier in the course - but of course, she didn't fall off. Clearly, my memory needs some help today! :o

[faluut42]

I think this is a very good rule. I see riders tumbing off there ponies and horses left and right at rated shows because there pony put there head down or they chipped in at a jump. If they cant stay on if a little bobble happens, they shouldnt be showing at a rated show. That is what schooling shows are for, or better yet schooling at home.

Same thing at ALL the other levels, if you fall off you should be eliminated. If you don't fall off that often, great that is one show out of the year that you MIGHT get eliminated from if you have a freak accident.

This seems like a rule that will narrow down the people that do need to be out of the competion because they shouldnt be riding at that level. Then again it may not, but this seems like a very logical rule.

[blackwly]

A few people have brought up the question of how riders are "cleared" to continue riding after a fall by EMS personnel or otherwise...

As a neurosurgeon, if I were in any way involved in the evaluation of a rider after a fall, there is no way I'd let them continue on course. There are COUNTLESS examples of head-injured patients who have a "lucid interval" where they appear completely normal only to succomb to disasterous intracranial injury minutes to hours later. Having seen many, many of these patients myself I can tell you that without complete neurologic evaluation, a CT scan of the head, and several hours of observation we can not predict who will fall into this catagory. So, clearing someone to carry on with their XC round 2 minutes after a crash is medico-legal suicide! I wouldn't count on the EMS or even advanced medical personnel to make this split-second determination with any kind of accuracy.

[beeblebrox]

"blackwly
As a neurosurgeon, if I were in any way involved in the evaluation of a rider after a fall, there is no way I'd let them continue on course. There are COUNTLESS examples of head-injured patients who have a "lucid interval" where they appear completely normal only to succumb to disastrous intracranial injury minutes to hours later. Having seen many, many of these patients myself I can tell you that without complete neurologic evaluation, a CT scan of the head, and several hours of observation we can not predict who will fall into this category. So, clearing someone to carry on with their XC round 2 minutes after a crash is medico-legal suicide! I wouldn't count on the EMS or even advanced medical personnel to make this split-second determination with any kind of accuracy."

OK so this is all interesting and sobering information. THANKS for posting it. Considering what your stating above I think those taking DIVES in the warm up ring over fences should be held or looked at ??? The falls I have seen in warm up are scary as the riders are clearly have trouble and anxiety and trying to get it all sorted before they are called to ring or start box... I would not say those folks falling in warm up running on major adrenalin from just falling should head out either if we are to make falling rules!

My only problem with the rule is: Are we doing this because people can not use judgment. Many riders who have died or had horses killed under them have not come off (fallen off) on the course before said fall and some may or may not have used bad judgement. You can not force good judgment on a person, I have kids and anyone who does knows this. I am also saying fine make the rule and I will follow but man if you have a person dive into a oxer in warm up that needs to be looked at! As I said I have seen multiple falls in the BN and N warm up for both XC and S and those people went out and some made it around and some did not.. Do we want that risk?

How would one explain in a law suit that the sport has a mandatory E after ONE fall on any course (XC or S) as this can impair judgment or a injury may not be apparent due to adrenalin.. BUT this does not count for falls or multiple falls in in warm up ring? I believe I am asking a valid question....

[J. Turner]

A few people have brought up the question of how riders are "cleared" to continue riding after a fall by EMS personnel or otherwise...

As a neurosurgeon, if I were in any way involved in the evaluation of a rider after a fall, there is no way I'd let them continue on course. There are COUNTLESS examples of head-injured patients who have a "lucid interval" where they appear completely normal only to succomb to disasterous intracranial injury minutes to hours later. Having seen many, many of these patients myself I can tell you that without complete neurologic evaluation, a CT scan of the head, and several hours of observation we can not predict who will fall into this catagory. So, clearing someone to carry on with their XC round 2 minutes after a crash is medico-legal suicide! I wouldn't count on the EMS or even advanced medical personnel to make this split-second determination with any kind of accuracy.

How do they do it in football? Don't football players with concussions or concussion like symptoms have to get cleared? I would think clearing Tom Brady when he wasn't ready to play would be a lawsuit too. So there must be a precedent. Is there a procedure in hockey? oh, that was a stupid question ...

[tle]

A few people have brought up the question of how riders are "cleared" to continue riding after a fall by EMS personnel or otherwise...

As a neurosurgeon, if I were in any way involved in the evaluation of a rider after a fall, there is no way I'd let them continue on course. There are COUNTLESS examples of head-injured patients who have a "lucid interval" where they appear completely normal only to succomb to disasterous intracranial injury minutes to hours later. Having seen many, many of these patients myself I can tell you that without complete neurologic evaluation, a CT scan of the head, and several hours of observation we can not predict who will fall into this catagory. So, clearing someone to carry on with their XC round 2 minutes after a crash is medico-legal suicide! I wouldn't count on the EMS or even advanced medical personnel to make this split-second determination with any kind of accuracy.

Would you clear someone involved in a fall where they landed on their butt? What about on their feet? What about that slow roll where they tried and tried and tried to hold on... tried to clamber back int he saddle as the pony stood VERY still but in the end, gravity won and they just kind of plopped?

Because IMHO (and no I'm not any kind of medical pro but my BF is a paramedic and we've talked about these instances) I'm not sure I see how those kinds of falls would be problems. A major crash? Yeah, I can see that. But a soft oops? That's why I think the rule proposal is too much of a "1 size fits all" when you're talking about the difference between Mini-me and the incredible hulk.

[Pixie Dust]

I'm not sure I would call it a split second judgement. The time is stopped and they are evaluated.

I am trying to think of other sports where you are not eliminated if you fall off of something. Endurance, gymnastics, bmx bicycle racing? I guess most of those X sports.

[blackwly]

I should clarify a little bit...

Certainly, MOST people who have fallen off do not have a "serious" head injury. MOST people do not even have a concussion. Even amongst those who have symptoms of a concussion (confusion, disorientation, headache, nausea, brief or sustained loss of consciousness) MOST will not eventually require any treatment other than rest and observation. The problem for medical personnel is this: a few people will have a serious head injury, and it is very difficult to predict, on the basis of a brief assessment, who those people are.

Let me give you a real-life example from my experience to try to illustrate the problem and why this scares me. A seven year old girl was involved in a bike accident in which she fell on concrete. She was helmeted. She did not lose consciousness, but did complain of a headache. She was taken to a local hospital where a neurologic assessment was preformed - it was completely normal. They did a CT scan of her head which showed a minimal skull fracture and a small (we're talking milimeters) ammount of blood outside her brain (epidural hematoma). Because of this they transported her to our children's hospital which is a trauma center. She arrived there about 3 hours after her accident. The ER doctors examined her, scanned her CT into our system and called me to consult. She was, at the time of their exam, completely neurologically normal. I made my way to the ER and examined her about 40 minutes after the ER physicians. She was essentially comatose. I rushed her to the CT scanner and she had a MASSIVE epidural hematoma. I then rushed her directly to the operating room and in the intervening 15 minutes she lost almost all of her brainstem function and nearly arrested. Luckily we got the pressure off her brain just in time, she did great (this is why kids are good patients) and she was home 4 days later. But...yikes!

Anyway, this is a very well-documented phenomenon. You can imagine how it could apply to to a rider who has suffered a fall. So, what I'm saying is that if my license was on the line and it was my job to "clear" riders to remount and finish XC, there are very few scenarios (popping off and landing on the feet, for example) where I can see thinking that was a good idea.

From my very sketchy understanding of medicine in pro sports like football, I think there are a few differences which are important. Let's say Tom Brady takes a bad hit to the head. He is comes off the field and needs to be seen by the medical staff. He's taken AWAY FROM THE FIELD OF PLAY and a full neurologic exam is preformed, and then repeated as needed. This includes a mini-mental status exam which can pick up subtle clues of concussion. Generally, even if he is out for 5-10 "game" minutes, 30-45 minutes may have elapsed. He may then be cleared to return to the game. But the "game" has about 1 million eyes watching it, and it has built-in pauses every 30 seconds. If the coaches see something wierd, Brady seems spacey, etc he's going to be pulled immediately for reevaluation. XC jumping is not like that. We have no idea what's going on in a rider's head as they continue on course. The first sign that there is a problem may be a second fall. At which point, it is too late.

[asterix]

but, folks, we already HAVE a rule that says "one fall in SJ and you are out" -- are you trying to tell me that going xc should be more lenient than this?

People are making perfectly valid points about all the ways in which you can fall off and not be hurt, and, yes, about the need for research in terms of understanding how best to prevent SERIOUS accidents.

But the vast majority of our rules now are not the result of statistical analysis, or, even, a sense of fairness to all competitors and their circumstances. Why should we apply a different standard to this rule?

We are talking about rider responsibility a lot. Fine. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that I believe that more often than not, a fall of ANY KIND on cross country will rattle you, distract you, unfocus you, and, as we've discussed, possibly impair your ability to make good decisions. This rule would take the burden off the rider (or the jump judge, or the EMT) to decide, on the spot, whether she is somehow mentally and physically fit to get back on and gallop to the next complex -- why?? Because many times she is NOT able to take true responsibility for that decision because she is impaired.

Of course there are exceptions to this rule. I know, I know. I rode BETTER after I fell the one time I fell off (hell bent for leather? um, no, that 65 points sort of did in the "going for time" thing. Mad at my mistake and determined to fix it? yes).

But, yeah, sometimes rules stink. Tell my friend who wore bell boots into the area II champs dressage test.

[Jealoushe]

Said by someone who has a lot of XC facilities at their disposal. A Show for you might be to be competitive, but in some places int he country, let's not forget that shows are few and far between... as are schooling venues.



Maybe so, but ONLY because I took time to scower my area and find places I could ride that would be good for my horses x-game, and built fences by myself in the spare time I had. The area I live is the least eventer friendly place in Ontario, no events and no schooling grounds. I'm sorry I just really don't understand why people compete as "training", then complain that they might get eliminated for a little slip up. Who cares then, if it is just a learning experience?

[JER]

But the vast majority of our rules now are not the result of statistical analysis, or, even, a sense of fairness to all competitors and their circumstances. Why should we apply a different standard to this rule?


Because we're having a bit of a crisis with serious injuries and death.

What you're saying is 'arbitrary rules are fine, so let's make more arbitrary rules'. I guess that's ok if that's the game you want to play. But then this rule is about scoring -- you're E'd -- than about safety. And that's also ok, if that's what people want.

But if it's about safety, then beeblebrox is right. Falls in warm-up are as serious as falls on XC. And if you're not ok to ride one horse, you're not ok to ride, period.

EMTs look at a few different environmental and mechanical criteria to assess the potential seriousness of someone's injuries. Falling off a horse doesn't meet most of them. The height and speed are not significant, again this is according to our criteria. A horse falling on a rider does meet the criteria as a crush injury.

blackwly is right about serious head injuries. They can be sneaky and surprising. But if, at the scene of the accident, you can demonstrate to the EMTs that you are alert and oriented to person, time, and place, you have the legal right to refuse medical treatment and if there's nothing else going on with you, we can't put you in the vehicle and take you to the ER.

[asterix]

JER, you are right to call me on that -- I was having trouble explaining what I meant!

I am not suggesting we just stick arbitrary rules on the book because we already have some (well, I hope they aren't arbitrary, but I can't figure out why using bell boots in dressage is some terrible eventing sin...)...

and I guess I would have to say that implementing the one-fall-you-are-out rule may not prevent ANY of the terrible accidents of the type we are currently lamenting. Research may well show that an entirely different approach is required...

so I am not in disagreement there. I would not have proposed this rule with that intention. But it has BEEN proposed, and responding to that, one must ask "will this rule improve the sport?"

And I think it will. Others don't, obviously. But your point is well taken!

[tle]

Maybe so, but ONLY because I took time to scower my area and find places I could ride that would be good for my horses x-game, and built fences by myself in the spare time I had. The area I live is the least eventer friendly place in Ontario, no events and no schooling grounds. I'm sorry I just really don't understand why people compete as "training", then complain that they might get eliminated for a little slip up. Who cares then, if it is just a learning experience?

I just had this conversatino with a friend on the phone. While yes, a competition is just that... are you saying you don't go to local hunter or dressage shows "to school"? Some folks view lower levels as "experience" so yes, being Eliminated on XC (particularly when XC is before SJ or when it's a silly little bobble that does NO damage) does hurt their schooling and learning experience.

I really can see instances where this rule would, as someone said, take the judgement away from people who's judgment may be impaired or those who don't want to take the flack for making a judgement call... but ... well... maybe I'm too much on the side of personal responsibility AND enforcing the rules that we already have (ie: dangerous riding) rather than making sweeping generalizations and blanket rules for ALL situations ala Big Brother. I thought eventers were better than that.

[Speedy]

Putting safety aside entirely - eventing is a horse riding competition. If you aren't on the horse, you aren't riding it and should go home.

[cchomey]

There is such a thing as overthinking a problem, and all these rule changes are symptomatic of it. These rules are a knee-jerk reaction to bad publicity of the sport and nothing more. As one poster said, where's the data on which the rule is based ? Being an engineer, we consider basing decisions on anything other than data is just emotional noise and counterproductive. There are very credible statistics that after bike helmets were introduced, head injuries actually increased because people felt they were "protected" when doing risky things like riding in traffic.

There is no rule that will fix ambition and/or stupidity. If the rider is too ambitious or confused to recognize an impairment, or the jump judge doesn't have the knowledge to recognize an impairment, then you're substituting dictates for judgment. All we're doing by making such blanket rules as XC Fall = automatic E is creating a nanny environment. Why not require crush-proof cages, seat belts, bubble wrap, soft footing and the like and just get over the sissifying of the sport ?

I'm with Danny Warrington - rider responsibility is the issue and the solution.

[ThunderstruckEV]

Wow, this was a fun thread.

In some way I want to agree with the new rule and in others I don't. I mean, don't get me wrong. If I fall off in any of the phases and get Eliminated than I would be pissed. In more ways than one. I would have lost money, time, effort and I'd just be in a crappy mood that I couldn't step it up enough to avoid the inevitable. But the rules are rules and I'd get over it and make sure it didn't happen again.

But also, think about it. Yeah, you will have a big E on your record but if you fall off than you probably wont pin anyway so what does it matter.

The only real problem I think I have with this rule is that for some horses it may teach them that "if I stop and dump my rider than I get out of working! Hooray!"--we all know the type. When we are going BN, N, and T we are trying to prepare out horses for the next level. They will never get to the next level if we teach them bad habits. Ok, Elimination at 1st fall, fine. But at least let me finish so my horse has a good experience. I think at every fall the judge need to be able to make a decision to weather the rider was being reckless or not. Some falls just happen and are just a fluke. Rider is fine, horse is fine. No reason why they shouldn't finish. Others are reckless or cause injury. Those need to be looked at closer and maybe a judge/EMT/Vet whatever, should be the ones who decide if they can finish unjudged or not. There is a huge difference between dangerous and a woops moment. I've seen people fall off in dressage from a stirrup breaking. I've also seen people fall of as their horse tried to climb a prelim fence like a ladder from a stand still as the rider beat the crap out of their horse after a stop.

It would be a really stupid idea to make a division where E doesn't mean elimination- I think I saw that somewhere on this thread. Then everyone would just enter that division to ensure they won't be eliminated.

I think the USEA has a lot of thinking to do. It would be so much easier to say falling off means E-period. But if you say falling off means E-sometimes than you get into opinions and protests and scores not being finalized for forever and a day because everyone is protesting yadda yadda yadda… So I think if they do try to make an exception or clauses to this rule than they better be very careful how they word it because loopholes are inevitable. We are eventers. We are not used to our sport being based on opinion. (besides dressage that is) Our jumping is supposed to be based on performance so naturally we would be more likely to argue against personal opinion. Maybe this is something we need to learn from our hunter friends. Their shows are nothing but opinion. One girl may rock her eq class but gets second to a another who broke at the canter. It’s the judges call…tough. They learn to accept that personal opinion is part of the game and they shrug it off. All I'm trying to say is that if we decided to add clauses to the XC=E rule than we may have to learn to accept personal opinions and not try to protest all night and day.

And to be honest, I think adding a little bit of this into eventing may be what saves our sport. Because right now, we're not looking too good to the rest of the world. Our sport is very raw and clean cut, but we need to think about safety first. I don't want my horse to be the next one that dies and if that means that someone else tells me I'm eliminated and to head back to the barn because it wouldn't be safe to continue...so be it.

Whatever they decide from now and in the future we need to accept and adapt. We need to trust our USEA board leaders with our safety because obviously we haven't done a good job of that on our own.

[flutie1]

I have been pushing the passage of this rule for the past five years (as everyone on the Eventing Committee knows). Not only do riders physically "impaired" by a fall present a clear and present danger to themselves and their horses, but psychologically, after a fall, (and this is especially true of the newer members of the competitive population,) many tend to lose focus and ride to make up for lost time and recover lost face. I've seen it over and over again - a rider who had a "pop off" kind of tumble, although physically OK, starts going like their pants were on fire - and this is an accident waiting to happen.
If some "innocents" are caught by this rule, so be it.

flutie

[tle]

There is such a thing as overthinking a problem, and all these rule changes are symptomatic of it.

I think Jimmy Wofford said it best in his recent article -- the governing body seems to think that there is some magic rule change that will prevent problems if only they can write it. More rules aren't the solution. First, let's try enforcing the ones we have.

[Jealoushe]

I just had this conversatino with a friend on the phone. While yes, a competition is just that... are you saying you don't go to local hunter or dressage shows "to school"? Some folks view lower levels as "experience" so yes, being Eliminated on XC (particularly when XC is before SJ or when it's a silly little bobble that does NO damage) does hurt their schooling and learning experience.

I really can see instances where this rule would, as someone said, take the judgement away from people who's judgment may be impaired or those who don't want to take the flack for making a judgement call... but ... well... maybe I'm too much on the side of personal responsibility AND enforcing the rules that we already have (ie: dangerous riding) rather than making sweeping generalizations and blanket rules for ALL situations ala Big Brother. I thought eventers were better than that.


YES I do go to dressage shows to school (not hunter), however if my horse jumps out of the ring or I fall off, I don't care that I'm eliminated. I also don't see my health at risk if my horse spooks at a dressage letter compared to if he misjudges a solid fence. Basically what Im saying is, if you HAVE to go to competitions to school, you have to be able to suck it up if you get eliminated for a stupid dismount.

[LLDM]

I have been pushing the passage of this rule for the past five years (as everyone on the Eventing Committee knows). Not only do riders physically "impaired" by a fall present a clear and present danger to themselves and their horses, but psychologically, after a fall, (and this is especially true of the newer members of the competitive population,) many tend to lose focus and ride to make up for lost time and recover lost face. I've seen it over and over again - a rider who had a "pop off" kind of tumble, although physically OK, starts going like their pants were on fire - and this is an accident waiting to happen.
If some "innocents" are caught by this rule, so be it.

flutie

Here, here!

Guess what? I don't like it either. But it IS the right thing to do, esp. now. Here's a thought - maybe if we are good, responsible riders for awhile and our ponies stop getting hurt, then this rule could get relaxed a little.

In the mean time, all this complaining about it in the vein of "they couldn't be talking about meeeeee" is only proving the point. Y'all want to save eventing or not? Um???

Maybe I would feel differently if I hadn't proven to myself just this weekend how stupid and stubborn I could be. But noooo, I had to jump right back on. Now I am trying to explain to my ACL and meniscus how sorry I am and my pony is on vaca. I didn't come near hitting my head, but my ego is damn well bruised and I feel like an a$$. The worst thing though, the very worst, is that I went on out XC in a possible compromised state. I should NEVER have put my pony at risk. Never. Nothing is worth her well being.

Flutie - you are SO right. And certainly not just about newbies or LLs. Pain changes your perspective - radically. It kicks up some primal stuff I think and gets the adrenaline going. So here's a new tag line for you:

Friends (and officials) don't let friends ride impaired by pain. Take those reins away! Take their truck keys while you're at it.

SCFarm

[Flying Hippotamus]

OK I can't read anymore - 2 more pages have been added since I started.
I am against this rule at BN and Novice levels (I am ambivalent about Training level). I am an organizer and just hoping to do BN this year. If you applied it at all levels to juniors I would also find that acceptable.
The arguement that you are not allowed to fall in stadium why should you be allowed to fall x-c is specious. The rules for each phase are completely different. In stadium if you stop to regain a stirrup that is a disobedience and penalized the same as a refusal. The same thing if you circle on stadium. Do you want those rules to apply to X-C? Also if you fall off in dressage (an oops thing) or you horse jumps out of the ring the TD will probably let you continue.

Also I just can not see how falling off a horse shows any lack of skill at all. Gravity happens. If you are "schooling, schooling, schooling" and fall off that day do you go home? Does your barn owner come out and say you had a fall today please don't ride any more today? I would hate to be the one to get on the horse who every time his rider has fallen off quits for the day. I have a challenge for anyone who thinks that you need a tighter seat or some crap not to fall off when your horse spooks. Come ride my horse and stand next to the wall of the indoor and I will go out and bang on it. I will even let you do it at a walk (I wouldn't want you to hurt yourself at a canter or trot)

I compete not to be competitve but for fun. Also I like to have goals and show off my pretty horsie. Though most of time the only comment I get is: wow you are a good rider. Having a good dressage test and stadium round is rewarding and makes me feel good. BUt cross country is a blast. and I'm not talking about going fast.

This is what will happen if this rule does go all the way thru. If you fall off anyway at all on cross country you will be told to leave the course and walk you horse in hand. You will not be allowed to mount at all. This is a terrible thing to teach a horse. If you are hurt its unavoidable but if not... I would mind if they give me a thousand penalty points I would continue because that is what I always do when I fall off.

I do see this as a knee jerk reaction. Yes we want our sport safe, we have to do something - that's what everyone is saying. But appling rules across the board to all levels is ridiculous. The difference between the types of riders, horses, venues at BN and FEI is huge. They are practically different sports.

What bugs me the most is that it is the slippery slope of loss of freedom due to liability issues. Look at any bucket of Strongid C. See the picture of the baby drowning in the bucket? My god! what parent (I have 3 kids) needs to be told that? Obviously some people do. I'm tired of paying the price in my freedom for people who can't take responsibility for their own actions. Wah, I spilled hot coffee give me a million bucks. Or closer to my home a teenager ran a stop sign and since he wasn't wearing a seatbelt he died. Tragic. But now the people who wanted to do something about that "dangerous intersection" have put in a traffic light. MNS to me, I've been going through that intersection for 18 years and never had a problem. - OK now I am ranting.

So anyway I really think this rule will not make anything safer. I also think it could get quite messy with multiple rides and such.

[Kementari]

I'm only going to say that I have had plenty of falls in my life, and sometimes I have not been able to get back on immediately. When that has happened, even though it has occurred with some pretty green or rank horses, I have NEVER noticed the horse being worse once I was able to ride again - with the exception of one horse who had been taught (and not by me) the lovely habit of rearing and going over...and he wasn't any WORSE - he was outright dangerous to begin with (and would have had no place on a xc course even if I'd been dumb enough to take him to one...).

Falling off once in awhile and not getting back on is very unlikely to teach your horse to dump you - especially if, as people claim, all these falls come from spooks and trips, not intentional misbehaviour. And, sorry, but if you are falling in competition often enough to teach your horse that getting the rider off is a free ticket, then you need either a break or a more appropriate mount.

[BLBGP]

While I must preface this saying I am not an eventer, this seems like a good rule to pass and I am surprised that so many are against it. If a spook or a trip unseats you, perhaps it's not your day to be jumping big solid fences. Call it a day, regroup, and try again next time. Yes, it's a bummer to be out your entry fee. But what other horse sport allows riders to fall off during competition and not be disqualified?

[ksbadger]

It's interesting that the vast majority of comments have been from the rider's point of view. Don't forget that any XC rule has to be capable of instant interpretation by someone who may not have even seen eventing before - your average jump judge. So any rule that is any more complex than "Fall = Elimination = Leave the track at a WALK, please" just won't work in reality.

[sirena_chaucer]

Exactly. FH-that's my opinion as well. The rule is BS, imo and a total knee jerk reaction. If the riders who had been killed had all had falls earlier in the course, maybe it would make some sense to me, but this is not the case. This is a knee jerk reaction that won't save lives, imo. And it certainly won't 'save eventing' as some posters have been claiming. :rolleyes:

OK I can't read anymore - 2 more pages have been added since I started.
I am against this rule at BN and Novice levels (I am ambivalent about Training level). I am an organizer and just hoping to do BN this year. If you applied it at all levels to juniors I would also find that acceptable.
The arguement that you are not allowed to fall in stadium why should you be allowed to fall x-c is specious. The rules for each phase are completely different. In stadium if you stop to regain a stirrup that is a disobedience and penalized the same as a refusal. The same thing if you circle on stadium. Do you want those rules to apply to X-C? Also if you fall off in dressage (an oops thing) or you horse jumps out of the ring the TD will probably let you continue.

Also I just can not see how falling off a horse shows any lack of skill at all. Gravity happens. If you are "schooling, schooling, schooling" and fall off that day do you go home? Does your barn owner come out and say you had a fall today please don't ride any more today? I would hate to be the one to get on the horse who every time his rider has fallen off quits for the day. I have a challenge for anyone who thinks that you need a tighter seat or some crap not to fall off when your horse spooks. Come ride my horse and stand next to the wall of the indoor and I will go out and bang on it. I will even let you do it at a walk (I wouldn't want you to hurt yourself at a canter or trot)

I compete not to be competitve but for fun. Also I like to have goals and show off my pretty horsie. Though most of time the only comment I get is: wow you are a good rider. Having a good dressage test and stadium round is rewarding and makes me feel good. BUt cross country is a blast. and I'm not talking about going fast.

This is what will happen if this rule does go all the way thru. If you fall off anyway at all on cross country you will be told to leave the course and walk you horse in hand. You will not be allowed to mount at all. This is a terrible thing to teach a horse. If you are hurt its unavoidable but if not... I would mind if they give me a thousand penalty points I would continue because that is what I always do when I fall off.

I do see this as a knee jerk reaction. Yes we want our sport safe, we have to do something - that's what everyone is saying. But appling rules across the board to all levels is ridiculous. The difference between the types of riders, horses, venues at BN and FEI is huge. They are practically different sports.

What bugs me the most is that it is the slippery slope of loss of freedom due to liability issues. Look at any bucket of Strongid C. See the picture of the baby drowning in the bucket? My god! what parent (I have 3 kids) needs to be told that? Obviously some people do. I'm tired of paying the price in my freedom for people who can't take responsibility for their own actions. Wah, I spilled hot coffee give me a million bucks. Or closer to my home a teenager ran a stop sign and since he wasn't wearing a seatbelt he died. Tragic. But now the people who wanted to do something about that "dangerous intersection" have put in a traffic light. MNS to me, I've been going through that intersection for 18 years and never had a problem. - OK now I am ranting.

So anyway I really think this rule will not make anything safer. I also think it could get quite messy with multiple rides and such.

[Whisper]

What other discipline doesn't penalize people for falling off in competition?!
But what other horse sport allows riders to fall off during competition and not be disqualified?
If you've finished most of your routine, and managed to fall with style, grace, and panache, vaulting. :lol: The only time I've fallen in any equine competition was in my freestyle at Regionals last year, and several people in the audience told me afterward they thought it was my dismount until I went to the middle to get back on. I know a couple of high-level vaulters who did get a great score even with a fall as their dismount. Noone is eliminated for falling, the coach and the vaulter/s decide whether or not to continue.

I think the fall of rider defined as anything but feet touching the ground may be a reasonable compromise. I agree with Gnep that it's easy for serious injuries to be masked by adreneline, or for a concussion to affect the rider's judgement, so elimination (or would mandatory retirement fit better?) seems reasonable. However, I haven't heard of any serious injuries or deaths that this rule change would have prevented.

[Kementari]

If you've finished most of your routine, and managed to fall with style, grace, and panache, vaulting. :lol: The only time I've fallen in any equine competition was in my freestyle at Regionals last year, and several people in the audience told me afterward they thought it was my dismount until I went to the middle to get back on. I know a couple of high-level vaulters who did get a great score even with a fall as their dismount.

OK, you win! :lol:

I could accept "anything but feet" as a definition for "fall"...

[Whisper]

OK, you win! :lol:
Yep, it's the only riding discipline in which you're judged on how well you part company with the horse. ;)

[GB Trail Rider]

I agree. Excellent post.

[GB Trail Rider]

OK I can't read anymore - 2 more pages have been added since I started.
I am against this rule at BN and Novice levels (I am ambivalent about Training level). I am an organizer and just hoping to do BN this year. If you applied it at all levels to juniors I would also find that acceptable.
The arguement that you are not allowed to fall in stadium why should you be allowed to fall x-c is specious. The rules for each phase are completely different. In stadium if you stop to regain a stirrup that is a disobedience and penalized the same as a refusal. The same thing if you circle on stadium. Do you want those rules to apply to X-C? Also if you fall off in dressage (an oops thing) or you horse jumps out of the ring the TD will probably let you continue.

Also I just can not see how falling off a horse shows any lack of skill at all. Gravity happens. If you are "schooling, schooling, schooling" and fall off that day do you go home? Does your barn owner come out and say you had a fall today please don't ride any more today? I would hate to be the one to get on the horse who every time his rider has fallen off quits for the day. I have a challenge for anyone who thinks that you need a tighter seat or some crap not to fall off when your horse spooks. Come ride my horse and stand next to the wall of the indoor and I will go out and bang on it. I will even let you do it at a walk (I wouldn't want you to hurt yourself at a canter or trot)

I compete not to be competitve but for fun. Also I like to have goals and show off my pretty horsie. Though most of time the only comment I get is: wow you are a good rider. Having a good dressage test and stadium round is rewarding and makes me feel good. BUt cross country is a blast. and I'm not talking about going fast.

This is what will happen if this rule does go all the way thru. If you fall off anyway at all on cross country you will be told to leave the course and walk you horse in hand. You will not be allowed to mount at all. This is a terrible thing to teach a horse. If you are hurt its unavoidable but if not... I would mind if they give me a thousand penalty points I would continue because that is what I always do when I fall off.

I do see this as a knee jerk reaction. Yes we want our sport safe, we have to do something - that's what everyone is saying. But appling rules across the board to all levels is ridiculous. The difference between the types of riders, horses, venues at BN and FEI is huge. They are practically different sports.

What bugs me the most is that it is the slippery slope of loss of freedom due to liability issues. Look at any bucket of Strongid C. See the picture of the baby drowning in the bucket? My god! what parent (I have 3 kids) needs to be told that? Obviously some people do. I'm tired of paying the price in my freedom for people who can't take responsibility for their own actions. Wah, I spilled hot coffee give me a million bucks. Or closer to my home a teenager ran a stop sign and since he wasn't wearing a seatbelt he died. Tragic. But now the people who wanted to do something about that "dangerous intersection" have put in a traffic light. MNS to me, I've been going through that intersection for 18 years and never had a problem. - OK now I am ranting.

So anyway I really think this rule will not make anything safer. I also think it could get quite messy with multiple rides and such.

I am in complete agreement with you FH. Excellent post

[Badger]

Does this rule apply to competitions run under FEI rules, i.e. a CIC, or is it just for USEA/USEF-run horse trials?

I was looking at FEI rules yesterday on-line, and it does not appear to apply to them.

[Kementari]

It is a USEF rule.

[Ajierene]

I Love you guys!

Look, I know it sucks to land on you feet and still have to walk home. I work with geenies too. And I am very familiar with the problem of getting XC experience in a *live* (not schooling) environment. But maybe we need a different answer for this . One that might work for everyone from organizers to better qualification systems.

I am thinking of proposing an "unrated schooling track" at USEA events. One could enter any combination of phases (one each, from 1 to 3 phases total) maybe even at different levels (for each of which they must be qualified). It would be at the SOLE discretion of the organizers. Rounds would be judged but not placed - jumps could be skipped with no penalties and have a limit of tries per jump with the understanding that ANY jump judge or stadium judge/ring steward could require them to move on at their own discretion.

Maybe this is a stupid idea. But what I am trying to get at is a mechanism for green horses to get *real* experience (with the whole event atmosphere) without the pressure. And to have organizers benefit from filling the empty spaces (I.E. dressage rings and judges at the end of the day, XC and SJ while only dressage is running). Organizers would be in total control of the schedule and how many training rides they would take, so they could phase it in as they learn how it would impact everything.

Just a thought trying to be outside the box. :lol:

SCFarm

This is a great idea. They have something like this at Bucks County. It was part of the Combined Training show. You can pay a certain amount to just be judged on the dressage test. Another to do dressage and stadium. Then add another if you want to school cross country while you are there. The only problem I had with it was once you added dressage, stadium and schooling cross country, you are paying for an unrated show. If I wanted to pay for an unrated show, I would go to one. So this is a good idea, but I would just like to see cost to be minimal. I am not sure if you have to pay to school because of a specific USEA rules or not.


In reference to research and 'knee-jerk' reactions.


What most people do not correlate is the amount of time it takes to do research being in contradiction to the public's 'want change NOW!' attitude. The government is also criticized for some of it's policies, but when they are being pressured by the public or other groups to make a change as quickly as possible, they do not have time for the research.

Personally, I am for the rule. You are there to compete - competing is not falling off. If you cannot sit a spook, dropped shoulder, etc. on an otherwise good horse, don't go. If you are schooling a horse, go to schooling shows. I do not know if the one fall rule will be the same, but at any schooling show where I have been eliminated (refusals), I was allowed to continue and/or go to the next phase to school. I have seen other competitors do the same at shows. When that horse is good enough that it isn't acting like a fool in eventing, then move on to recognized.

I have been victim to the one fall in stadium rule at a recognized show. Cross Country after stadium. Did it suck to fall off during a refusal at the second show? yeah. Was it my fault? yeah. Did I land on my feet? yeah. I was half on/half off and ended up all the way off. Did not knock over the jump...no injuries....if it is a rule in stadium, it should be definitely be a rule in cross country.

I also think the fall off as a blanket rule is appropriate. Leaving it to jump judges to determine whether or not a fall was serious is not fair to jump judges who are not necessarily expert riders and/or trainers. Even highly skilled trainers are not medical experts and should not be expected to determine if someone is seriously injured or not. As far as falling off and landing on your feet - I fell off my mare, basically did an emergence dismount. End of a lesson, sitting relaxed - kind of side saddle - horse standing, instructor walks up to see if she is cool - apparently her McDonald's cup eats horses. Horse spooks left, I jump off because I was about to get off anyway. land on my feet, break my ankle in three places.

Now, someone who breaks their ankle as bad as I did would not have been able to get on and ride, not matter how much adrenaline. They can fracture something, twist their back and herniate something....it is not fair to ask a non-medical person to evaluate this.

[FlightCheck]

FH - love that name, used to own a horse named "A Hippopotamus " ;)

As a competitor, until this year I, too was against this ruling (a) because of the "yes but I fell on my feet (or my rear)" argument, and (b) because I was raised on "if you fall off you MUST get back on"

But, let me write This about That:

I watch literally thousands of XC rides a year (38 weeks of announcing per year, times # of competitors...).

More than 5 times in the last 6 months I have seen riders at all levels fall off, remount, and fall off again, resulting in more serious injuries. I've done it myself several times during my lifetime.

"Personal Responsibility" is a great slogan. It's a great idea. But when we're competing, and we fall and get right back on and continue, sometimes our thinking process isn't what it should be.

I'll be the first one to be mad as he$$ when I fall off the FatPaintMare and have to stop for the day. But the medics will be relieved because they don't have to make snap decisions about whether I am fit to continue.

'Nuff rambling.

[ksbadger]

LLDM wrote:
"I am thinking of proposing an "unrated schooling track" at USEA events. One could enter any combination of phases (one each, from 1 to 3 phases total) maybe even at different levels (for each of which they must be qualified). It would be at the SOLE discretion of the organizers. Rounds would be judged but not placed - jumps could be skipped with no penalties and have a limit of tries per jump with the understanding that ANY jump judge or stadium judge/ring steward could require them to move on at their own discretion."

Isn't this what a well-run Schooling HT or CT should give you? I doubt any organizer could run this at the same time as a USEF/USEA-recognized event just from the scheduling aspect let alone the liabilities and much higher number of volunteers, time needed etc.

[YRAP Mom]

They're so funny but I saw something that gave me an idea tonight. They use "Shock Watch Stickers" on their poor crash dummy Buster all the time. The stickers measure the g-force of impact from which they determine whether a real human would have had relatively minor injury up to fatal. These stickers were made for shipping packages and are readily available online. That started me thinking about how they could be used on rider helmets to immediately indicate the severity of impact no matter what the rider reports or is feeling in the moments after a fall. While on this path I started looking and found an interesting study performed with the helmets of football players at UNC (where there were some surprises regarding the amount of impact necessary to cause concussion.) Here's the link: http://research.unc.edu/endeavors/spr2008/football_concussions.php

Any way, I thought that the stickers might be a relatively inexpensive way to conduct some research with riders in actual competition without interferring with performance because the stickers would go on the exterior of the helmet. Maybe this way we'd get an idea if folks who report feeling fine after a fall actually have some degree of injury that could impair or even endanger them.

Just thinking out loud!

[flutie1]

Does this rule apply to competitions run under FEI rules, i.e. a CIC, or is it just for USEA/USEF-run horse trials?

I was looking at FEI rules yesterday on-line, and it does not appear to apply to them.

This just out - the FEI is proposing a one fall and out on cross country and in show jumping effective August 1, 2008. It's been approved by the Bureau and has gone out to the NF's for approval. This was implemented as an emergency rule change to take effect at the Hong Kong Olympics.

So get your FEI "two falls" in before then 'cuz it's changing.

flutie

[flyingchange]

Badger -

It just applies to USEA/USEF horse trials. If, a CIC or CCI were held tomorrow, a rider would not be eliminated at her first fall.

But a rider that falls off at a BN ditch here in the good old USA at a USEA event is going home, by God!!!! "For safety reasons!"

Of course, none of the life-altering or -ending falls that have occured in the past 12 mos have occurred AFTER a rider has already fallen off the first time. It's very convenient to omit that pesky little FACT.

So the whole, "this rule makes sense and is going to save lives!!!!" argument is NONSENSE. You don't even have to do much real ANALYSIS -again, something that is so darn pesky here! - to know that!!!!

You guys who think all these emotion-based rule changes are going to "save the sport" - look at history, please, and tell me when emotion-based decision making has EVER done ANYBODY any good.

[Jazzy Lady]

Sorry, I don't buy that falls are less dangerous at a lower level. My goodness, at the first event in Ontario the ambulance moved 3 times, for ENTRY (BN) level! There was one fall at prelim, and none at intermediate.

This IMO is a good idea. There are plenty of people who have no business even attempting a bn and fall off alot, get back on and keep going. Maybe if they get eliminated by falling off, even just once, then they will go home and evaluate why they are flying through the air so much.

I can understand disappointment if you fall off and land on your feet. Of course, but this happens with all rules. There will always be those people who "don't deserve it". But if you fall off in competition, it is obviously not your day anyway.

Even a BN fall can result in a serious injury that a rider may not know about.

[flyingchange]

See? Really, we should all just stay home and play our Lucinda Green's Equestrian Challenge on our computers. None of us are good enough, especially those BN riders who are just starting out. they are just SOOO dangerous!

[Kementari]

This just out - the FEI is proposing a one fall and out on cross country and in show jumping effective August 1, 2008. It's been approved by the Bureau and has gone out to the NF's for approval. This was implemented as an emergency rule change to take effect at the Hong Kong Olympics.

So get your FEI "two falls" in before then 'cuz it's changing.

flutie


Good! :yes: Maybe they DO listen every once in awhile after all... :winkgrin:

(Now I'm just waiting for all the arguments about how it's really OK to fall off at a CCI, too, so long as it's "a stupid fall"... :rolleyes:)

[flutie1]

"... (Now I'm just waiting for all the arguments about how it's really OK to fall off at a CCI, too, so long as it's "a stupid fall"... )
__________________

Ah yes. Fasten your seat belts!
:-)

[groom]

I whole-heartedly support the one-fall rule.

I do think we need to clearly define "fall of rider" in the same sense that we define "fall of horse".

I do no think we should call it a fall if the rider lands on their feet, completely uninjured.

I also think falls anywhere on the competition grounds (horse or rider) merit elimination (not just "obstacle related").

[flutie1]

"... I do no think we should call it a fall if the rider lands on their feet, completely uninjured."

I for one in this litigious day and age would not be willing to evaluate any separation of horse and rider in the "completely uninjured" category. As I think you said, groom, in a former post some dolphins will be caught along with sharks - and so be it.

As for falls anywhere on the grounds, how would this be monitored? Would we rely on the honor system? How would that work?

From the new rule proposal just sent out to the national federations by the FEI and approved by them -

"1. Intermediate rules change to be implemented 1 August 2008, the FEI Eventing Committee and FEI Safety Sub-Committee has proposed a change of rule for Eventing to apply for all events as of 1 August 2008 to include the Olympic Games. The Rule change has been unanimously approved by the Bureau for the medical reasons as follows:
Elimination after 1 fall: any rider having one fall at an obstacle will be eliminated on XC and 1st fall in Jumping at both the Cross Country & jumping Test.
The reason for the change is firstly medical as the difficulty of evaluating any fall in the field which can result in a mild concussion. A subsequent lapse in judgment exacerbated by a concussion could result in serious injury on XC."

(How depressing. I actually agree with the FEI on something? I shudder. I'll be agreeing with George Bush next and then I'll know I've gone over the edge.)


flutie

[Mariequi]

"I'll be agreeing with George Bush"

um-hmm, sure you will...

[Kementari]

(How depressing. I actually agree with the FEI on something? I shudder. I'll be agreeing with George Bush next and then I'll know I've gone over the edge.)


:lol:

I had the same feeling upon reading that this morning... :eek:

[bambam]

"...
(How depressing. I actually agree with the FEI on something? I shudder. I'll be agreeing with George Bush next and then I'll know I've gone over the edge.)


flutie
In a single month, I have actually agreed with something Mark Phillips and the FEI have said- I don't think I need to wait for the agreement with Bush to realize locusts are imminent :lol::lol:

[purplnurpl]

A few people have brought up the question of how riders are "cleared" to continue riding after a fall by EMS personnel or otherwise...

As a neurosurgeon, if I were in any way involved in the evaluation of a rider after a fall, there is no way I'd let them continue on course. There are COUNTLESS examples of head-injured patients who have a "lucid interval" where they appear completely normal only to succomb to disasterous intracranial injury minutes to hours later. Having seen many, many of these patients myself I can tell you that without complete neurologic evaluation, a CT scan of the head, and several hours of observation we can not predict who will fall into this catagory. So, clearing someone to carry on with their XC round 2 minutes after a crash is medico-legal suicide! I wouldn't count on the EMS or even advanced medical personnel to make this split-second determination with any kind of accuracy.

Agreed. I have one head injury experience.

I fell off. Lay there. Coach came and looked down at me.
I got up. Back on to horse and continued on.
I stopped at the far end of the arena and suddenly had no idea how I'd even arrived at the barn. Why am I on my horse? My geometry was also messed up. I had no concept of N/S/E/W or what I had done the evening prior.

BUT! I did see the jump in the arena and knew I was supposed to jump it. I could have continued on and hidden it from everyone.

In the time it took me to realize I had an issue swelling (pardon the pun) I would have finished the rest of my XC course.

But instead I called across the area to my coach (there was a hug audience watching as well) and yelled "What the hell am I doing over here?"

[purplnurpl]

Would you clear someone involved in a fall where they landed on their butt? What about on their feet? What about that slow roll where they tried and tried and tried to hold on... tried to clamber back int he saddle as the pony stood VERY still but in the end, gravity won and they just kind of plopped?

Because IMHO (and no I'm not any kind of medical pro but my BF is a paramedic and we've talked about these instances) I'm not sure I see how those kinds of falls would be problems. A major crash? Yeah, I can see that. But a soft oops? That's why I think the rule proposal is too much of a "1 size fits all" when you're talking about the difference between Mini-me and the incredible hulk.

Along with my statement above I did not hit my head. I landed on my butt. We have it on video. The whip lash torqued my brain stem. All I felt was this big black spot coming towards me and the WHAM! a loud noise in my ears.

Very gray area.

[JER]

So how do people feel about fallers being allowed to ride their other horses?

If a fall makes you a danger/liability on one horse, why is it ok to go ride another horse just minutes or hours later?

We have blackwly, a neurosurgeon, telling us you can't 'clear' someone in the field with any degree of certainty (I'm an EMT and I concur with that). But that same someone who lands on her butt in front of the ditch at BN can go out 30 minutes later to tackle the Intermediate XC.

Following the logic and reasoning behind the one-fall rule, is this safe?

Same goes for falls in warm-up. If we have a zero-tolerance rule for falls, why is it ok to fall in the warm-up?

For me, this is all fine if the one-fall rule is a scoring issue. Fall = E. But if it's a safety issue, the logic and reasoning seem a bit flimsy.

[flyingchange]

oh, JER, those annoying details are just so ... irritating. logic and reasoning are just so ... complicating...don't spoil this warm and fuzzy moment - eventing just go so much safer! the data will be able to show that! err, I mean, well, since the data show that none of the catastrophic falls that have happened in the past 12 mos occurred after fall #1 - oh, there I go again ...

[flutie1]

"I'll be agreeing with George Bush"

um-hmm, sure you will...

And I saw a herd of pigs flying by my window just now .......

[LLDM]

JER - It is a sticky issue. We have been having some similar discussions about this in our local club. Since we DO host schooling CTs and HTs do WE let people continue or ride additional horses. After all they ARE schooling - that's why we have them. But the issue is the same, really.

One thing we are considering is having the rider declare a designated person (of their choosing) before hand. This person must approve if they want to continue after a fall. Presumably this person will know them well enough to be a non-inhibited judge of their condition.

This idea needs some more thought - but the idea is for you to give a sort of temp. Power of Atty to use when your brain might be rattled. If you don't have someone there - then you can't remount.

This might also work for additional horses as well. Someone who knows what you wanted before you knocked your head and knows you well enough to know how rattled you are.

GNEP had some good advice about directives and instructions in his trailer for emergency use too. But that's further away from this topic.

SCFarm

[bambam]

Nobody is claiming that this is the panacea that will make eventing safe (at least no one I have seen) and the fact that it would not have prevented one of the fatalities in the last 2 years does not negate what I see as the incontrovertible logic of the rule- that you are not safe if you are riding impaired either from concussion or other injury and you cannot assess whether you are impaired in a moment or two while on course (Heidi and Corinne anyone? really, it is safe to ride 4 star fences with one hand and a broken arm?- not slamming them, just saying inadvisable decisions made)
As for riders going on different horses later- I believe the rules require that they get an okay from medical after a fall or face a fine- or am I confusing rules?
Regardless, even if you are allowed to continue on a later horse, the decision to ride the second horse will be made with both the lapse of a little bit of time to determine if you are indeed impaired (something you cannot assess in a minute or 2 on course) and without the judgment-affecting factor of adrenalin. I suspect we are all capable of making bad decisions after falls when amped up on adrenaline- I know I have done so as have both upper and lower level riders that I know.
The answer to safety in eventing? no. Something that contributes to it? I think so.

[JER]

As for riders going on different horses later- I believe the rules require that they get an okay from medical after a fall or face a fine- or am I confusing rules?


This is the rule:
2) EV112.1 (a) & (b) Medical Requirements-Accidents Involving Competitors
a. In the event of an accident in which a competitor is apparently injured or concussed, they must be examined by designated medical personnel to determine if they may take part in another test, ride another horse or if they are capable of leaving the grounds. Refusal to be examined shall be penalized by a fine of $100 (Payable to the Organizing Committee) at the discretion of the Ground Jury.

Hmmm. It doesn't say that refusal to be examined results in disqualification. Disqualification means you're out of the competition, on all your horses. Meaning, I guess, that you can pony up your $100 and ride your other three horses. And you only have to pay the fine if the GJ says so.

Anyone know if the medical DQ language is elsewhere in the rulebook? I really thought it was here.

Also, the rule says you have to be 'apparently injured or concussed' to face mandatory examination. But didn't we all agree that you can't tell who's concussed right away, that closed head injuries often don't show up till later? And what's 'apparently injured'? An obvious deficit or deformity (this is EMS language)? Grass stains on your breeches? A dirt patch on your helmet? A spectator says you landed on your head? A hole in your boot from your spur?

And what happens if you're deemed 'incapable of leaving the grounds'? (I assume this doesn't apply to the competitors' party.) Will the organizer or GJ keep you against your will? Are they willing to face charges of false imprisonment and kidnapping?

An EMT/Paramedic has to let you go if you are alert and oriented to person/place/time. Or if a parent/guardian refuses to allow a minor to be treated. We have tricks and trade secrets to deal with situations when we know the person is not ok but it's a really sticky legal issue, more so in some states than others.

LLDM, your local group has some interesting ideas. I've been involved in situations where we've used our knowledge of a person to keep them off their horse. Ask them something they should know. If they're a baseball fan, ask them who's playing in the World Series -- if they can't name both teams, they can't get back on. The defiant attitude usually disappears when they can't answer a simple question like that -- they'll agree there's something wrong. Not sure how you apply this on a wider or organizational scale.

[flyingchange]

how can this rule make eventing safer? the logic does not stand. again, falls occuring from fall #2 on XC have NEVER BEEN A CONTRIBUTING FACTOR TO INCIDENCE OF CATASTROPHIC FALLS. Therefore, no, sorry, this rule will NOT make eventing safer as fall #2 did not ever make eventing less safe!!!! It's called logic and reason, and sticking to facts. Something that a lot of policy makers do not seem to have a grasp on.

There have been many, many, many laws passed and wars fought because they seemed like good ideas and they fed emotions when emotions were high. The results have usually not been impressive.

[jhodkin]

how can this rule make eventing safer? the logic does not stand. again, falls occuring from fall #2 on XC have NEVER BEEN A CONTRIBUTING FACTOR TO INCIDENCE OF CATASTROPHIC FALLS. Therefore, no, sorry, this rule will NOT make eventing safer as fall #2 did not ever make eventing less safe!!!! It's called logic and reason, and sticking to facts. Something that a lot of policy makers do not seem to have a grasp on.

There have been many, many, many laws passed and wars fought because they seemed like good ideas and they fed emotions when emotions were high. The results have usually not been impressive.

Sorry but I have to disagree with you.

If a person falls off, they will undoubtedly suffer shock, ranging from mild to severe. They may also have concussion. Both of these symptoms can be masked by the massive amounts of adrenelin running though a person's body when they go cross country. My personal view is that a person's judgement cannot fail to be impaired as the result of a fall no matter how 'trivial' it may appear on the surface.

Impaired judgement results in compromised decision making, which inherently puts both the horse and rider at greater risk. If a rider of mine fell I would be happy to see both walk home safe and sound, minus my entry costs etc. than to see either carted off in an ambulance later on course.

ALSO - When rules are set they cannot account for every single variation or nuance of fall that might occur. We have 'amateur' officials e.g. fence judges at most events and asking them to determine whether a fall was one which should result in an elimination is impossible as it would be an opinion, and is extremely unfair on the judge as they would come under incredible pressure from riders and followers to allow the rider to continue, when this may not be appropriate. We would end up with very few people willing to volunteer their time when each time they do it they know they might end up in a stand up argument with a rider.

Rules have to be absolute and unfortunately that means that in some circumstances individuals will feel they have been hard done by, and this may well be the case - but unless we all want to spend 3 hours at the end of the day listening to objections to elimination, I think we have to go with the 80:20 rule, that 80% of the time elimination WAS appropropriate. I have deep sympathy for the 20% for whom it probably wasn't appropriate, but as I said before, unfortunately rules have to be made for the benefit of the majority.

- This won't just be of benefit in cases of 'catastrophic' falls, but should also help to reduce the incidence of more minor conditions such as breaks and concussion in riders and a reduction in injured horses, and generally contribute to a safer and more enjoyable sport for all. Surely that's a good thing? I witnessed Dornan's fall at Rolex - where luckily both horse and rider were OK, but it was a horrible fall that would have been prevented under this new rule as she would have been elimated as a result of the fall she had earlier on the course. Bearing in mind her fall was exactly the same as the Quiet Man's I don't think I need to articulate how much worse this could have been.

Needless to say I agree 100% with the 1 fall=elimination rule.

[Jumphigh83]

For gods sake let them ride! Its their life..no wait..it is also their horses' lives...De Nile is not a river in Egypt and thinking(wishing hoping praying whatever) you are alright doesn't make you alright. I cant believe this is even an issue. Fall off=E Play your riding roulette at home on your own risk.

[JER]

I cant believe this is even an issue. Fall off=E Play your riding roulette at home on your own risk.

Are you following the issues in this discussion?

Fall off = E. Fine.

But do you think it's ok for that rider to ride their next horse or next 3 horses? You have a fall at BN a 2'6" fence or a 18" shallow swale. Your next horse is at Preliminary. Should you be allowed to ride? Or you have a fall at a 3'9" max width table. Should you be allowed to go out and ride at Training or Novice half an hour later?

Or you have a bad fall in warm-up ring. You have no 'apparent injury'. Is it safe for you to go out on course, even though you've been 'playing your riding roulette' at the show venue?

I'm just curious, Betsy, you seem very passionate about this issue so I'd like to see where you stand on these other aspects.

[Kementari]

We can't make it perfectly safe. That's a given. So it becomes a question of how far we want/are willing to go. To some of us (myself included) that line falls in between allowing someone to remount/continue on a horse they've fallen off of and disqualifying them from the entire competition.

My thought is that people who come off in warmup, or people who continue later on a different horse, have the time and the potential for input from friends/trainers/etc to actually make a more reasonable choice. Even in warmup, you don't have nearly the same amount of adrenaline going, plus the riding is simply not as challenging (you are in far less danger jumping a single straightforward fence impaired than jumping an entire course or portion thereof), so you do have the time for someone to figure out that there was something wrong before heading out on course.

For riding another horse, you usually have at least enough time for most injuries to become apparent through the adrenaline - plus, again, you are very likely to interact with people who know you and can more easily tell if there is something wrong (question, though: What do you do if you know your friend is about to ride impaired and they won't listen to those telling them they shouldn't? Tell the TD? Would they actually do anything?). Yes, there are some serious closed head injuries that don't show any symptoms for hours - but what percentage are we talking about? And when you take that percentage and figure in also the percentage of riders who are riding multiple horses and fall off their earlier mount - well, it's becoming pretty darn tiny.

I wouldn't have a problem with eliminating anyone who fell off anywhere on course (in other words, not jump related), except that that becomes nigh unto impossible to enforce because on many (most?) courses you'd have to have many more volunteers in order to be able to see the entire course and apply the rule across the board, and, well, we have a hard enough time finding volunteers as it is.

Perhaps, too, we should define what being checked out by the EMTs involves - that you must be oriented to place and time, able to move all extremities, with, I don't know, no obvious deformities (thinking broken bones) or something. So instead of saying "this person is OK to compete" the EMTs are saying "this person fulfills this set of criteria" - hopefully taking some of the legal liability away from the EMTs (because they'd just be saying "yes, these things are true" and it would be USEF, essentially, saying "OK to compete"). I don't know how/if that would work, though.

Like I said, it's a line. And clearly it's a line that we all draw in different places. I think that you can fall off of one horse, showing that there is something wrong with that pair on that day and they should not be permitted to continue, and yet still be just fine on another horse (especially since, at least around here, they usually run the events from high to low - so it would be falling off your BN horse and later riding P; it would be falling off your P horse and later riding BN - and I know plenty of people (like me...) who aren't ready to be riding P but who can get around BN safely and even easily).

We will never make the sport 100% safe, and, at the same time, what we DO to make the sport safe will always catch some people who weren't unsafe to start with. With this particular rule, I'll go home without complaint even if I wasn't hurt because I think it's worth it to help those who are hurt and don't realize it immediately.

And, for the record, I find the idea that we have to wait for someone to die before passing a safety rule to be completely unconscionable. I wonder how people would feel if it was someone they cared about who was the first to die, after they had argued that that was the bar that had to be passed in order to justify a rule change.

[groom]

As for falls anywhere on the grounds, how would this be monitored? Would we rely on the honor system? How would that work?

flutie

How is the potential for unrecognized injury less in warm-up, or between fences? We have had human & equine mortality in off-course accidents in the past 12 months. How can we not treat these falls the same as "obstacle related"?

I can't imagine that very many of our falls are happening "unwitnessed". 1 percent? Can anyone offer an anecdote of a fall they've had at a competition that no one saw?

Sure, there may be some sneaky fallers who will evade our rule, but the other 99% will benefit, so we're back to the sharks & dolphins metaphor.

[mjedge808]

FEI passed their rule. effective August 1 08, including Olympics.

From FEI website:

New Eventing Rule in Place for the Olympic Games 06/06/2008
The IOC and the FEI Bureau have approved the proposal of the FEI Eventing Committee and Safety Sub-Committee regarding a change of rule for Eventing to apply for all events as of 1 August 2008 including the Olympic Games.
The new rule states that horses AND riders will be eliminated after ONE fall at fence at Cross Country and in the Jumping test. According to the rules currently in place, horses are eliminated after a first fall and riders after a second fall.

The reason for the change is firstly medical given the difficulty to evaluate the gravity of a fall which can result in a mild concussion. A subsequent lapse in judgment exacerbated by a concussion could result in a serious injury.

[Kementari]

How is the potential for unrecognized injury less in warm-up, or between fences? We have had human & equine mortality in off-course accidents in the past 12 months. How can we not treat these falls the same as "obstacle related"?

I can't imagine that very many of our falls are happening "unwitnessed". 1 percent? Can anyone offer an anecdote of a fall they've had at a competition that no one saw?

Sure, there may be some sneaky fallers who will evade our rule, but the other 99% will benefit, so we're back to the sharks & dolphins metaphor.

I know someone who fell where no one saw - she popped off, got back on, and continued. If she hadn't told people no one would have known (and how likely would she have been to mention it if it had been cause for penalty? ;)).

I don't think falling off where no one sees is a GOOD thing, but I do think we shouldn't make rules that are by their very nature close to impossible to enforce fairly.

[groom]

I know someone who fell where no one saw - she popped off, got back on, and continued. If she hadn't told people no one would have known (and how likely would she have been to mention it if it had been cause for penalty? ;)).

I don't think falling off where no one sees is a GOOD thing, but I do think we shouldn't make rules that are by their very nature close to impossible to enforce fairly.


She really would not have confessed? Huh. I think most Eventers are honorable people, not at all like this person. Would you cheat like that? What is the winking smiley for?

..."close to impossible to enforce fairly"???

What are you talking about? This is a rule regarding the safety of horse & rider which could possibly be flouted by the 1% of Eventers who somehow fall unseen AND have no morals or integrity. How is this unfair to the rest of people whose safety we have protected?

[Kementari]

She really would not have confessed? Huh. I think most Eventers are honorable people, not at all like this person. Would you cheat like that? What is the winking smiley for?

..."close to impossible to enforce fairly"???

What are you talking about? This is a rule regarding the safety of horse & rider which could possibly be flouted by the 1% of Eventers who somehow fall unseen AND have no morals or integrity. How is this unfair to the rest of people whose safety we have protected?


Actually, this particular person probably would have been honest. But should we expect a kid to go up to the officials and say, "Gee, I should be eliminated?" I mean, it's great to expect and encourage honesty and sportsmanship from our kids (and adults...), but I think that may be going a bit far and setting someone - especially a young person - up for failure. Yeah, *I* would be honest -but I'm old enough, and with a well-enough formed brain, to know better. ;)

Not to mention that you then have someone walking off the course that no one knows about, and who could therefore cause issues for following riders or even just cause all sorts of concern by their missing-ness (new word :winkgrin:). Not that that is insurmountable at most events, but still, you have to look at the big picture.

And, honestly, NO, we shouldn't make rules that CAN'T be enforced across the board, no matter WHY we've made them. As soon as you do that, it's not a true competition anymore; it's a game of luck. The rules should encourage fairness, not contravene it.

[groom]

If indeed we have any significant number of riders falling unseen by any official then this is a much greater issue than we are presently "debating". But we do not. (I'm not conceding any merit to your argument that it would be "unfair" if we did. Where is the logic in that? Many rules can be broken or are difficult to evenly administer. Example: Dangerous Riding.)

You seem stuck on this cheating phantom faller aspect- but what of the questions I posed:
How is the potential for unrecognized injury less in warm-up, or between fences? We have had human & equine mortality in off-course accidents in the past 12 months. How can we not treat these falls the same as "obstacle related"?

[flyingchange]

Groom said:

(sigh)

nevermind.


I hear you.

[groom]

I hear you.


oops - sorry!

I edited. I couldn't let that lapse of logic go. But I'm gone now - really.

bye

[Kementari]

How is the potential for unrecognized injury less in warm-up, or between fences? We have had human & equine mortality in off-course accidents in the past 12 months. How can we not treat these falls the same as "obstacle related"?

Well, I don't know about anyone else, but I already talked about those things. I don't have a problem with the concept of eliminating someone for falling anywhere on course, if it could be administered equitably. If you'd like to make a suggestion as to how that can happen (preferably without driving events out of business), I'm all ears.

I already talked about my opinion of the in-the-warm-up falls, as well, and since all you have to do is scroll up to see it, I'm disinclined to spend the time to do so again at this point in time.

[sofiethewonderhorse]

I agree with this rule being 'overkill' at BN, N & maybe TR (I also acknowledge it is too late to argue, rule is made going backwards is probably not going to happen anytime soon)

I have a question though, sorry if this has been brought up between page 2 & 6...

What happens if you fall off in warm up? (been there, done that) :eek::D


OK I can't read anymore - 2 more pages have been added since I started.
I am against this rule at BN and Novice levels (I am ambivalent about Training level). I am an organizer and just hoping to do BN this year. If you applied it at all levels to juniors I would also find that acceptable.
The arguement that you are not allowed to fall in stadium why should you be allowed to fall x-c is specious. The rules for each phase are completely different. In stadium if you stop to regain a stirrup that is a disobedience and penalized the same as a refusal. The same thing if you circle on stadium. Do you want those rules to apply to X-C? Also if you fall off in dressage (an oops thing) or you horse jumps out of the ring the TD will probably let you continue.
....

[Kementari]

I
What happens if you fall off in warm up? (been there, done that) :eek::D

Nothing (well, nothing official ;)). You are also free to fall off in dressage (so long as you stay in the ring...). :winkgrin:

[Jazzy Lady]

Why is it overkill for BN through T??

Are lower level riders exempt from injuries when falling off????

[Jazzy Lady]

Nothing (well, nothing official ;)). You are also free to fall off in dressage (so long as you stay in the ring...). :winkgrin:

A fall in dressage is elimination.

[Sightunseen]

What happens now if that happens on stadium? You go home.

What happens if your horse spooks and jumps out of the dressage arena in the middle of a test that would have been straight 8s? You go home.

What happens if stadium is first and you screw up and miss a fence? You go home.

You pays your money; you takes your chances. If you aren't willing to accept that you might have to go home without finishing, then you should stay home to begin with.

I think that there is a huge difference between a fall because your horse slipped and a fall becasue your horse stopped. To ky knowledge there are very few occurences of horses slipping and riders falling off in stadium, normally it is becasue a stop or nasty fence, and in the dressage ring where it is ALL about obedience I understand the rule that if you leave the arena you are disqualified, but on cx crap happens. At Sydney I think Betina Hoy's horse slipped coming around the corner where the course pulled a U and she came off. She hoped back on being fine and came home in time.

That being said I also see a lot of merrit in sending people home if the jumping is not going there way, it could prevent accidents, and as it was said before really you are out of the competition any way with a fall. While I agree with that logic, when you need to complete so your team (meaning in International Competition ie NAYRC, World Cup, Olympics ect) Not being E for a fall would be the only reason I could see someone arguing with that point.


Sorry if that was a lot of gibberish...Im on pain meds...

[Flying Hippotamus]

I just have one question for everyone who thinks that falling off at the lower levels deserves E because you are unsafe somehow because you fell off your horse. If you are riding at home (or where ever your horse is) and you fall off what do you do? Do you quit riding for the day and head for the Emergency Room? Or do you get back on your horse. I assume you assess yourself and decide if you are OK. Is there anyone there to legislate if you are capable of this? Does anyone even see that you have fallen?
But if you fall off at a recognized event (and this is speaking from what happens at the event I run), there is usually at least 1 fence judge right there to see that you fell and even if it is a 12 year old girl she is holding a radio telling about 30 other people that you fell off. immediately the safety coordinator comes on and says "is there a head strike?!" By this time the rider is either up or not. Say there was a head strike (and I know there were stories of injury without hitting the head) then the 12 yo fence judge says yes and even if the rider is remounting then they are held by everyone else now is rushing to the scene. Then they will be checked out. What is safer falling at home or falling at a horse trials? And is it safe to even be riding horses?

Just as a guess I would say last year about 10 people fell off at our trials last year out of about 150. I would say 2 were checked out by EMTs. I don't have a good guess of how many opted to walk off the course just because they felt it wasn't their day, maybe 1? Everyone else got to continue and jump stadium. Did any of them get ribbons - no way! I would guess 45 was the maximum score that finished in the ribbons. So with a 65 points just from falling they are getting nothing.

[canterlope]

A fall in dressage is elimination.Maybe in Canada, but not in the US. However, the execution of the movement will be penalized by the effects of the fall and taken into consideration in the collective marks.

[Kementari]

A fall in dressage is elimination.

Sorry, it's gotten confusing now that we are talking about both USEF and FEI. ;) Under USEF rules (which seemed to be what the poster was asking about), you are not eliminated for a fall in dressage. :yes:

For those who can't seem to understand the difference between falling at home and falling in a show, well, I'm not sure there's much anyone can do to convince you. All I can say is that yes, the way I handle a fall is CLEARLY different at home vs at a show. At home I take more time to "take stock" after I fall (no, not necessarily a trip to the ER every time, but a few minutes to know if all the parts are where they should be and seem to function), whereas at a show (event or otherwise) I am focused on getting back on ASAP - and that is only emphasized when one is not only not eliminated, but is getting even more (time) penalties for every second spent on the ground.

[groom]

For those who can't seem to understand the difference between falling at home and falling in a show, well, I'm not sure there's much anyone can do to convince you. All I can say is that yes, the way I handle a fall is CLEARLY different at home vs at a show. At home I take more time to "take stock" after I fall (no, not necessarily a trip to the ER every time, but a few minutes to know if all the parts are where they should be and seem to function), whereas at a show (event or otherwise) I am focused on getting back on ASAP - and that is only emphasized when one is not only not eliminated, but is getting even more (time) penalties for every second spent on the ground.

There you go. That sort of attitude is precisely why the 1 fall rule was written. You already had 65 points for the fall; what is your hurry? Is it because you know there are officials & emt's out there looking after you in case you were too hasty in remounting, and have more problems?

How dare you take advantage of us like that!

I think I finally understand your objection to this rule.

[Sightunseen]

On the Rolex broadcast there was a graphic that read that first fall of rider is "so many" faults. I didn't know in eventing stadium you could fall off and get back on.

I think I was watching Spruce Meadows once and someone fell off in the Nations Cup, the horse ran across the field to the clock tower. She was allowed to get back on and finish, but I guess that rule only applies to Nations Cups.

In falls for horses, they designate part of the body hitting the ground, yes? Why not with humans? If someone lands on their feet, especially if it is not part of a jump complex, let them continue. Hands and knees ok. Any part of torso, bottom or head - nope, you're out.



I dont think it would be fair to try to make that judgment that a person who fall on any part of there torso should be E. I was taught to tuck and roll, therefore 95% of my falls I land on my shoulder (always my R for some reason...:)) and roll away from the horse staying unscathed the only times I have been hurt in a fall where when I did not do this, landed feet first and broke my femur (and yes I only hit the ground). And it is pretty east to break a wrist landing on your hands and knees. So if the idea is to E people who might be hurt but caught up in the adrenaline I dont think this would work

[Sightunseen]

Dunno. Its never happened to me out there...seen my friends get dumped though for a nasty spin spook and they're usually cracking up b/c their horse is being SUCH A GREENIE/chicken s%it!



Wow. So, your horses never trip, huh? :rolleyes: I guess it goes with NEVER coming off at a spook. You must be the coolest, stickiest rider ever to grace the horse world.

Its always amazing to me how many uber talented, sticky, hard riding, put together riders grace this forum with their posts. Maybe it'll rub off on me-I must need help if my horse occasionally trips (so do race horses, should they not run that day if they trip in the post parade?) or my friends who occasionally get the odd toss off at spooks...we're a pathetic lot that probably shouldn't be eventing, eh. I'll go hang up my spurs, and I'll relate the message to my BNT who was tossed the other day too-he must be incompetent. :rolleyes:

I think her point was not that people that fall off suck, just that if you having a bad day, doing one of the most dangerous equine sports might not be in the best interest for you and your horse....

[Jumphigh83]

Stop making sense and talking logically. It is much more fun to be nasty and miss the entire point.:rolleyes::rolleyes:

[Sightunseen]

"Granada

I don't understand why everyone is assuming I've never ridden a greenie, or never come off at a spook, or never had a horse trip. I just don't think it should be all hunky dory if we fall off in competition, we ARE trying to make it safer, and this seems like a fair way across the board. Also, most of the falls I've seen were the horse spooked or "propped" or tripped, the rider could have stayed on had they had a stronger position."

First you need to see a few more falls in the open divisions at the baby levels.
When I had the baby leave the box he saw a loose horse running at the box and was so surprised as he had never left the box before, in fact he had left a racing gate last. Literally he spun and I was back on and the horse never never even hiccuped after he was able to get over the jitters of leaving the box, so NO I GUESS I do not agree that a fall at the baby levels by a pro needs to be a wrap it up put them away day. Hell I have seen some pro's who should have with a lot of scary stops which did not result in falls but clearly the horse was over faced or not prepared. So to me a fall and that scenario do not always go hand in hand!

ON a different note I have retired babies who are so over jumping or feel scared who have not stopped or fallen because it is a feel one has. Patted them on the neck and walked in half way around the course.

MORE than anything it is a feel that is lost out there with a lot of riders and NOW everyone will be punished because riders can not be responsible and NO WHEN TO call it a day. I have seen some very big name riders come off over some silly thing or a horse who slipped on the grass coming around a corner (not with a fence involved) and your saying that is it, put the team to bed and give the the BIG E? Sorry we can agree to disagree!



Not to be mean, but I have little sympathy for "pro riders on babies", that is why people are professionals, because they are really good and they stick well. Also while I agree that schooling is mutch different then a real show there is still a lot of ways that you can aclamate horses to the environment...such as schooling shows, and in my area you can walk through a start box anywhere, so I would think that would be one of the easiest things to school

[Sightunseen]

Big Brown's jockey fell off when he spooked. Another one fell off in the tunnel when the colt spooked. I just read an article where an Olympic level pro got tossed by a particularly vehement horse.

And there must be a reason behind allowing falls in the original rules. Maybe we should look at WHY they were allowed, consider, debate whether the reasoning is still valid, then make the decision.

Really good point...It is like looking at the constitution and realizing why laws were made and deciding if they are still important now....:)

[Sightunseen]

After reading these posts, I think some valid points are being made as to why * maybe* it should not be a blanket rule for every level, even though I posted in another thread that I thought it was a good idea. For P and up, I think it's a good thing ~ with the addendum that if you have another horse later, you get cleared by the med staff before leavng the box.

But part of what seems to be a point of concern is, "What if ol' Sparkplug spooks as we are galloping, or the jump has nothing to do with it", ~ anybody out there remember "Penalty Zones"?? Falls only counted inside the penalty zone ~ granted there were many harrowing moments as riders clung to ol' Sparkplug's neck, ears, tail, (insert any other equine body part as needed here) to stay on, but if the rider hit the ground outside that line ~ no penalty. Maybe the penalty zone should come back in a new and improved form. (as I recall, they were 11mx11mx22m). That would remove the "yikes I've never seen one of those before,mom!!":eek: moments.

So these were very amusing times, but I think the reason they got rid of them, or one of the reasons was that it was getting dangerous...:p

[Kementari]

There you go. That sort of attitude is precisely why the 1 fall rule was written. You already had 65 points for the fall; what is your hurry? Is it because you know there are officials & emt's out there looking after you in case you were too hasty in remounting, and have more problems?

How dare you take advantage of us like that!

I think I finally understand your objection to this rule.

Actually, darlin', I've never fallen at an event (come close a couple of times, but stuck it) - knock on wood. Perhaps if you actually read what was written you could have gathered that. I have, however, fallen in other sorts of competition, and there was a HELL of a lot more adrenaline involved and a HELL of a lot more pressure to get right back on than there is at home. Maybe those who are falling off constantly get so used to it that it's ho-hum wherever it happens, but for most people there's a lot more going on when you fall in competition than there is in schooling.

Also, perhaps if you read a few posts instead of knee-jerking, you might have comprehended that I am in favor of the rule that was just passed, and would be in favor of a rule eliminating a fall anywhere on course if it could be enforced equally for all.

[SR Rider]

I think it is a good rule. If your horse is so green, you cannot stay on him if he spooks...do more schooling at home; do more clinics.

[Ajierene]

I think it is a good rule. If your horse is so green, you cannot stay on him if he spooks...do more schooling at home; do more clinics.

Exactly what I have been thinking. My horse was green at our first show and we did elementary. Why? because she was spooking at the jumps and it was a whole lot safer to deal with an 18" jump that she was scared of than a 2'7" jump (This was before Introductory was introduced).

If you are taking your horse to their first show and you aren't sure - he can jump 2'9" at home, take him BN or Introductory. Don't spend twice the money to go to a recognized shows and get annoyed because you fell off. Spend half that, go to an unrecognized show, go to a lower level and make sure you and your horse are safe.

[paintgirl]

So I was watching Prelim. division this morning at Plantation Field, and I saw a horse slip on a road in an open field between fences, sort of dragged a rear leg and swerved its rear end. The rider came off, landed on both feet. No part of the horse touched the ground except its feet. The rider got back on, her stirrup leather came off the saddle. She continued over 3 more fences perfectly. Is she eliminated?

[Kementari]

So I was watching Prelim. division this morning at Plantation Field, and I saw a horse slip on a road in an open field between fences, sort of dragged a rear leg and swerved its rear end. The rider came off, landed on both feet. No part of the horse touched the ground except its feet. The rider got back on, her stirrup leather came off the saddle. She continued over 3 more fences perfectly. Is she eliminated?

No, not if it was not fence-related.

[JER]

Online petition against the new 1 fall rule (http://nonewfallrule.googlepages.com/mainpage)

A USEA member has put up a website to organize/encourage repeal (or at least revision) of the new rule.

Definitely worth a look, no matter how you feel about this rule. I'd hoped to hear some thoughtful discussion of this rule at the safety summit but there wasn't any. Cathy Wieschhoff strongly stated her disagreement with the rule and it was quite clear the people in the front of the room didn't want to talk about it.