The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedDirectoriesMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Page 13 of 13 FirstFirst ... 3111213
Results 241 to 258 of 258
  1. #241
    Join Date
    Jan. 6, 2008
    Location
    Area II, the Blue Ridge Mountains
    Posts
    2,119

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by baxtersmom View Post
    I don't see how any of this "clarification" makes any of it better. So, FEI won't have spies, but the NF's can use this as "leverage" to spank any unrecognized competition that runs afoul of them? How does any of that have anything to do with the supposed "competing" international events this rule is supposed to address?

    You know what they say about what to do when one finds oneself in a hole...
    Well, at least it doesn't affect schooling events.



  2. #242
    Join Date
    Apr. 20, 2009
    Location
    Raeford, North Carolina
    Posts
    2,972

    Default

    Thank goodness the FEI is "safeguarding the welfare of horses and athletes". I feel so nurtured.

    Funny, I don't recall moving to Stepford .....
    "Drawing on my fine command of the English language, I said nothing" - Robert Benchley
    Cotton would fight.
    http://buildingthegrove.blogspot.com/



  3. #243
    Join Date
    Jul. 21, 2011
    Location
    Co
    Posts
    4,826

    Default

    It's quite possible that I am being dense, but that explanation seems to me not to have anything to do with horse welfare, but has only to do with the FEI's desire to be the "only game in town" as far as International competitions are concerned.



  4. #244
    Join Date
    Aug. 14, 2000
    Location
    Clarksdale, MS--the golden buckle on the cotton belt
    Posts
    19,084

    Default

    The FEI language about international events that are not on the FEI calendar is directed straight at the Global Champions Tour--and its dressage offshoot. I would think that the FEI will not rely on the affected NFs to enforce the rule against riders in those events but will police the rule itself.

    I also think that they are just as bent out of shape about officials as riders and horses.
    "I'm a lumberjack, and I'm okay."
    Thread killer Extraordinaire


    1 members found this post helpful.

  5. #245
    Join Date
    Mar. 1, 2003
    Location
    Happily in Canada
    Posts
    5,022

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FEI Rule
    [snip]
    5.3 It is not triggered by participation in unsanctioned events that the National Federations authorise or have no express objection to, such as local events run outside the NF structure but with the knowledge and acceptance of the NF. Again, however, if this is abused, it may be necessary to revisit and tighten the regulation.
    Yet another point of concern. If, in the eyes of the FEI, the NFs don't do a good enough job of policing this rule (or maybe give the FEI the middle finger over it), then the FEI may revisit and tighten the regulation.
    Blugal

    You never know what kind of obsessive compulsive crazy person you are until another person imitates your behaviour at a three-day. --Gry2Yng



  6. #246
    Join Date
    Oct. 20, 2008
    Location
    Sunshine State
    Posts
    2,215

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ahbaumgardner View Post
    Well, at least it doesn't affect schooling events.
    It doesn't affect schooling events so long as the USEA/USEF don't have issue with them. Nothing there provides any sort of safeguard that they might change their mind.

    I think the heart of the issues is from your earlier post where it says that unsanctioned events undermine and emasculate the FEI. The FEI is hiking its leg and peeing on everything in sight right now.
    This is mine, this is mine, this is mine.... You can keep that for now but at a later date I may revisit it and decide this is mine too.
    The rebel in the grey shirt



  7. #247
    Join Date
    Jun. 16, 2009
    Location
    Gray Court, SC
    Posts
    880

    Default

    Two quotes are the heart of this...
    Instead, reflecting the principle that those who benefit
    from the collective efforts of the FEI and its stakeholders should not at the
    same time participate in activities that undermine those efforts, it prevents
    simultaneous participation in both sanctioned and unsanctioned events, by
    making any Athlete, Horse or Official that participates in an unsanctioned
    event ineligible to participate for a specified period in sanctioned events.
    and
    indirectly (by undermining public confidence in the ability of the FEI to protect
    the safety and integrity of the sport). The public is unlikely to appreciate fully
    the distinction between sanctioned and unsanctioned events, and so if
    problems occur in unsanctioned events the image of the entire sport will
    suffer, and public confidence in the ability of the FEI to maintain the integrity
    of the sport and to protect the welfare of its participants will be undermined,
    to the great detriment of the sport as a whole.
    This rest is hooey. The FEI feels that they are the one and only legitimate body to protect the child...um..I mean the horses. They also feel that if you don't play in their sandbox, you are stealing candy from the ba...I mean, they are taking money from them.

    I swear they must think only horses are reading this tripe.

    The mob just moved into town and the NF have rolled over to save their own skin.

    "Ey, Yo, USEF...yuz like your pretty rolex? Yuz like to keep that pretty Rolex? Then yuz better be nice to me and the FEI boyz, 'cause utta wize...well lets just say yuz might have...trouble...coming to the Olympic party...got it? Good, now vote this way"

    Then we read this...
    . The FEI will not on its own initiative look for or police national events to determine whether or not they are authorised. Therefore, local events do not come within the scope of this rule so long as the NF does not expressly object to them.
    See, now that started off rational till the last part. It looks great for the NF until the day the NF does not object to the World of Champions Tour the FEI does not like. The NF takes a look and says, yeah its being run safely though not strictly by FEI rules. The FEI steps in and then says...Hold on there pardna. You're not seeing the big picture here. It would be very bad if you do not object to this show...very bad.

    Maybe I watch to many movies, but the reason we have RICO laws is to stop a company or organization from being able to improperly control peoples lives or business. This rule and this rationale reek of allow one governing body to dictate the actions of other groups and individuals.

    People backed down from this, because they felt it was better to kiss the ring of the Don, then call a turd a turd and tell him to take a flying leap. For one moment I wish I could be the president of USEA (or F) and write a public statement that would simply state,

    "We do not agree with this rule. We will not object to any non-sanctioned event held in our regions, but will be available to advise on how to run a proper show. Our concern is first and foremost the welfare of the horse, but we feel we cannot, and will not be in the way of any rider or official as they make their choices on earning money or gaining experience. If the FEI objects or attempts to suspend any rider, official, or horse having ridden in any show in our regions we will support the party and vigorously argue against the suspension. Oh and FEI, Go F yourself."

    Which is why I'm not in politics.


    3 members found this post helpful.

  8. #248
    Join Date
    Aug. 14, 2000
    Location
    Clarksdale, MS--the golden buckle on the cotton belt
    Posts
    19,084

    Default

    Here's where I'm confused. It sounds as if the FEI itself will be policing "international events" wherever they are. And that means 15 riders who are not from the country where the event is held with at least 4 different residences/citizenships. If there aren't the minimum to make an international event, then it's up to the National Federation to be the policeman.

    What I'm wondering now is what about National events that meet the criteria for "international" but haven't signed on with the FEI. Thinking of the big USEF H/J shows. For instance the Phillippaerts twins are currently show jumping in the US at big east coast shows to get experience where the competition is less intense. They're Belgians but non-resident. Canadians come down. All they would need is one rider visiting North America for the events to be FEI and not USEF.

    In other words, what I'm asking is whether the FEI plans to force USEF shows to become FEI shows instead. But maybe there aren't 15 non-residents who show at USEF shows.
    "I'm a lumberjack, and I'm okay."
    Thread killer Extraordinaire



  9. #249
    Join Date
    Apr. 15, 2003
    Location
    Northeast MA
    Posts
    4,074

    Default

    This is starting to sound a little like Catch 22. Is the FEI's contention that any international competition not sanctioned by them is unsafe and may reflect negatively on them? NFs are charged with deciding which competitions are of concern, which they can only do by investigating said competitions, but what are the criteria and who is going to fund the investigation? And how will organizers of unsanctioned events get "the assistance" and tacit approval of the NF (presumably not for free)?

    Way too byzantine for me today.
    They don't call me frugal for nothing.
    Proud and achy member of the Eventing Grannies clique.



  10. #250
    Join Date
    Jan. 27, 2008
    Posts
    286

    Default

    I don't know enough about the politics to know the answer to this, but maybe someone here does...

    What if the USEF actually stood up to the FEI as suggested by JP60 above and said, "we will not go after any unsanctioned events in our nation, because this is America and we believe in free market competition?" Then the FEI says "Fine, we're taking our toys and going home, you can't play in the Olympics, neener, neener." At that point, would the USOC actually get involved and fight on behalf of the US athletes?

    Because it seems like maybe that's the right path to take? Right now this is being quietly implemented in horsey land so no one else is paying attention. But if we stood up for ourselves now and forced it to a confrontation this year rather than 6 months prior to the 2016 games when our hands will be tied, might that not be a solution?
    TPR!
    Thoroughbred Placement Resources, Inc
    www.goodhorse.org


    1 members found this post helpful.

  11. #251
    Join Date
    Jul. 21, 2011
    Location
    Co
    Posts
    4,826

    Default

    OK, (since no one anwered my question) I dug around a bit and found that the "Global Champions Tour" is run in accordance with FEI rules, so the horse welfare concerns cited by the FEI are bunk.
    Now, how can following FEI rules be construed as using the FEI system without paying into it?
    With the great concern the FEI has regarding horse welfare, you'd think they'd be thrilled with the Global Champions Tour's keeping to FEI rules, (unless of course the FEI is actually ticked off that GCT hasn't paid the FEI to use FEI rules).

    Remember, those rules the FEI is horrified might NOT be used at unrecognized competitions?

    Seems it's "damned if you do and damned if you don't".



  12. #252
    Join Date
    Feb. 3, 2000
    Location
    Nokesville, VA
    Posts
    35,327

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vineyridge View Post
    In other words, what I'm asking is whether the FEI plans to force USEF shows to become FEI shows instead. But maybe there aren't 15 non-residents who show at USEF shows.
    I think there is something already in the rules that says that.
    3. Not counting "Athletes Living Outside their Country of Nationality" (Article
    119.6), the number of foreign Athletes who may take part at a CN shall,
    subject to the appropriate laws if applicable, be as specified in the relevant
    Sport Rules. However, a CN which allows more than fifteen (15) foreign
    Athletes or more than four (4) different NFs to take part in the Event is
    considered to be a CI with the following implications:

    (i) organising fees are due for a CI of the relevant Discipline and category in
    accordance with the Sport Rules;

    (ii) results of CNs considered as CIs under the provisions of this Article do not
    count for any qualification or ranking purposes, unless the FEI has given its
    prior written approval.
    A "CN" is a USEF competition. A "CI" is an FEI competition.
    Janet

    chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle and Tiara. Someone else is now feeding and mucking for Chief and Brain (both foxhunting now).



  13. #253
    Join Date
    Aug. 14, 2000
    Location
    Clarksdale, MS--the golden buckle on the cotton belt
    Posts
    19,084

    Default

    Oops. Missed the "or". Does that mean athletes from 4 different NFs even if less than 15? And if 15 Canadians ride at one US competition, does that mean it can't be a CN and count for qualifying? And, of course, the FEI fees.
    "I'm a lumberjack, and I'm okay."
    Thread killer Extraordinaire



  14. #254
    Join Date
    Oct. 2, 1999
    Location
    Mendocino County, CA: Turkey Vulture HQ
    Posts
    14,884

    Default

    It is my expectation that we have many non-FEI shows that have more than 15 non-resident international entrants from more than 4 countries, especially on the winter circuits.
    If you are allergic to a thing, it is best not to put that thing in your mouth, particularly if the thing is cats. - Lemony Snicket



  15. #255
    Join Date
    Oct. 22, 2001
    Posts
    5,211

    Default

    Strikes me that the new press release expands the prohibition rather than limiting it, by prohibiting a rider to cross over between National and unrecognized events, as well as between FEI and unrecognized:
    Quote Originally Posted by ahbaumgardner View Post
    DIRECT QUOTE FROM USEVENTING.COM

    http://useventing.com/news/clarifica...ned-event-rule

    "
    ***
    If an Athlete, Official, or Horse does participate in a competition and/or event that is not on the FEI calendar or in a national event and/or competition that is expressly unauthorised by their NF, they or it cannot participate in any International or National Event for a period of six (6) months thereafter.
    ***



  16. #256
    Join Date
    Sep. 14, 1999
    Posts
    856

    Default

    I'm not feeling any better about any of this than I was earlier in the thread. It still seems hugely overreaching and bound to hurt both true upper level riders who need to make a living bringing along young or sale horses and us AA's who might want to occasionally do an FEI sanctioned 1 or 2 star. I like to do a mix of things - jumper classes here and there, some local dressage shows as well as the unrecognized and recognized events. I currently ride my little Connemara cross mare at prelim, and she could probably do a two star if I was so inclined, but neither of us is ever going to Rolex. Last season I also competed my daughters pony at elementary and BN, and that was a lot of fun as well. As an attorney, I think the rule is very badly written, and I'm not comfortable that they will refrain from enforcing it as written.



  17. #257
    Join Date
    Jan. 21, 2009
    Location
    Virginia zip 20120
    Posts
    492

    Default

    after 13 pages of discourse, I still can't make sense of this nonsense. This is why I don't compete, I simply ride...
    “Always saddle your own horse. Always know what you’re doing. And go in the direction you are heading.” Connie Reeves
    Jump Start Solutions LLC



  18. #258
    Join Date
    Feb. 22, 2000
    Location
    passepartout
    Posts
    10,164

    Default

    The welfare argument is utter nonsense because the sanctions are about the rider, not the horse.

    If you ride Horse A in the Global Champions Tour last month, you can't ride Horse B or Horse C in an FEI competition -- even if it's eventing or dressage -- for six months.

    Yes, I can see the horse welfare improving already!



Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: Sep. 17, 2012, 12:03 PM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: Apr. 2, 2012, 11:20 PM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: Mar. 6, 2012, 12:16 PM
  4. Replies: 5
    Last Post: Jul. 20, 2010, 09:41 AM
  5. Replies: 16
    Last Post: May. 14, 2009, 07:55 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •