From time to time around the hallowed halls of the Chronicle, there’s talk of the fact that our coverage often seems to inadvertently jinx people despite our best intentions. Horse sports are innately dynamic, but it always seems unfair when someone drops suddenly from the highest high to the lowest low, particularly when we have just documented their triumph. It’s with deep regret that I admit I have apparently continued the curse on 20-year-old California rider Jennie Brannigan.
Jennie won two divisions at last month’s Wellpride American Eventing Championships (Sept. 28, p. 92), but this week the U.S. Eventing Association announced (after much deliberation over a protest from another competitor) that her titles were being revoked because she was “technically overqualified” for the young rider training and preliminary divisions in which she rode (see p. 106).
These divisions are actually not the first in which this same mistake was discovered. While the AEC was still going on, officials realized after two phases of competition that Tera MacDonald, the leader in the open beginner novice division, was also “overqualified.” Her status was changed to hors concours on Sunday.
AEC rules state that for all non-horse divisions, riders cannot have ridden more than one level above their championship level during the qualifying year. Jennie, who competed through advanced with another horse, entered the young rider division because that’s where she assumed she belonged, while Tera, who rode through preliminary with another horse, naturally assumed that “Open” meant just that.
Though they were on young horses, it’s possible that both riders may have had a leg up on some other competitors because of their personal experience. But I’m not sure repaying one unfairness with another can really be considered justice.
Under section EV117: Inquiries, Protests and Appeals, the 2007 USEA Rulebook states that protests “against the eligibility of a horse or a competitor” may be lodged “not later than one hour before the start of the relevant competition.”
ADVERTISEMENT
A failure to read and follow rules was the initial cause of this whole unfortunate situation, and yet that same insolence seems to have continued in the handling of it. The aforementioned statute was apparently ignored as well, as more than three weeks after the fact, we now have new champions.
The bottom line is that rules are useless if there’s no enforcing body able or willing to uphold them. A press release issued by the USEA on Oct. 5 stated that “The USEA attempted to verify horse and rider qualifications prior to the event, and regrets that this discrepancy was not discovered and corrected before the competition.” The release continued, “The competitor is always ultimately responsible for ensuring that he or she meets eligibility requirements for divisions entered.”
Everyone makes honest mistakes now and then, and Jennie and Tera were technically overqualified. But they ultimately (and gracefully) took the fall for mistakes that should have been caught and corrected long before the competition began, and busting through a statute of limitations to punish them doesn’t jibe with my sense of fairness.
The AEC is still in its infancy, and this year’s competition was laudable in many ways. But if this event has any hope of reaching the caliber of a true national championship, some huge strides still need to be made.
I’d suggest not basing the qualification process on the honor system.
Kat Netzler
