• Welcome to the Chronicle Forums.
    Please complete your profile. The forums and the rest of www.chronofhorse.com has single sign-in, so your log in information for one will automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.

Announcement

Collapse

Forum rules and no-advertising policy

As a participant on this forum, it is your responsibility to know and follow our rules. Please read this message in its entirety.

Board Rules

1. You’re responsible for what you say.
As outlined in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, The Chronicle of the Horse and its affiliates, as well Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., the developers of vBulletin, are not legally responsible for statements made in the forums.

This is a public forum viewed by a wide spectrum of people, so please be mindful of what you say and who might be reading it—details of personal disputes are likely better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts that violate these rules. Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting, but administrators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts upon request.

Outright inflammatory, vulgar, harassing, malicious or otherwise inappropriate statements and criminal charges unsubstantiated by a reputable news source or legal documentation will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

2. Conversations in horse-related forums should be horse-related.
The forums are a wonderful source of information and support for members of the horse community. While it’s understandably tempting to share information or search for input on other topics upon which members might have a similar level of knowledge, members must maintain the focus on horses.

3. Keep conversations productive, on topic and civil.
Discussion and disagreement are inevitable and encouraged; personal insults, diatribes and sniping comments are unproductive and unacceptable. Whether a subject is light-hearted or serious, keep posts focused on the current topic and of general interest to other participants of that thread. Utilize the private message feature or personal email where appropriate to address side topics or personal issues not related to the topic at large.

4. No advertising in the discussion forums.
Posts in the discussion forums directly or indirectly advertising horses, jobs, items or services for sale or wanted will be removed at the discretion of the moderators. Use of the private messaging feature or email addresses obtained through users’ profiles for unsolicited advertising is not permitted.

Company representatives may participate in discussions and answer questions about their products or services, or suggest their products on recent threads if they fulfill the criteria of a query. False "testimonials" provided by company affiliates posing as general consumers are not appropriate, and self-promotion of sales, ad campaigns, etc. through the discussion forums is not allowed.

Paid advertising is available on our classifieds site and through the purchase of banner ads. The tightly monitored Giveaways forum permits free listings of genuinely free horses and items available or wanted (on a limited basis). Items offered for trade are not allowed.

Advertising Policy Specifics
When in doubt of whether something you want to post constitutes advertising, please contact a moderator privately in advance for further clarification. Refer to the following points for general guidelines:

Horses – Only general discussion about the buying, leasing, selling and pricing of horses is permitted. If the post contains, or links to, the type of specific information typically found in a sales or wanted ad, and it’s related to a horse for sale, regardless of who’s selling it, it doesn’t belong in the discussion forums.

Stallions – Board members may ask for suggestions on breeding stallion recommendations. Stallion owners may reply to such queries by suggesting their own stallions, only if their horse fits the specific criteria of the original poster. Excessive promotion of a stallion by its owner or related parties is not permitted and will be addressed at the discretion of the moderators.

Services – Members may use the forums to ask for general recommendations of trainers, barns, shippers, farriers, etc., and other members may answer those requests by suggesting themselves or their company, if their services fulfill the specific criteria of the original post. Members may not solicit other members for business if it is not in response to a direct, genuine query.

Products – While members may ask for general opinions and suggestions on equipment, trailers, trucks, etc., they may not list the specific attributes for which they are in the market, as such posts serve as wanted ads.

Event Announcements – Members may post one notification of an upcoming event that may be of interest to fellow members, if the original poster does not benefit financially from the event. Such threads may not be “bumped” excessively. Premium members may post their own notices in the Event Announcements forum.

Charities/Rescues – Announcements for charitable or fundraising events can only be made for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. Special exceptions may be made, at the moderators’ discretion and direction, for board-related events or fundraising activities in extraordinary circumstances.

Occasional posts regarding horses available for adoption through IRS-registered horse rescue or placement programs are permitted in the appropriate forums, but these threads may be limited at the discretion of the moderators. Individuals may not advertise or make announcements for horses in need of rescue, placement or adoption unless the horse is available through a recognized rescue or placement agency or government-run entity or the thread fits the criteria for and is located in the Giveaways forum.

5. Do not post copyrighted photographs unless you have purchased that photo and have permission to do so.

6. Respect other members.
As members are often passionate about their beliefs and intentions can easily be misinterpreted in this type of environment, try to explore or resolve the inevitable disagreements that arise in the course of threads calmly and rationally.

If you see a post that you feel violates the rules of the board, please click the “alert” button (exclamation point inside of a triangle) in the bottom left corner of the post, which will alert ONLY the moderators to the post in question. They will then take whatever action, or no action, as deemed appropriate for the situation at their discretion. Do not air grievances regarding other posters or the moderators in the discussion forums.

Please be advised that adding another user to your “Ignore” list via your User Control Panel can be a useful tactic, which blocks posts and private messages by members whose commentary you’d rather avoid reading.

7. We have the right to reproduce statements made in the forums.
The Chronicle of the Horse may copy, quote, link to or otherwise reproduce posts, or portions of posts, in print or online for advertising or editorial purposes, if attributed to their original authors, and by posting in this forum, you hereby grant to The Chronicle of the Horse a perpetual, non-exclusive license under copyright and other rights, to do so.

8. We reserve the right to enforce and amend the rules.
The moderators may delete, edit, move or close any post or thread at any time, or refrain from doing any of the foregoing, in their discretion, and may suspend or revoke a user’s membership privileges at any time to maintain adherence to the rules and the general spirit of the forum. These rules may be amended at any time to address the current needs of the board.

Please see our full Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

(Revised 1/26/16)
See more
See less

No unrecognized or schooling shows for ULR's ...

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • I've helped write a few laws....it isn't brain surgery. It isn't that hard to do...unless you are not clear on what you are regulating or trying to slip something by people or too many cooks in the kitchen. This "rule" is so badly drafted that it isn't funny. So what it implies to me is that they want it ambiguous enough that they can say it means what ever they want....and change what they say the rule means to suit their mood. BS that I do not support.....and it does raise a lot of red flags.
    Last edited by bornfreenowexpensive; Nov. 16, 2012, 10:18 AM.
    ** Tact is the ability to tell someone to go to hell in such a way that they look forward to the trip. ~Winston Churchill? **

    Comment


    • If it were as easy as believing a press release isn't open to interpretation & sanctioning as the FEI see's fit - this rule itself is unenforceable, and could cause quite the headache for something unenforceable. For instance, make your show a 'Society show' and you are fine. Eventing Derby society, Exclusive Dressage Society, Grand Prix Jumper Society. A 'small show' and you are OK (wtf is a small show, btw? some of the local shows can get a huge turnout, more so than a rated. so by exhibitors? prize $? plenty of local shows have more entries than Rolex, lol!) Heck, decide you are part of 'etc etc' and do as you see fit. And if FEI decided to place limits & terms to acceptable non-threatening competitions, how are they not restricting trade, and causing a large barrier to entry? Think about how difficult it is for venues to get show dates with USEF/USEA. FWIW, you don't just have to be bad to be considered a monopoly, bigness - which is something the EU is fond of attacking - is enough for antitrust suits.

      I highly doubt any of the above situations will fly with the FEI, and they will apply the rule as they see fit. When they apply the rule (if they are allowed to keep this rule in place), they will eventually have to explain their real intent. I hope that when they do that, it's somewhere in the US.

      My issues have widespread roots, largely based on the implications that this type of behavior has on our overall economy, and 'big business.' Many are quick to attack big business, but are also quick to wonder why they didn't get the job offer after the interview at that BB. So when a big & bad business operates as such in front of our noses, we can look the other way because it doesn't affect us, because some backless press-releases make it all OK. Why does an eventer care about AQHA? The FEI counts on this. It's sad how hypocritical & self-absorbed our country is becoming. When we finally all agree that somethings amiss, it's usually too late - think about all those mortgages. As JER has alluded to, the crux of the matter w.FEI revolves around the fact that the governing body, is also the promotional body. Now they've evolved into the body that wants regulates income in their disciplines. That's not where their noses belong. With all that said, I like to see some righteous furor amongst the smurfs I wish I had more time to look into this GB that is FEI, and those that influence the rule proposals.

      Originally posted by Divine Comedy View Post
      This thread exasperates me (mostly because of the extreme reactions BEFORE receiving clarification on the rule, it was too absurd a rule to not need clarification)
      DC - do you really think there would have been clarification & a press-release if people didn't raise hoop-lah? Passive inaction, waiting for someone to clarify a rule that should have been detailed before publishing, is naive. As naive as thinking that 'reason' can apply to the FEI & their decisions.

      Comment


      • Seems to me that this is a blatant case of "restraint of trade", since athletes who want to ride in the Olympics or WEG, have to be members of the FEI, and now the FEI is telling them where they can and cannot show, thereby limiting the amount of prize money they can compete for.

        And the FEI is restricting these top riders from competing on their sponsors horses at competitions where $$$$ is offered. This is a horrible rule.

        It will end upin court very quickly. Power v. money. Dangerous adversaries.

        That said, I sure am glad that Bobby Costello can ride my horse in a Charity Mini Prix and a Jumper Derby in the next 2 months. And that Charlie Plumb, Will Faudree, Mark Weissbecker, et al, can show in the starter horse trials and "pipe openers" that are held at CHP in the winter.
        "He lives in a cocoon of solipsism"

        Charles Krauthammer speaking about Trump

        Comment


        • USEF and FEI officials have assured us they are busy reviewing the rule and composing clarification about it. I think this furor caught them a bit unaware, and from what I gather, there are some legitimate reasons behind the rule change. They just didn't realize some unexpected ramifications.

          Stay tuned--we're just waiting for the legal departments of both organizations to put out official releases.

          Thanks, Molly

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Molly Sorge View Post
            USEF and FEI officials have assured us they are busy reviewing the rule and composing clarification about it.
            Why does that line not really give me warm fuzzies.

            Maybe I missed something, but so far, the public has gotten two "releases" from the FEI, nothing official from any other NF and the rule as stated still reads as it started. I think the commentary in EN was pretty spot on. A clarification is not a "What we meant to say was", in a rule book, it is being clear in the rule its self so it is not open to interpretation either by lawyers or the general public. This is not a tempest in a teapot, I feel it is a valid set of concerns relating to an organizing body that placed a rule across many disciplines that has some broad consequences.

            The original rule was pretty clear for it clearly raised the concerns amongst many people. So far the "releases" have only clouded the rule, not cleared it up. A rule should not be a potential tool to be used against someone, but a way to improve a structure or stop an abuse. Currently it is more the former then the latter.

            Comment


            • What was published on EN was not an official release. I don't know where it came from, but I have been assured by the FEI's manager of press relations that they have issued no 'official' clarification yet.

              I have spoken to officials about the rule who have asked me to hold their comments until USEF and FEI officials have put out more information. I'm not minimizing the concern over the rule change, but there's not much to report on until the parties involved come up with statements.

              Comment


              • some legitimate reasons behind the rule change.
                I'd love to know the reasons, because honestly right now the only one is to limit the competition and/or buffer the ego of those in the FEI... neither of which I consider "legitimate". Sorry.. I have VERY little faith in the FEI to do what is really in the best interest of the sport if it means diminishing their power grab on the horse world.
                ************
                "Of course it's hard. It's supposed to be hard. It's the Hard that makes it great."

                "Get up... Get out... Get Drunk. Repeat as needed." -- Spike

                Comment


                • Originally posted by tle View Post
                  I'd love to know the reasons, because honestly right now the only one is to limit the competition and/or buffer the ego of those in the FEI... neither of which I consider "legitimate".
                  $20.5 million reasons might be related to the Saudi bail out of the Nations Cup series, announced here on Nov 7th...can't help but wonder if the bailout came with a few conditions attached....

                  http://www.sportspromedia.com/news/fei_formalises_us20.5m_saudi_sponsorship/

                  Comment


                  • Molly, I think the only way this will be resolved is through the efforts you, EN and I'm sure others are making, and I appreciate those efforts.

                    In the meantime, what JP60 said.
                    They don't call me frugal for nothing.
                    Proud and achy member of the Eventing Grannies clique.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Lisa Cook View Post
                      $20.5 million reasons might be related to the Saudi bail out of the Nations Cup series, announced here on Nov 7th...can't help but wonder if the bailout came with a few conditions attached....
                      Well, there were those pre-Olympic doping positives of Sharbatly and al-Eid. The Saudis jumped in with a huge offer to fund the Nations Cup, then the CAS reduced their riders' suspensions so they could compete in the Olympics.

                      Again, this comes back to the problem of the regulatory body -- the organization that purports to prioritize 'horse welfare' -- also functioning as the promotional body.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Molly Sorge View Post
                        USEF and FEI officials have assured us they are busy reviewing the rule and composing clarification about it. I think this furor caught them a bit unaware, and from what I gather, there are some legitimate reasons behind the rule change. They just didn't realize some unexpected ramifications.
                        Molly, I really appreciate your time and efforts on this, and your responses back on this thread.

                        What I would like to respectfully convey to them is that - reading the rule text from the FEI - the objections listed here... were obvious, at least to me, in 5 minutes. It distresses me that their existing processes did not flag the same concerns.

                        Crowdsourcing ... which is something we can do here so easily... is a great way to explore the issues of unintended consequences for rules and other changes. It's also free.


                        It is very important to me that the letter of the rule correctly describe the intent and that the rule itself is all that is needed to fully understand how to apply it and how the FEI will apply it. Press releases are not legal documents.
                        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

                        Comment


                        • Well the problem is too that even at recogonized events some levels aren't recognized or rated...

                          Comment

                          • Original Poster

                            I would like to know what exactly it was meant to do....is it the competition for sponsorship that they are trying to address?
                            Proud & Permanent Student Of The Long Road
                            Read me: EN (http://eventingnation.com/author/annemarch/) and HJU (http://horsejunkiesunited.com/author/holly-covey/)

                            Comment


                            • Normally not a rabble-rouser, but as I've followed along this thread I've gotten disturbed by the complacency demonstrated. Listen, this rule has no direct impact on me...EVER...but it bothers me enough that I feel strongly enough to keep pushing till there is a clear answer.

                              Lets review (after 8 pages)..
                              If an athlete, horse or an FEI official participates in a
                              non-sanctioned event, such person or horse will be prohibited from
                              participating in any sanctioned events, both international and national, for a
                              period of six months thereafter. An unsanctioned event is an event that is not
                              on the FEI calendar and is not authorised by a National Federation."
                              That is the exact wording, From The Ruling. It has not changed since this "rulegate" started. Molly's own words stated there is nothing "official" so if we just roll over, that wording stands, because that is what the FEI officially states. This is not something for lawyers, this is for friggin Presidents of all NF FEI regulated disciplines to present to their memberships, not for clarification, its pretty clear, but to decide if this type of rule is viable for the sport.

                              Right now, as that rule stands, schooling shows are not sanctioned for horses or rider. Y'all can talk about the obfuscation presented by FEI, but when you look at an FEI calendar for 2012, please post which schooling show is on the FEI calendar and also authorised by the NF (USEF). That! is their criteria right now.

                              Retread, I can appreciate the thought "why do this", but in truth, the why does not matter now...They Did It! The focus is better served to say "This really sucks and you better change it".

                              I could take the view that I really don't give a hoot, because how much will this effect me, Mr. LLR that may never get past Training, but I find this rule to be wrong at its most base level and has nothing...nothing related to either the welfare of a horse or the promotion of equine sports.

                              So I would ask those who really have some power or some access to power to really push, not to clarify, but to kill this this rule.

                              Comment


                              • The FEI has legitimate concerns. The Global Champions Show Jumping Tour draws the top riders on their top horses. It competes with FEI Sanctioned shows and generally offers huge purses with a bonus at the end. It has managed to create shows in places that the FEI has been spending money for years to get competitions going. The "lesser" FEI shows have to do something to draw top riders on top horses.

                                Unless I'm mistaken, some European riders did not take their top horses to the Olympics, but saved them for the Global Champions final 2012 shows.

                                There was some discussion this year with the Global Champions about the calendar, and IIRC, some agreement of some kind was reached. But it may have been a one year thing. I believe the same people (Jan Topps (?)) are behind the World Dressage Masters, which has the potential to do exactly the same damage to FEI competitions.

                                In addition, as I posted earlier, who knows what these show series do about drugging? It's entirely possible that since they are not FEI sanctioned, they could come with their own drugging protocols or none at all.

                                The FEI is VERY serious about their Clean Sport program, and these show series have the potential to make a mockery of what they are trying to do.

                                For those who point at the Saudis, the FEI tried its damnest to keep them out of the Olympics, and it was the CAS--which covers all Sports, not just equestrian-- that shortened their suspensions. When the CAS ruled against it, the FEI then bent over backwards to get the Saudis qualified for London, and I would suspect that the Nations Cup sponsorships may have been a factor; but the rule allowing the procedure was already in place and had been for a while.
                                "I'm a lumberjack, and I'm okay."
                                Thread killer Extraordinaire

                                Comment


                                • Curiouser and curiouser . . .
                                  Always be yourself. Unless you can be Batman. Then always be Batman.

                                  The Grove at Five Points

                                  Comment


                                  • Another example competition:

                                    Foxfield in California has been running a jumper derby since dinosaurs roamed the earth. I believe it is run unrecognized, and it would pretty much have to be, because it's not a format USEF has ever supported. It draws many GP level jumper riders.

                                    Interestingly, if the issue is drug testing, California separately under state law has its own horse show drug testing program, so it is covered even though it is not USEF affiliated.
                                    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

                                    Comment


                                    • Originally posted by vineyridge View Post
                                      The FEI has legitimate concerns. The Global Champions Show Jumping Tour draws the top riders on their top horses. It competes with FEI Sanctioned shows and generally offers huge purses with a bonus at the end. It has managed to create shows in places that the FEI has been spending money for years to get competitions going. The "lesser" FEI shows have to do something to draw top riders on top horses.

                                      Unless I'm mistaken, some European riders did not take their top horses to the Olympics, but saved them for the Global Champions final 2012 shows.

                                      There was some discussion this year with the Global Champions about the calendar, and IIRC, some agreement of some kind was reached. But it may have been a one year thing. I believe the same people (Jan Topps (?)) are behind the World Dressage Masters, which has the potential to do exactly the same damage to FEI competitions.

                                      In addition, as I posted earlier, who knows what these show series do about drugging? It's entirely possible that since they are not FEI sanctioned, they could come with their own drugging protocols or none at all.

                                      The FEI is VERY serious about their Clean Sport program, and these show series have the potential to make a mockery of what they are trying to do.

                                      For those who point at the Saudis, the FEI tried its damnest to keep them out of the Olympics, and it was the CAS--which covers all Sports, not just equestrian-- that shortened their suspensions. When the CAS ruled against it, the FEI then bent over backwards to get the Saudis qualified for London, and I would suspect that the Nations Cup sponsorships may have been a factor; but the rule allowing the procedure was already in place and had been for a while.
                                      If they want to compete with the Global Champions Tour, why not find a way to offer that kind of money instead of just banning it? It's not an easy sport to make money in, and pros should have every opportunity to try and win some prize money. It's a stupid rule, just like the mileage rule.
                                      Trying a life outside of FEI tents and hotel rooms.

                                      Comment


                                      • It sounds like folks are okay with the FEI having a monopoly on competitions. Am I reading that right?
                                        Kanoe Godby
                                        www.dyrkgodby.com
                                        See, I was raised by wolves and am really behind the 8-ball on diplomatic issue resolution.

                                        Comment


                                        • It sounds like there is a lot of complacency and passive inaction going on. I'll say it again, sad. Sad far beyond the implications it has in the equine industry, as this type of nonsense is what has contributed to our entire economy. People don't seem to care until it's too late.

                                          Folks competition is GOOD - it helps keep the market honest - and why MONOPOLIES are illegal! - glad to see someone annoying the FEI. It's good for us. Why on earth is this a bad thing?!

                                          As far as drug testing, that's almost as laughable as this law. McClain Ward went to Europe and Sapphire/Ward set-down? Say what you want about that man, but that horse didn't have her career thanks to nefarious acts. How about that Canadian jumper during the Olympics?...or Becky Holder being pulled up at Rolex on Can't Fire Me? FEI can not, and should not, rule it all.

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X