Selection of a Special Kind

Editorial - Blue BookRecently, I witnessed how a DC has actually applied and enforced the rules in the “Blue Book”. Much to the dismay of the affected exhibitors whose horses were disqualified because they did not show up on time in the collecting ring and thereby missed the common walk round in the main ring (see rule 23b “Exhibits, that appear late (missing the walk around the ring), will be excluded from the class.”). The exhibitors did not understand that the mistake was on their side, instead they said “but the DC’s at other shows are not so strict!”

Another example: A judge applies the whole range of the scoring scale, and gives a “4” for faulty legs. The judge, thanks to his professional training as a veterinarian, has knowledge of the matter, he is sure of what he is doing, and even makes a note why he gave this score. The horse owner is shocked, a “4” is a scandal, the explanation of the judge is of no interest to him, since the two other judges have given a “standard 6”. Clearly, those two are right, the one is completely wrong. He goes mad and yells at the organizer, “If you ever invite this judge again, I will not be back!” That would be a paying customer less.

I suspect, the organizer will neither invite this judge nor this DC again, because there will be other DCs that are more popular among the exhibitors by looking the other way, and there will be other judges who will be more popular by giving high marks. The result is a certain selection – unfortunately in the wrong direction, because in this way, DCs who are applying the rules and judges who exploit the whole range of scores, are “sorted out”. So they only have the choice to remain faithful to their line, and to be no longer invited, or to adapt and look the other way.

However, if existing rules and policies are not equally applied and enforced for all, this will automatically give room for suspicion of nepotism. The system loses credibility, and thus support – also on the part of the exhibitors. Because, what often is not considered: While there is a loud minority that complains (the affected exhibitors), there is also a silent majority, which takes good note of a tough but fair decision.

To ensure that existing rules and standards are applied by their officials, is the task of the governing institutions. Obviously, that is not so easy, as is also shown by the case of Totilas or the scandal in endurance riding (see issue 1/2015). It would be important, therefore, to prevent these “wrong selection”, and to strengthen the back of those who are “tough but fair”. Also with public statements. Also with a different selection mechanism for judges and DCs, who should be allocated to the shows, and not be selected by the organizer.

Whether it comes to that? I do not think so. But maybe it helps already, if the one or the other thinks about it.
Gudrun Waiditschka

(Editorial “Arabian Horses IN THE FOCUS”, issue 3/2015)