RAC Proposal 2 - verbal backs

[FOM]

This is another proposal I think worth discussing:

Proposal NO.2
Add as a paragraph to the Supplement to the Standard Procedure under the section titled uAbilities Acquired Through Training" immediately before the paragraph titled "Delivery of the Bird" the following new paragraph.
"If, after a dog has been sent on a mark or a blind retrieve and while the dog is in motion, a handler gives the verbal command (back' to the moving dog, such a command is likely a method of intimidating and forcing the dog, which is a serious handler fault and sufficient cause for elimination. A 'back' command after the dog has been stopped by a whistle, or has popped, with or without a hand signal should be judged as a cast."

[FOM]

So i have a question - how long of a delay can a verbal be given? For example this past weekend I gave a cast after stopping on the whistle, Bullet did not respond as crisply as I wanted, so I gave him a verbal back, but by that time he had already turned and heading back - the delay was about 3 seconds. Under the proposal are we packing our bags?

FOM

[Ted Shih]

I think it is a stupid proposal for two reasons

1) The judges have the discretion to drop that dog already for poor style, courage, you name it ... this is just another example of eliminating the discretion judges have

2) I think that some people will drop you for the delayed back ... even though that is not the intent of the rule

[Anthony Heath]

Hi Lainee,

If this were to be approved, I think that it would depend on the judge as to your fate.

It seems to me that this is an answer to a nonexistent problem. As a judge I would prefer to make the call on this situation and the resulting penalty.

AH

[Barry]

I think it is a stupid proposal for two reasons

1) The judges have the discretion to drop that dog already for poor style, courage, you name it ... this is just another example of eliminating the discretion judges have

2) I think that some people will drop you for the delayed back ... even though that is not the intent of the rule

I am in total agreement, I think a lot of this is already covered in the book and is normally interpreted the same by all. While I see where this might be going, there are two different scenarios in this rule change. There are three different scenarios already in the rule book.

A back on a mark if it is referring to the style of the dog is a automatic handle and your probably going to be drooped for that because of the style and the cast.

A delayed verbal back on a blind or a pop will account for another cast. There are two different situations in this change, one is a pop the other is a verbal given during the commission of a cast, which is always been at the discretion of the judges how they judge it. A delayed verbal is a beautiful thing if you get it.( ie cast toward the shore to tighten up the line but not land) And will score high in my judging book.

1 According to the rules stopping the hunt or ignoring the bird on a mark is a serious fault "stopping the hunt" Popping usually happens in this instance.

2 Popping on a marked bird before an extensive hunt is a moderate fault.

3 Popping on a blind retrieve where there are no extenuating circumstances is a minor fault.

Why are all of these scenarios treated the same at a trial, if you commit one I can understand being droped, if you commit two and three which are moderate and minor faults you also get dropped.

Congrats by the way to Buffy for letting you stand next to her the past two weeks. Pretty Cool.

[Wade]

I am in total agreement, I think a lot of this is already covered in the book and is normally interpreted the same by all. While I see where this might be going, there are two different scenarios in this rule change. There are three different scenarios already in the rule book.

A back on a mark if it is referring to the style of the dog is a automatic handle and your probably going to be drooped for that because of the style and the cast.

A delayed verbal back on a blind or a pop will account for another cast. There are two different situations in this change, one is a pop the other is a verbal given during the commission of a cast, which is always been at the discretion of the judges how they judge it. A delayed verbal is a beautiful thing if you get it.( ie cast toward the shore to tighten up the line but not land) And will score high in my judging book.

1 According to the rules stopping the hunt or ignoring the bird on a mark is a serious fault "stopping the hunt" Popping usually happens in this instance.

2 Popping on a marked bird before an extensive hunt is a moderate fault.

3 Popping on a blind retrieve where there are no extenuating circumstances is a minor fault.

Why are all of these scenarios treated the same at a trial, if you commit one I can understand being droped, if you commit two and three which are moderate and minor faults you also get dropped.

Congrats by the way to Buffy for letting you stand next to her the past two weeks. Pretty Cool.

Barry, they might as well change the moderate fault of a pop to a serious or major fault. If you do it in an AA stake, 99.9% of the time you are done. No matter what.

Ted, congrats on the nice spring. I hope it continues for you and your friends thru the summer Colorado circuit.

[Ted Shih]

Thanks guys, Buffy is running well

She had a tooth pulled, so we won't have a chance to get three in a row

But, Mootsie and Mozzie are running well, and will, I hope, pick up the slack

[FOM]

Thanks guys, Buffy is running well

She had a tooth pulled, so we won't have a chance to get three in a row

But, Mootsie and Mozzie are running well, and will, I hope, pick up the slack

Don't take it personally, but thanks for giving the rest of us a break

FOM