Let me preface this post by saying:
1. I'm not "fishing"
2. I'm new to the retriever game, having only attended 1 HT, have not entered any yet
3. I don't have an axe to grind with anybody- I'm just asking
Ok. I was sitting at work this morning, thinking about FT's, then National FT's. And I began to wonder if the judges in the retriever game ever have some of the trouble that referees, umpires, and judges have in other sports with the subjectivity of the sport. In football, there's instant replay for when the coach doesn't like the ref's call. I've heard it said that in the NBA a foul may or may not be called, depending on who the player is. In retriever events, I can only guess that there's a fair amount of judgment calls that have to be made in who gets called back and who does not. I imagine there are plenty of whiners in the sport as well, who are never satisfied unless a call goes their way.
So what do you think? Would most people consider the judges of our sport as being tremendously fair? Has there ever been a judge that "everybody knew" gave preferential treatment to his/her favorite handler/dog?
Now, I know I run the risk of getting flamed for asking such a question, but I assure you that I'm not trying to stir any pots. I am genuinely curious as to what the prevailing opinion is. I have a lot of respect for people that have taken the time to go to judging seminars, etc., so that newbies like me will have events to go to!