[AmiableLabs]

Integrity. We have had this word bantered about this Forum with impunity. Just what is it?

Doing the right, moral, and principled thing, come he!! or high water.

 

[Misty Marsh]

It does'nt fly in any other type of professional or semi-professional sport so why should it fly here? Even on the surface it sounds like a bad idea, and as far as morals and values go, geez good luck finding me a large number of people these days that know the meaning.
p.s don't look at M.T.V.

 

[john fallon]

It does'nt fly in any other type of professional or semi-professional sport so why should it fly here? Even on the surface it sounds like a bad idea, and as far as morals and values go, geez good luck finding me a large number of people these days that know the meaning.
p.s don't look at M.T.V.

Sad but true.

Ed and Kevin I agree with your simplistic definition butttttttttt
The Price we are willing to pay for the Moral High Ground is an ethical dilemma in the competitive Field Trial environment. At times the price is very high. To think ?all? will pay it is naive at best. So we must have rules that mandate conduct.
john

 

[EdA]

[So we must have rules that mandate conduct.
john

John, we already have rules to mandate conduct

rules can never mandate honesty and integrity

those are characteristics that people either have or lack

instituting another rule is wasted time and effort, and will accomplish nothing other than to litter the rule book with fluff

I would prefer to expend that effort on making better judges, not restricting the ones we have

 

[john fallon]

It's back on the front burner. I think the wording of the new RAC recomendation is impotent and as such has no real value.

If there is no problem why do anything at all . If there is "Should Not" ain't gona fix it.

john

 

[John Kelder]

Term -- Judge .
In a court of law ,to avoid any appearance of impropriety, Judges do not preside where a relationship , either professional or personal , exist . The key is THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY.How does it look to an unknowing eye ? Should our standards be lower ?

I write this thinking of how I spent one of my first club training sessions with a group of ladies , mostly throwing birds and observing dogs .This was on a Thursday around 1995 . I knew even less then than I do now . (I know , hard to believe)
Saturday I dropped off my son to be a bird boy at the trial , I went to my job , telling the Prez I will pick my son up at around 4 . Trial is on the same grounds we trained on Thursday.
Go to pick up the kid , and he is at the pond where we were at on Thursday . Set up is identical to Thursday . My son described the land series on the way home . Identical and in the same field as Thursday.Two of the ladies from the training group are judging the derby , and the other two get first and second . I didn't train with them again . I had seen enough.

 

[Granddaddy]

I voted with the minority. You cannot substitute new rules for integrity. For those voting yes, the issue, I would guess, is not really integrity but the perception of influence (meaning no one really has integrity so we need rules). Notwithstanding, a new rule of the type being considered does nothing to bolster or add support to the accountability that judges already are bound by - to judge according to the rules.

And just what does "their pro" mean & what about other areas of potential influence among handlers and a particular judge? There is no end to potential situations or relationships that most of us would know nothing about.........the answer is integrity, not new rules. I train some with Chris Ledford, does that make him "my" pro. I have trained some with Paul Sletten, does that make him "my" pro. Or maybe Dave Smith, I have trained with him too & he trains a dog I co-own, or Jim Van Engen, he once trained a dog of mine. Or maybe that means I am no longer eligible to judge since one of these pros will most likely be at most any trial I might judge in the SE or WI (so maybe it is a good rule).

And BTW, there is a game that amateurs and pros alike play where the enforcement of the rules is left to the player himself - golf. It seems to me that in the game of PGA golf there is much more at stake than in our FTs, yet they continue to enforce the rules of play based upon the individual's integrity to play within the rules. I think we should too.

 

[Moosetogooseranch]

Absolutely NOT! My Vote is NO!
In fact, I think it would be a good idea for the Judges to post their sheets after every series.

 

[K G]

The Chattanooga Retriever Club is voting "NO" to EVERY currently proposed rule change EXCEPT #3.

It's time to take a stand regards,

kg

 

[Moosetogooseranch]

Term -- Judge .
In a court of law ,to avoid any appearance of impropriety, Judges do not preside where a relationship , either professional or personal , exist . The key is THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY.How does it look to an unknowing eye ? Should our standards be lower ?

I write this thinking of how I spent one of my first club training sessions with a group of ladies , mostly throwing birds and observing dogs .This was on a Thursday around 1995 . I knew even less then than I do now . (I know , hard to believe)
Saturday I dropped off my son to be a bird boy at the trial , I went to my job , telling the Prez I will pick my son up at around 4 . Trial is on the same grounds we trained on Thursday.
Go to pick up the kid , and he is at the pond where we were at on Thursday . Set up is identical to Thursday . My son described the land series on the way home . Identical and in the same field as Thursday.Two of the ladies from the training group are judging the derby , and the other two get first and second . I didn't train with them again . I had seen enough.

Makes me wonder HOW MUCH of this goes on.

 

[DEDEYE]

What about your friends/training partners judging? Is that fair? I have been tossed out several times by my friends. So, if I won, would anyone think it wasn't fair because surely I was favored?

 

[helencalif]

I think it would be a good idea for the Judges to post their sheets after every series.

An intriguing and interesting suggestion. But would the second series ever get started?

 

[TXduckdog]

Nope....pro's judging their amateurs or vice versa.

The birddog FT game has gone to hell because of this very thing. Especially on the east coast.

You can talk about integrity all you want...it's best to not even put folks in the scenario where there is the least bit oppurtunity to show preference.

Even though....it's judging the ANIMAL....but if it's so easy to remove the handler, this issue would not even be an issue, Unfortunately, human nature being what it is....and no matter the sport....dogs, horses, etc.....people will put emphasis on the human involved.

 

[zipmarc]

....In fact, I think it would be a good idea for the Judges to post their sheets after every series.

In Schutzhund competition (a sport derived originally from testing the German Shepherd Dog for breedworthiness), it is mandatory that the judge reads out loud his written comments and score of each contestant immediately after the contestant runs. When we invite judges from Germany to judge, we also must have an interpreter with integrity to translate.

The köerung (judge's written comments on the dog's character, courage and conformation) become part of the dog's official pedigree, along with its titles and health clearances (hips etc.)

Because the dog is tested in depth in the three phases of its abilities - A. Tracking, B. Obedience (ability to work as a team with handler) and C. Protection (courage in adversity), the rules prohibit the judge from judging more than about 12 dogs per day (I say "about" because there is a point system for calculating how many dogs a judge is allowed to judge, some of the "minor stakes" carry only a half point).

Schutzhund folks find it astounding that RFT/HT judges can judge so many dogs per day - they can't believe it's humanly possible for the judge to maintain mental concentration such that all the dogs are given the same level of attention.

 

[cakaiser]

Bad idea about the posting of judges sheets. What difference could it make, judges decisions are final anyway. Let's just add more controversy and arguments, and waste a bunch more time.

I prefer to think that judges are honest, until proven otherwise, not just heresay and gossip. Many times it is not cheating that causes disputed call backs and placements. It may be differing opinions on what is important, and what is not. In all my years, only know 3 people that I know for a fact, cheat. I do know many more that, IMHO, stink at evaluating dog work.

I hope that all who voted no on this poll have been getting AA judges for many years. I for one dont relish the idea that a thankless, no-pay, time consuming job, is made even harder.

The pool of good AA judges is small, if that passes, it will be even smaller, and clubs will end up with judges they know are not too competent. So, pick your poison, dishonesty, or stupidity, they both have been, and will be, around as long as there are FTs, and as long as there are people.

Stop worrying about what people think, If you do what you believe is right, that's all that matters. Believe me, if you judge, someone will disagree, dislike, and complain about, YOU.

 

[john fallon]

Bad idea about the posting of judges sheets. What difference could it make, judges decisions are final anyway. Let's just add more controversy and arguments, and waste a bunch more time.

I disagree
The problem as I see it is that Judges are too autonomous . Having to post their sheets wound provide some accountability.

john

 

[cakaiser]

I disagree
The problem as I see it is that Judges are too autonomous . Having to post their sheets wound provide some accountability.

john

How??? Are we now going to have committee meetings after every series, for every stake? Will we have votes, majority rules??

I vote for my dog to get called back and /or, win, and I get to be on the committee every single time!!! Because, I choose the committee, haha.

Rats, consensus, my judging sheets not so good, guess will not be asked to judge any more, there's a real punishment, that.

 

[K G]

It'll never happen....it's another windmill to tilt at....

kg

 

[Moosetogooseranch]

In Schutzhund competition (a sport derived originally from testing the German Shepherd Dog for breedworthiness), it is mandatory that the judge reads out loud his written comments and score of each contestant immediately after the contestant runs. When we invite judges from Germany to judge, we also must have an interpreter with integrity to translate.

The köerung (judge's written comments on the dog's character, courage and conformation) become part of the dog's official pedigree, along with its titles and health clearances (hips etc.)

Because the dog is tested in depth in the three phases of its abilities - A. Tracking, B. Obedience (ability to work as a team with handler) and C. Protection (courage in adversity), the rules prohibit the judge from judging more than about 12 dogs per day (I say "about" because there is a point system for calculating how many dogs a judge is allowed to judge, some of the "minor stakes" carry only a half point).

Schutzhund folks find it astounding that RFT/HT judges can judge so many dogs per day - they can't believe it's humanly possible for the judge to maintain mental concentration such that all the dogs are given the same level of attention.

I am all for it! It works for them.

 

[Golddogs]

Just stop professional handlers. Cased closed, problem solved. Train all the dogs you want but only run the ones you own.......................................................


Or trust that you have people of Honor sitting in the chair and move on.If you find a bad one, expose them for the cheating scum bag they are and refuse to ask them to ever judge again.

Hope to always be impartial regards