[Jerry S.]

You are one of the two judges. Contestant calls for birds. After the first bird hits the ground you can plainly hear the contestant say "sit" to their dog. Your co judge does not hear anything.
For this scenario let's say the other two birds hit the ground and the contestant gets their number from the judge who did not hear anything.
You were the judge that did hear contestant talk to the dog.
What do you do?

 

[bjoiner]

Tell my co-judge and drop the dog. Inform handler ASAP.

 

[Tim Carrion]

Tell my co-judge and drop the dog. Inform handler ASAP.

Let the dog run the series, the problem may take care of itself. It takes both judges to drop a dog. We can discuss it at the time of callbacks or placements. If this is a minor stake we may decide it is a control break.

Tim

 

[bjoiner]

Let the dog run the series, the problem may take care of itself. It takes both judges to drop a dog. We can discuss it at the time of callbacks or placements. If this is a minor stake we may decide it is a control break.

Tim

I would assume the dog ran the test since the co-judge gave him his number. I would let the dog finish the test. I like to discuss issues like this with my co-judge as soon as they occur (after dog has run) and then have the marshal or us tell the handler ASAP. That way they don't hang around all day thinking they are back and maybe it will jog their memory a bit.

 

[Ted Shih]

I would tell the handler to pull his dog off the line. I would clear the holding blind behind the judges. I would talk to my co-judge about what to do. Unless it is a minor stake, the dog is not coming back. I am not a fan of the problem may take care of it school. I observed a serious fault, and cannot ignore it.

 

[Tim Carrion]

You were the judge that did hear contestant talk to the dog.
What do you do?

The bigger dilemma for me would be what I would do as the judge who DID NOT hear the handler say sit.
Not in favor of dropping a dog for something I did not witness.

Tim

 

[Daren Galloway]

The bigger dilemma for me would be what I would do as the judge who DID NOT hear the handler say sit.
Not in favor of dropping a dog for something I did not witness.

Tim

Unless I had a reason to think my cojudge would lie to me, I'd default to them.

 

[Sabireley]

It does say “shall remain quiet”, so there is no wiggle room. I would defer to my co-judge if I did not hear it for some reason.

 

[Tobias]

Is it common for judges to come to an agreement on these sort of scenarios before an event?

examples might include
see the handler intimidate the dog
see the handler touch the dog
hear verbal before released and after birds were called for
see handler pinch lip for a sticky mouth or step on toe

and if one judge is watching the honor dog/handler and the other is watching the birds thrown/working dog...

 

[Tom Cheatham]

Is it common for judges to come to an agreement on these sort of scenarios before an event?

examples might include
see the handler intimidate the dog
see the handler touch the dog
hear verbal before released and after birds were called for
see handler pinch lip for a sticky mouth or step on toe

and if one judge is watching the honor dog/handler and the other is watching the birds thrown/working dog...

I am new to judging, but I don't think all these things are discussed prior to an event but should be watched for by both judges. However, per the rulebook, judges should discuss in advance:

1 - instructions to handlers
2 - who signals for birds
3 - who calls the dogs number
4 - each judge has liberty to say "no bird"
5 - every bird retrieved should be inspected (preferably by the judge not calling numbers)
6 - who gives instructions to handler if dog is to be picked up
7 - running or crippled birds - judges should decide in advanced how to deal with runners should problem arise
8 - judges should decide how to deal with encountering of wild birds
9 - agree in advance on creeping and if dog should be brought to heel before sending. (also in minor stakes, judges should agree about the degree of controlled break)

 

[Sabireley]

That’s a good list. the rule book could be organized a bit better and a section for pre-stake preparation that included this kind of a checklist would be useful.

1 - instructions to handlers
2 - who signals for birds
3 - who calls the dogs number
4 - each judge has liberty to say "no bird"
5 - every bird retrieved should be inspected (preferably by the judge not calling numbers)
6 - who gives instructions to handler if dog is to be picked up
7 - running or crippled birds - judges should decide in advanced how to deal with runners should problem arise
8 - judges should decide how to deal with encountering of wild birds
9 - agree in advance on creeping and if dog should be brought to heel before sending. (also in minor stakes, judges should agree about the degree of controlled break)

 

[Sabireley]

For those interested in judging questions and the rule book, the Retriever News bi weekly newsletter has a judges corner column with questions submitted and answered by FT and HT judges. If you have a question or topic you think is interesting, you can submit it through a link in the newsletter. A couple of people on this thread are regular contributors.

 

[tigerfan]

It does say “shall remain quiet”, so there is no wiggle room. I would defer to my co-judge if I did not hear it for some reason.

I don't see it as so black & white, as your no wiggle room comment indicates. One judge hears "Sit" the other doesn't....so to him the "shall remain quiet" was not violated.
Takes two judges to drop the dog.
The OP states that I am the judge that heard it, and my co judge didn't hear it. The OP does not state which judge was closest to handler, how close was gallery or the next dog in the holding blind, was it windy etc etc
I like MANY of us that play this game have compromised hearing. So in that scenario I would tell my co judge that I thought he said "sit"
But if it were a soft "sit" that I thought I heard and the dog had been rock steady, I would be amenable to questioning what I heard and give any doubt to the dog team

 

[Jerry S.]

Let's say in this scenario that the judge that heard the word "sit" clearly, told the co-judge while dog was on the way to the go bird flyer.
Now what transpires?

 

[captain2560]

I would tell the handler to pull his dog off the line. I would clear the holding blind behind the judges. I would talk to my co-judge about what to do. Unless it is a minor stake, the dog is not coming back. I am not a fan of the problem may take care of it school. I observed a serious fault, and cannot ignore it.

I don't see it as so black & white, as your no wiggle room comment indicates. One judge hears "Sit" the other doesn't....so to him the "shall remain quiet" was not violated.
Takes two judges to drop the dog.
The OP states that I am the judge that heard it, and my co judge didn't hear it. The OP does not state which judge was closest to handler, how close was gallery or the next dog in the holding blind, was it windy etc etc
I like MANY of us that play this game have compromised hearing. So in that scenario I would tell my co judge that I thought he said "sit"
But if it were a soft "sit" that I thought I heard and the dog had been rock steady, I would be amenable to questioning what I heard and give any doubt to the dog team

In the original post the judge that was closest to the dog is usually the one that does the calling or signaling for the birds to be shot. The other judge who is usually a little farther away either with honor dog or closer to bird rack is the one who plainly hears the handler say sit after the first bird hits the ground. If I was the judge closest to the dog and heard nothing while I was watching the birds and the dog on line, and my co judge who was farther away says the handler said sit I would have a hard time summarily dismissing a dog for an infraction I didn't hear. This week's judge was last week's contestant and I know there are some vindictive individuals in the sport. It takes 2 to drop a dog and I would have trouble in this case if I was closest to dog and heard nothing. Nothing to do with this scenario but how do two individuals look at the hunts on the same dog and have 2 different hunts on the same dog when looking at placements? And each is sure that they are correct and the other judge has made a mistake? All these things requires 2 judges communicating and making a fair decision.

 

[drunkenpoacher]

Is it common for judges to come to an agreement on these sort of scenarios before an event?

examples might include
see the handler intimidate the dog
see the handler touch the dog

These are not rule violations so I don't know what the agreement or scenario would be.

 

[Tobias]

These are not rule violations so I don't know what the agreement or scenario would be.

touching the dog to prevent breaking is. to make the dog drop a bird.


25. No handler shall (1) carry exposed any training equipment (except whistle) or use any other equipment or threatening gestures in such a manner that they may be an aid or threat in steadying or controlling a dog; (2) hold or touch a dog to keep him steady; or (3) noisily or frequently restrain a dog on line, except in extraordinary circumstances, from the time the handler signals readiness for the birds to be thrown until the dog’s number is called. Violation of any of the provisions of this paragraph is sufficient cause to justify elimination from the stake. During the period from the moment when the handler signals readiness for the birds to be thrown until the dog’s number is called, the handler of the working or honoring dog shall remain silent. Also, in all marking tests during such period, the handler’s hands shall remain quietly in close proximity to his body. A handler who projects his hand during such period, whether for the purpose of assisting his dog to locate a fall or otherwise, should be considered to have used a threatening gesture, and his dog penalized accordingly.

I used the wrong word... Threaten..
synonym for 'threaten' --- 'intimidation' Synonyms of threaten | Thesaurus.com

 

[drunkenpoacher]

touching the dog to prevent breaking is. to make the dog drop a bird.


25. No handler shall (1) carry exposed any training equipment (except whistle) or use any other equipment or threatening gestures in such a manner that they may be an aid or threat in steadying or controlling a dog; (2) hold or touch a dog to keep him steady; or (3) noisily or frequently restrain a dog on line, except in extraordinary circumstances, from the time the handler signals readiness for the birds to be thrown until the dog’s number is called. Violation of any of the provisions of this paragraph is sufficient cause to justify elimination from the stake. During the period from the moment when the handler signals readiness for the birds to be thrown until the dog’s number is called, the handler of the working or honoring dog shall remain silent. Also, in all marking tests during such period, the handler’s hands shall remain quietly in close proximity to his body. A handler who projects his hand during such period, whether for the purpose of assisting his dog to locate a fall or otherwise, should be considered to have used a threatening gesture, and his dog penalized accordingly.

I used the wrong word... Threaten..
synonym for 'threaten' --- 'intimidation' Synonyms of threaten | Thesaurus.com

That is a lot different than,
"intimidate the dog" or "touch the dog"
Two often quoted "rules" that are not in the rule book.

 

[Ted Shih]

Rule Book, page 33 "During the period from the moment when the handler signals readiness for the birds to be thrown until the dog’s number is called, the handler of the working or honoring dog shall remain silent"

Pretty black and white to me. Handler shall remain SILENT. Handler was not silent.

If you judge enough, you will miss things because you are always multi-tasking. That's why it takes two working together. That's why I take Daren's position - I trust my co-judge unless I have good reason not to do so.

 

[Tom Cheatham]

That’s a good list. the rule book could be organized a bit better and a section for pre-stake preparation that included this kind of a checklist would be useful.

I take no pride in authorship as I pretty much took that list directly from the rulebook in “Trial Procedure Part I” in the section starting with “Judges Responsibility On Line” on pages 44 -45.