[AmiableLabs]

Well , well, well. Last night was the annual meeting and party of the Midwest FTC at Linda and Larry Waco's. There was a printout of how the clubs voted on this question at the annual meeting --

"Should amateurs be allowed to judge their professional trainers at field trials?"

In the case you have not heard, the national body voted 42-38 that Amateurs not be allowed to judge their pros.

We got to see how Ted, Keith G., Jack U., and others voted.

What about you? What do you say?

Do we avoid the appearance of impropriety? Do we make it harder to find judges?

 

[AmiableLabs]

By the way, someone at the meeting mentioned that the new rule is worded with "should" instead of "shall;" Therefore it won't be a law (per se.) but only a recommendation. :?

 

[Anthony Heath]

Kevin,

Conceptually I like it. Practically I'm not so certain. It's damned hard enough to find judges as it is, much less having to worry about whether or not that is going to exempt a pro from running the trial. Additionally, I like to think that judges do the right thing, and by that I mean the work in front of them on that given weekend. It also takes 2 judges to come to a conclusion for the weekend and I'd suspect that the 2nd judge most definately wouldn't have the same pro.

So I guess it is worth trying, but not a deal breaker IMHO.

Anthony

 

[Ted Shih]

Kevin

The Rocky Mountain Retriever Club voted against the proposed rule change for several reasons

1) If anything, the prohibition should be against pros running under their clients, not the reverse, since judging commitments are often made years in advance

2) Failure to define what the pro - client relationship was (how long a relationship, how long since pro last trained dog for client, etc.)

3) Concerns over the effect the rule would have on the club's ability to attract judges

I still am not sure what I think the answer is

 

[Jerry]

It's a difficult situation. Defining the relationship, establishing guidelines, time frames, or whatever.

Real life situation that occurred recently, within the last year. Pro has a choice of two trials to attend within reasonable driving distance. In both instances, a "client" is Judging. What does the Pro do? Stay home? Assume that at the last minute, a club has to rustle up an alternate Judge at the last minute. The Pro is already entered, in fact on the road to the Trial. One of his clients agrees to Judge. Now what???

To me, the best answer is to believe that the Judges have integrity and go with it.

Jerry

 

[Emily Faith]

I am not in favor of the rule change as it is worded. I would be in favor of a rule change that says the pro is not eligible to run under his client. Further, they have to spell out the time frame, such as they can't run under any one who has been their client within a calendar year.

 

[Jerry]

That's semi-reasonable but how do you handle the last minute change of Judges?

Jerry

 

[john fallon]

No :!:
john-The buck stops here

 

[Jerry]

No, What John????

Please explain.

Jerry

 

[AmiableLabs]

There was a day when FTs were a sport for gentlemen and ladies. It was an honorable game. I admit I am a bit of a Romantic, and like to think it still is, for the most part.

I don't like any rule that presupposes differently. That is how I interpret this rule. It presupposes that an Amateur cannot be fair when his Pro is running under him. I believe that is not true.

There should be safeguards when any judge demonstrates that s/he cannot be fair or impartial, that s/he can be dealt with properly. But to just make a blanket assumption against the honor and decency of all judges and the sport is just plain sad.

 

[Jerry]

My thoughts also!!!

In the years that I have been pouring money down a rathole, I've seen ONE instance of BLATANT favoritism of a Judge relating to his Pro.

Now one might say that "Once is too often" and I would agree with that. Shouldn't have happened, but it did.

Jerry

 

[Ted Shih]

There should be safeguards when any judge demonstrates that s/he cannot be fair or impartial, that s/he can be dealt with properly.

What safeguards do you propose?

 

[rbr]

Gee, how many more devisive controversies can we come
up with?

HT vs FT
Birds vs Rubber
MHX vs MN
AKC vs MNRC
AKC vs NHRA
HRC vs AKC
HRC vs NHRA
PRO vs AM
White vs Camo
MOM vs DAD
:roll:

Bert

 

[john fallon]

No, What John????

Please explain.

Jerry

I voted the no option in the poll ,along with close to 70% of the people that voted
As members of the FT. community .We are in our own little world with all of the same flaws, at about the same percentage as the outside world. To think otherwise, is to have one?s head buried in the sand!
john-Better safe than sorry

 

[Jerry]

OK, but explain how you would handle the "Judge change" question I asked Emily.

Jerry

 

[john fallon]

OK, but explain how you would handle the "Judge change" question I asked Emily.

Jerry

let them judge and"let the chips fall where they may" so to speak.
john-The best-laid plans of mice and men often go awry*

*No matter how carefully a project is planned, something may still go wrong with it. The saying is adapted from a line in ?To a Mouse,? by Robert Burns

 

[AmiableLabs]

What safeguards do you propose?

I am still a novice Ted. That one is out of my league.

 

[Jerry]

OK, but explain how you would handle the "Judge change" question I asked Emily.

Jerry

let them judge and"let the chips fall where they may" so to speak.
john-The best-laid plans of mice and men often go awry*

*No matter how carefully a project is planned, something may still go wrong with it. The saying is adapted from a line in ?To a Mouse,? by Robert Burns

I sort of understand some of those things, since I are a coledge graduat. What I really want to know is how your wife enjoyed the shotgun you got for her. Or did you mean that you got a shotgun "in exchange" for your wife??

Nosey minds want to know.

Jery

 

[Pat F.]

OK, but explain how you would handle the "Judge change" question I asked Emily.

Jerry

let them judge and"let the chips fall where they may" so to speak.
john-The best-laid plans of mice and men often go awry*

*No matter how carefully a project is planned, something may still go wrong with it. The saying is adapted from a line in ?To a Mouse,? by Robert Burns

I sort of understand some of those things, since I are a coledge graduat. What I really want to know is how your wife enjoyed the shotgun you got for her. Or did you mean that you got a shotgun "in exchange" for your wife??

Nosey minds want to know.

Jery

:mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

Reo who LOVES Jerry's sense of humor!!! :twisted:

 

[Jerry]

Most folks probably recognize it from Steinbecks "Of Mice and Men" but in fact it did originate with Mr. Burns.

Jerry