Moderator: Peter Butterfield
Gareth wrote:What do people think if the idea of general petition to RAFT asking for a national review of the rules and development of a judges guide. This would mean people around the country drumming up the neccessary support.
Gareth
goldy wrote:Jason Ferris wrote: Now with the sport at an all time low, in numbers as well as quality - Judges are at a premium in most States - and many of them are relative newcomers - so as the numbers decline, so does the quality.
Cheers, Glen
Me again....
Glen, I think that this statement is a very big call to make but I'm sure you've given it much thought and consideration. I wasn't around for the great old days where the sport was booming and entry numbers were very high in all states so I can't make any comparisons. I am loathe, however, to say that the quality of dogs currently being trained and trialled is at an all time low. Given the difficulty of the runs set at the State Championships and the National I think it is testament to the calabre of trainers and dogs that we had the finishers we did. I know that the handlers of these dogs have put in 100's of hours of training to reach this standard and congratulate all for their supreme efforts.
I am also concerned that this thread might be construed as a "judge bashing" forum, something which I believe it was never intended to be. Retrieving Trial judges give up their time free of charge. They stand out in the heat, rain or wind and set up and mark run after run. When we bomb out and go home, they stay there and keep judging until the end. Judging is largely a thankless task - the only person happy with the runs you set is the person who wins. Mostly everyone else will be griping and whinging for some reason or other. This behaviour, I'm afraid, is timeless.
We don't need to make it harder for judges to become judges - its hard enough to get them anyway. I've also participated in some great trials judged by "relative newcomers". In fact, I've found that new judges seem to put on the well constructed runs aimed at the appropriate level of difficulty. Its not until later in their judging career that they seem to deteriorate into exceedingly difficult or poorly constructed runs. Its almost as if its thought that you're not a good judge if too many dogs finish the runs you've set.
Nevertheless, I'm with you Prue - what do we need to do as handlers to make something happen? I'd like our RAFT committee to be reviewed and revised as a first port of call. As Peter says, when are they going to start representing our interests???
Kirsty
pruew wrote:Being one of the oldest triallers (in both senses of the word!) in Victoria and with a minority breed that used to be able to compete and finish in AA (I know Bob thinks they still can) I believe the standard has risen enormously.
Note that back in August the bulletin board had "Judges' Guide" as a topic - and as Qld already has one it was offered to anyone interested. Response so far is zero........
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 98 guests