AN is like having a really talented employee that is a complete and total pain in the ass. So or later you just need to get rid of him.
It looks like NZ has good depth of riders and horses, and is not in real need of AN.
This is stupid posturing on both sides. ENZ doesn’t look any better with their childish return-to-play policy.
As for the ‘assault’ – well, what if this is about horse welfare? All sides agree that AN was upset about the lack of monitoring of Nereo while on an IV drip. Maybe there’s more there. Maybe the horse has a history of not being a good patient. Maybe no one was watching the horse. Maybe AN had described the horse’s needs in great detail, received assurances, then discovered that no one was paying attention to the horse. All kinds of things can go wrong when a horse has a line in.
The point I’m making here is that early in this thread, people commented on AN’s lack of regard for his horses. But then we have an incident in which he is apparently so upset about the care given his horse that he spatially relocates a veterinarian. So which is it? Or is it simply that AN’s behavior crosses too many lines of politesse and acceptable comportment?
AN is a very, very special case in eventing. Until he was in his 40s, over twenty years into his international career, he was a very solid rider who had the occasional big win but was mostly known for his ability to get anything around an XC course. Anything. That was the problem. His horses usually weren’t of the highest quality, and his overall results reflected that. He has talked about how he decided to change that, to invest personally in quality horses, to be more discerning about the caliber of horse he’d take on.
This is at a point where he’s enough of a name to have a solid business and an easier life. But he wanted to be #1, to actually become the best, and he did it. I hope everyone here can realize – and appreciate – how difficult that is and how much focus that takes.
Normal it’s not. IME, ESNZ is lucky to have him and should be more accommodating. I suspect we’re not privy to the passive-aggressive goading that goes on among ESNZ sport personnel who don’t like AN (and they may have very good reasons for this) but that kind of behavior is immature and petty, and provoking AN should not be confused with good sport.
“Andrew’s a reliable individual but it can’t be at any cost,” Vicki told the Herald. “We can’t let him determine his own fate, ride at his own pace and not follow a collective decision.”
Meanwhile, Andrew is singing a very different tune: “If I’m good enough and needed for Rio, it’ll be on my terms,” he said. “The Olympics are not until next year. They could change their attitude if the main players run out of horses.”
Just so rude. I don’t care how good you are, you have to play in the sand box.
If you can’t play well in the sand box you don’t deserve to build a sand castle.
He HAS been #1, he is someone that a lot of people respect for his riding style. This is taking it one step too far.
I agree that both sides are being childish, but they clearly aren’t in desperate need for him and it looks like he needs to be knocked off his big ego a little right now. You can be awesome and not be a total ass.
I still don’t get it, an IV drip, you have a GROOM to keep an eye on the horse. This way the VET can tend to other horses while yours stand, munches on hay and gets an IV drip. It wasn’t AN and his horse, there is a team of people, and I’m sure quite a few who could sit and watch the horse.
We will never know the whole story.
JER- talent does not give you a free pass on behavior. That is the problem in most major US sports and why professional athletes get away with criminal behavior all the time. It is not right in any sport.
I don’t care how special you think you are or how talented you are, it does not mean it is okay to physically assault anyone or even be verbally abusive, which apparently he is on a regular basis. He admits he assaulted the vet and in an earlier statement he essentially admitted that he was verbally abusive to the vet (did not use that term but it was clear from what he said and his admission that he went too far). This is not a case where we don’t know what happened- he admits it.
ESNZ decided to set rules for if he wants to play on the high performance team and he won’t sign the athlete agreement that is required of all athletes. I don’t care how passive aggressive ESNZ may be behind the scenes, it is pretty clear who crossed the line here and it is not ESNZ.
Completely agree regarding the posturing - both sides are playing the media here, so we should be very careful to not think we have the whole story. That being said, I can completely understand why ENZ might take the position that physical altercations are absolutely 100% unacceptable. That said, the ‘return to play’ terms have not been made public to my knowledge, and they may very well be attempting to try to control AN more than is reasonable. Or maybe the terms are reasonable. Particularly if there are other incidents to which we are not privy.
As for the ‘assault’ – well, what if this is about horse welfare? All sides agree that AN was upset about the lack of monitoring of Nereo while on an IV drip. Maybe there’s more there. Maybe the horse has a history of not being a good patient. Maybe no one was watching the horse. Maybe AN had described the horse’s needs in great detail, received assurances, then discovered that no one was paying attention to the horse. All kinds of things can go wrong when a horse has a line in.
The point I’m making here is that early in this thread, people commented on AN’s lack of regard for his horses. But then we have an incident in which he is apparently so upset about the care given his horse that he spatially relocates a veterinarian. So which is it? Or is it simply that AN’s behavior crosses too many lines of politesse and acceptable comportment?
I’ve always found it interesting that no one has clarified whether the horse was under any one’s care. Was a groom present? Was the vet with another horse, or off having a drink? Those are important details and no one seems to be filling in the details - there may be some dirt on both sides of this issue so, personally, I’m watching both sides with some scrutiny. That being said, I went and found the quote I had paraphrased from an earlier article in my post above:
[i]‘Robust discussion’
Andrew maintains his horse Nereo was left without veterinary assistance when he was put on a routine rehydration drip following the cross-country. He said he had to ask someone to find the vet, which led to a “robust discussion and an argument”.
“That’s not what you expect at a world championships for a horse of that calibre,” Andrew told The New Zealand Herald on Sunday. "Also, there were only two horses [Nereo and Jonelle Price’s Classic Moet] to look after at that stage of the competition.
“That was the sole basis for why I was angry. I regret the incident but I’m not going to apologise.”[/i]
I suspect that ENZ and his teammates may find that sort of attitude problematic. There weren’t just two horses to care for after XC, there were 5. As I mentioned earlier, Wesko in particular likely required care even if he wasn’t going to be show jumping the next day. It would be quite poor horsemanship to think otherwise. That being said, this quote may be out of context, or perhaps Wesko and Leonidas were perfectly fine by that point of time. We don’t know - but that sort of quote does raise some questions in my mind about the reasonableness of AN’s position re: horsemanship. Again, the physical altercation is something that a governing body MUST take issue with. They have certain responsibilities to their staff and the other teammates.
Edited to add source article for the quote above: http://www.horseandcountry.tv/news/2014/11/02/andrew-nicholson-withdraws-nz-squad
[QUOTE=bambam;8212498]
ESNZ decided to set rules for if he wants to play on the high performance team and he won’t sign the athlete agreement that is required of all athletes. I don’t care how passive aggressive ESNZ may be behind the scenes, it is pretty clear who crossed the line here and it is not ESNZ.[/QUOTE]
The articles say that AN hasn’t signed the athlete agreement. I’m not sure that he ‘won’t’ sign it. One article said something to the effect that he needs to sign it to come back to the team but the athlete agreement is just a formality.
An athlete agreement is something that you need to sign each year if you’re going to be representing a country internationally. In many sports, you may never be selected but you need to sign the agreement if you want to be considered or go to qualifying competitions or whatever. I have to sign a similar agreement as a coach.
As soon as AN agrees to ride for NZ, he will sign the agreement as part of that process. Otherwise, he can’t participate. It’s just not a big deal.
ESNZ says all he needs to do is sign it to “come back” (although that won’t get him on the Aachen team which is what he is demanding). I agree it should be a minor issue- they all have to sign it.
AN seems to think that he’s bigger than NZ sport. It all boils down to that. The fact is that right now he needs NZ Sport more than NZ sport needs him. That might change as horses come and go, but to have Tim and Jonelle Price, Jock Paget, Mark Todd, Caroline Powell, and even Blythe Tait coming back means that NZ will start a very competitive team even without AN. And the Team will only be four persons, not five.
Perhaps NZ Sport has been dreaming of the time that they can bin AN, and that time has finally come.
[QUOTE=vineyridge;8212577]
The fact is that right now he needs NZ Sport more than NZ sport needs him. [/QUOTE]
The only thing AN needs is a good horse.
He’d do just fine never riding for ESNZ again. ESNZ can’t stop him from winning Burghley, Badminton, and so on.
An NSF can be every bit as mercurial, unfair, corrupt and unpleasant as any individual athlete. What’s more, the NSF can inflict all that on the athletes.
For some reason, we have this quaint notion that sport orgs exist for some noble ideal of the good of the sport. Not necessarily at all.
[QUOTE=JER;8212653]
The only thing AN needs is a good horse.
He’d do just fine never riding for ESNZ again. ESNZ can’t stop him from winning Burghley, Badminton, and so on.
An NSF can be every bit as mercurial, unfair, corrupt and unpleasant as any individual athlete. What’s more, the NSF can inflict all that on the athletes.
For some reason, we have this quaint notion that sport orgs exist for some noble ideal of the good of the sport. Not necessarily at all.[/QUOTE]
Except that AN wants an Olympic Gold Medal - he has to play ball for that.
I don’t disagree that NSF are capable of all kinds of wrongs, but do you have anything to point to with respect to ENZ here, or is that just speculation? Kind of hard to have a debate/discussion, if some people are operating on additional information.
No excuse for the physical conduct but I thought the issue had to do with the horse being left totally unmonitored/unsupervised and for some reason I thought the groom was not allowed to be there? So it was unsupervised horse in contention on a drip which might have caused concern from a horse health perspective and also (in ligbt of the bad test results in such competitions lately) from a tampering with said horse issue.
Sorry, but no one should be making excuses for someone who is actually physically assaulting someone, no matter the circumstances. So he was angry? OK, a verbal lashing is just as effective in getting a point across.
I don’t care how good of an athlete someone is, or how much a team does or does not need someone. This is the problem in so many different pro athletic arenas. Bad behavior of the violent variety off the field/course/whatever is NOT OKAY and SHOULD get you booted.
Who cares if we/they/whoever win competitions if we lose our humanity in the process?
/soapbox
[QUOTE=PaintedHunter;8212694]
Sorry, but no one should be making excuses for someone who is actually physically assaulting someone, no matter the circumstances. So he was angry? OK, a verbal lashing is just as effective in getting a point across.
I don’t care how good of an athlete someone is, or how much a team does or does not need someone. This is the problem in so many different pro athletic arenas. Bad behavior of the violent variety off the field/course/whatever is NOT OKAY and SHOULD get you booted.
Who cares if we/they/whoever win competitions if we lose our humanity in the process?
/soapbox[/QUOTE]
This. So much this.
I cannot believe people are actually excusing his behavior in this situation. A verbal exchange is one thing, but it is never, ever ok to physically assault someone because you don’t like how they did their job.
I don’t care how competitive or driven you are. Physical violence is unacceptable.
Again not saying anything excused putting hands on somebody-- but similarly I am not sure it is accurate to say he put his hands on somebody AND it was over a prima donna demand, in addtion to the concern for sabotage and the advantage of having a third party supervising the IV for that reason, there did seem to be some other concerns:
http://www.horse-canada.com/cuckson-report/sometimes-riders-are-bigger-than-the-team/
""For as objective an account as is feasible to get, I am inclined to rely on this Facebook post by Annabel Scrimgeour, a long-time aide of Nicholson, British List 2 dressage and FEI eventing judge. She has decades of experience of what it’s like in the stables after a fraught cross-country day from both rider and officials’ points of view.
Annabel wrote: “Nobody was expecting him [the vet] to be there the whole time, but regular checks (sic). Remember this is a different situation to a horse getting fluids in a clinic during the course of the day. He [Nereo] was late in the day to run so it is even more important to get the job done quickly and efficiently so the horse has time for rest before the trot-up the next day, earlier than usual as they then had to travel to the sj venue [from Haras du Pin to Caen]. It is not like he was rushed off his feet. Two [NZ] horses had gone home, one had jumped six fences, another was out of the competition and the individual horse had competed earlier and was finished and put to bed.” “”
Verbal abuse should also be unacceptable. After all, aren’t these athletes calling themselves “professionals”?
[QUOTE=PaintedHunter;8212694]
Sorry, but no one should be making excuses for someone who is actually physically assaulting someone, no matter the circumstances.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Divine Comedy;8212702]
I cannot believe people are actually excusing his behavior in this situation. A verbal exchange is one thing, but it is never, ever ok to physically assault someone because you don’t like how they did their job.
I don’t care how competitive or driven you are. Physical violence is unacceptable.[/QUOTE]
Then why isn’t ESNZ saying this?
If ESNZ took the physical assault – admitted to by AN – seriously, AN would be out of the program pending various legal charges and investigations.
But this is not what they’re doing. You can soapbox and grandstand all you like, but ESNZ is not taking that approach to this incident. Why not? What is their obligation to the team vet? Why isn’t the team vet pursuing legal action against AN?
I agree with you JER - it was noticeable from the beginning that all the parties were glossing over the actual details. Perhaps they got legal advice… perhaps someone is suing?
[QUOTE=JER;8212774]
Then why isn’t ESNZ saying this?
If ESNZ took the physical assault – admitted to by AN – seriously, AN would be out of the program pending various legal charges and investigations.
But this is not what they’re doing. You can soapbox and grandstand all you like, but ESNZ is not taking that approach to this incident. Why not? What is their obligation to the team vet? Why isn’t the team vet pursuing legal action against AN?[/QUOTE]
So what I’m getting from your posts is that it’s completely okay to verbally and physically harass a vet that should be taking care of your horse? Whether this vet was or wasn’t, you’re saying it was okay to do this to another human being? I feel sorry for the vets you may work with if you think this attitude is okay.
We never get the full story, never will, unless you know more back story than we do… but whats written on paper(online) is all we have right now, and either way both parties are being 2 year olds and its NOT okay to harass ANYONE because you feel entitled.
Clearly something is hidden, but I can’t believe you think that this behaviour is OKAY.
[QUOTE=LadyB;8212800]
So what I’m getting from your posts is that it’s completely okay to verbally and physically harass a vet that should be taking care of your horse? Whether this vet was or wasn’t, you’re saying it was okay to do this to another human being? I feel sorry for the vets you may work with if you think this attitude is okay.
We never get the full story, never will, unless you know more back story than we do… but whats written on paper(online) is all we have right now, and either way both parties are being 2 year olds and its NOT okay to harass ANYONE because you feel entitled.
Clearly something is hidden, but I can’t believe you think that this behaviour is OKAY.[/QUOTE]
I don’t think JER was saying the behavior was okay…
