Newly illegal crownpiece

[spencerlucy]

Do it! I joined the board of my professional organization after the then executive made some questionable decisions that were illustrated just how far out of touch with the membership.

We did switch the one horse back to his Fairfax in time for the Third Level Freestyle Championship this morning which he won. Two days earlier he had to go in a cobbled together bridle with a Passier crownpiece and it was evident he wasn’t happy in it. Proper fitting equipment really matters.

The stupidity of this rule aside the bigger issue is the timing of the roll-out. It really should have taken effect in December once the season was done. They also need to provide TD’s with better education and examples of what is legal so they aren’t having to make stuff up on the fly.

[DownYonder]

@rothmpp

I wish I could say that it surprises me that the USEF instituted a rule change in the middle of regional championships. Especially since this rule went effective October 1st. So more than half the regions had already had their championships. So not even running regionals under the same set of rules for all regions. But it doesn’t surprise me. At all.

This is not a major safety issue that requires an immediate change. It is a minor tack rule change that easily could have waited for a December 1 effective date, like every other rule change usually has.

I don’t know which is the stupider scenario:

1. USEF didn’t realize the timing of the rule change would occur while Regional Dressage Championships were being held
2. USEF was aware the timing of the rule change would occur while Regional Dressage Championships were being held - but didn’t care.

[endlessclimb]

We can change this rule mid-year to protect horse welfare…

But we can’t change that rule that actually protects horses from abuse until December 1.

#logic

[SillyHorse]

My experience with USDF/USEF is that, with a few exceptions, they’re not the brightest bunch.

[ParadoxFarm]

Maybe every competitor at every show for a period of time should go line up and ask the TD about their bridle. Maybe it would show how inefficient that method is.

[atr]

They could have used that time to Decenber 1 to actually publicize this new rule, too. I read my Connections magazine, I’ve been on USDF and USEF websites recently, but I’ve not consciously seen hide nor hair of an announcement about this. It feels like they’d rather just catch people out.

And no, I haven’t done a pre-show read- through of the rule book. I check it out at the start of the season. Which I think is not unusual.

[Cowgirl]

Please update on this. I have three of the illegal HP-6 that I have to replace and three of these.

[athelas]

The absolute [edit] irony of this when Fairfax has data galore to actually PROVE their tech.

[Cerise]

I feel like I got a non-answer asking if the Nirak bridle’s noseband would still be allowed with a different crownpiece.

The Nirak bridle is not permitted as is, due to the crownpiece of the bridle. Any padding must be smooth and continuous across the poll while on the horse, and rectangular or in the same shape as the crownpiece. Crownpieces with interrupted padding or padding of uneven thickness on the underside are not permitted.

Annex A is a supplement to the USEF Dressage Rules, but we will be working on an update.

And a non-answer in response to my concerns about Annex A not being updated either. I’m sure they’re getting tons and tons of emails about this but I feel like a better response is warranted. You KNOW people use Annex A to double check rules, you can’t just leave it unedited for an indefinite amount of time. It’s a source you provide to competitors, it’s unacceptable for it to not be up to dare.

[yaya]

@rothmpp

I wish I could say that it surprises me that the USEF instituted a rule change in the middle of regional championships. Especially since this rule went effective October 1st. So more than half the regions had already had their championships. So not even running regionals under the same set of rules for all regions. But it doesn’t surprise me. At all.

This is not a major safety issue that requires an immediate change. It is a minor tack rule change that easily could have waited for a December 1 effective date, like every other rule change usually has.

Actually, the rule change went into effect on September 1st, which is before any Regional Championships started (but not by much).

But I agree, they could have waited until December 1.

[poltroon]

I don’t have one of these bridles, and am not showing this year, but:

1. it’s absurd for a bridle with a gap at the poll to be illegal. Those look super comfy. Show me the data.
2. There’s no reason this needed to be an emergency.
3. Even rule book nerd that I am, I don’t think I would have expected a rule change like this to be only a three month lead time, or seen it.
4. If you’re worried about poll pressure, it’s coming from the nosebands. Two fingers on the side is not providing relief either.

[endlessclimb]

That’s what’s blowing my mind. The woman driving these changes claims to be educated, yet hasn’t tackled the fact that we check noseband tightness at a fleshy part of the face? Puleeze.

Get a plastic taper gauge, file off the pointy end so you cant hurt a horse, and dictate that it must be able to be inserted to “X” gap at the bridge of the nose. Take the subjective out of it, and measure where it matters.

[millerra]

Well, you can check the legality of padding width with two arrows vaguely pointing at the horse’s poll on a drawing. Ahhh… no… Granted the dimensions are stated in the written rules but… good grief folks…

[Samondel]

This exists! https://www.morsandmore.com/en/accessoires/11594053-noseband-taper-gauge.html

EC did a whole pilot project with it: https://equestrian.ca/news/vital-signs-committee-update-on-noseband-tightness/

This project also resulted in a peer-reviewed paper: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/12/19/2685

[poltroon]

Although I’m really confused about the impetus here, I’m not enjoying the personal attacks on Dr. Clayton. She could be wrong - science is like that! - but I don’t think she’s stupid or evil and I really don’t think it’s helpful for people to jump to those implications. She’s not just educated but in many ways has been inventing and pioneering the field in ways that are generally beneficial.

That doesn’t mean she correctly designed this particular experiment or that the conclusions required an emergency rule change.

We can have this conversation with a spirit of getting at the truth without requiring anyone to be stupid or malicious.

(Also, I still can’t get over a rider getting a YELLOW CARD for this. C’mon.)

[endlessclimb]

I can’t think of one good reason why this crownpiece would be made illegal by someone intelligent, and someone who thinks of how many horses prefer this style. Why might they prefer it? Is it because it hurts more?

If that hurts her feelings, perhaps she should think before presenting her word as gospel to an organization who (apparently) trusts her.

[Old_Mac_Donald]

@atr

The rule is being interpreted as “any crown piece that is not one piece underneath over the poll.”

Now I’m questioning if my crownpiece will become illegal in the near future in Australia.

It’s a Bridle2Fit crown (thanks to this thread I have been able to track it down, could not remember what brand it was)

[DMK]

I thought this type of crown was under review with the FEI… I’m honestly not sure, but in annex a which shows both usef and FEI, I thought this was under review… If that’s the case, and the FEI also rules it to be an illegal piece of tack, I imagine that most national governing bodies will follow, it just makes their life easier

[atr]

Well, it’s one piece on the side that contacts the horse, which seems to be what this hoo-hah is all about.

[atlatl]

@joiedevie99

…
I need this problem like I need a hole in the head, but I’m a lawyer who cares about wording and understands our sport, and I’m tempted to run for the Board after this.

I hope you decide to do so.

When organizations don’t get fresh blood and different perspectives they stagnate.