Wcra Rule Clarification

[Scott Frodsham]

Luckily no dogs were disqualified at the Northern bend open for fighting. :thumbsup:

I appreciate as racing manager I should know, but please can somebody update me on the rules for re-trialing ? My understanding was that if a dog is DQ’ed for fighting that it had to go back to club racing and successfully complete 3 proving trials. :b

On Sunday a dog was DQ’ed for fighting, and re-trialed in at the end of racing. It ran off the front, and led from start to finish. It did not pass a dog, nor was it passed, so what does this prove? To me this is merely passing on the problem to next club that the dog visits! :angry:

Having had a dog DQ’ed for fighting and spending a lot of blood, sweat, and tears over a considerable length of time getting him right to race again, this to me seems like a farce! :rant:

Regards,

Scott.

 

[BeeJay]

I obviously can't comment on what happened at Gloucester as I wasn't there.

However these are the rules re reclearing dogs after they have been disqualifed at an open or champs as I understand them.

If a dog is disqualifed at a race meeting where passports have to be shown it can have 1 clearing trial at the end of racing per year. So if a dog has been disqualifed at an open or champs then it's owner can try to reclear at the end of the racing (subject to the racing managers approval) only once per year.

The clearing trial has to re create as closely as possible the circumstances which lead to the dog being disqualified.

If the dog fails to re clear then it's has to wait for 7 days and then the dog has to have 3 consecutive clean (successful) clearing trials at an WCRA affliated club. The dog is only disqualifed from competing in races where a passport has to be shown so there is no reason that it can't club race.

Again the 3 clearing trials have to recreate as closely as possible the circumstances which lead to the dog being disqualified.

BUT this is an almost impossible thing to do as we all know that each race is different so you can only run them from the same trap and with the same level of dog. In an ideal world you'd be able to run the disqualifed dog with the same dogs that were in the race where the dog was disqualifed but we all know there is no way that is going to happen. Not even on the same day when the dogs are there.

Also what happens to the 1 clearing trial only rule if through no fault of the dog or it's owners the handicapping is wrong or the dogs don't trap as you expect them to.

Do you get a chance to have another go at it or is it considered that the dogs one chance is up for that day and it has to go through the 7 day wait and 3 clearing trails.

 

[Judy]

The dog had not been disqualified before Scott so he was allowed to clear at the end of racing as per the rules.

I am not sure what the handicaps were but I can tell you that the dog in question definitely did not run off the front or the back. He was in the 2 or 3 trap. Not sure which but I am pretty sure it was the 2 trap. I know they were trying to replicate the conditions of the race and that was the trap he had been in. He may have taken an early lead which led some people to assume he was off the front. He was seen to overtake cleanly by those people that were down at the trap end however.

 

[Scott Frodsham]

I am not sure what the handicaps were Scott but I can tell you that the dog in question definitely did not run off the front or the back. He was in the 2 or 3 trap. Not sure which but I am pretty sure it was the 2 trap. He may have taken an early lead which led some people to assume he was off the front. He was seen to overtake cleanly by those people down at the trap end however.

Thanks for this Judy/Barbara. As a further question who decides if the dog clears ?

It's just my personal opinion, but I didn't think that the re-trial on Sunday was satisfactory. :b

I appreciate Barbara's point that the dogs don't always run how we expect, but would assume in that scenario a second trial would take place. :unsure:

Regards,

Scott.

 

[Judy]

The Race Manager decides Scott. He was one of the people down at the traps.

 

[Scott Frodsham]

Thanks Judy!

Hope no dogs are disqualified at the Northern straight Open or I could see myself being about as popular as a fart in a space suit!

Regards,

Scott.

 

[Mark Roberts]

i've never liked the 1 trial at the end of the day rule to re-clear dogs, the only saving grace now is that they can only trial once in any one racing season now.

Scott, the trials are (if i'm correct) arranged at the descretion of the racing manager (with his/her permission) so i'll nip to the fancy dress hire shop and pick you the space suit up. :- "

 

[BeeJay]

>I appreciate Barbara's point that the dogs don't always run how we expect, but would assume in that scenario a second trial would take place.

I would hope that that would be the case Scott but I'm not sure. Because of this 1 chance to clear at the end of racing per year rule I don't know that it would be considered tough luck. Especially at the end of racing when people are wanting to go home. Not ALL racing managers will want to allow even 1 clearing trial. Not ALL racing managers allow trialling at opens full stop I know that Geoff at Gloucester is very good about allowing trialling but they aren't all like him.

Obviously if the dog has a go during the reclearing trial the dog should be deemed to have failed the trial. But what if the trial itself doesn't work out?

I can appreciate that this is only a small matter but it could be very crucial to the owner of a dog that's been disqualified.

It would be nice to hear some WCRA views on this matter as it's their rules that we are trying to understand.

Maybe the WCRA (I can hear the committee groaning from here :lol: ) should do a teach-in every now and again to bring interested parties up to date with their racing rules. Or maybe they do but I've never got to hear about it.

There seems to be a considerable difference of opinion in what constitutes fighting for example. Oh wouldn't it be nice if all clubs were singing from the same hymn book.

With new people coming into the sport/hobby all the time it's not surprising that there is this wide range of interpretation of the rules.

 

[BeeJay]

>The dog had not been disqualified before Scott so he was allowed to clear at the end of racing as per the rules.

Nothing to do with a particular dog but an attempt to clarify the rules pertaining to all dogs racing.

From the rules I thought that a dog that has been disqualified say last year could attempt to be re-cleared at a meeting where he has been disqualified this year. The dog can't do this ONLY if it's been disqualified earlier the same year AND has attempted to reclear at that meeting. ie a dog can be disqualified 3 times in one year BUT it's only allowed to reclear at the same meeting ONCE that year which could be at the 3rd disqualification.

 

[Mark Roberts]

With new people coming into the sport/hobby all the time it's not surprising that there is this wide range of interpretation of the rules.

you've hit the nail on the head there Barbera, i'm a rule man and if it's in the rules it should be followed to the letter regardless of whether I agree with the rule or not.

but the problem is as you have stated my interpritation is differant from anyone elses and that applies to everyone in the country.

I don't feel a teach in would solve the problems as this would only serve to clarify the issue but then those present would then still go away and still interpret the rules how they see them.

A good example would be myself and Scott, we run at the same club under the same rules but very often see things differant regarding fighters and what constituts fighting.

the only way you could get round it and have consistancy would be to have 1 person sanctioned by the WCRA to act as a disq officer who would attend every open ect to act as a steward for fighter ect but who would want a job like that (no not even me despite what some may think o )

what I see as fighting many won't and vise versa.

 

[Mark Roberts]

Quoted from the new WCRA disqualifications form.

Dogs may only trial on the day ONCE per racing season

my understanding of the rule is that on the 1st offence in any one season a dog can trail at the end of racing at an open with the permission of the clubs racing manager. after that it must go back to a WCRA affiliated club and compleat 3 trials to the satisfaction of the racing manager.

 

[ChrisBishop]

It would be nice to hear some WCRA views on this matter as it's their rules that we are trying to understand.
Maybe the WCRA (I can hear the committee groaning from here  ) should do a teach-in every now and again to bring interested parties up to date with their racing rules. Or maybe they do but I've never got to hear about it. 

There seems to be a considerable difference of opinion in what constitutes fighting for example. Oh wouldn't it be nice if all clubs were singing from the same hymn book.

With new people coming into the sport/hobby all the time it's not surprising that there is this wide range of interpretation of the rules.

Barbara , I could not agree more and I myself ,not actually ever having a dog disqualified for fighting , would appreciate a teach in scenario so that whatever club open you run at at least you'll know that people in charge of disqualifying dogs all have the same interperatation of the ruling ... ) .

Oh and by the way your post sounded a little familiar... :- " ..could it be from one of our conversations about dog fighting disqualification ??? :thumbsup:

 

[Mark Roberts]

Oh and by the way your post sounded a little familiar...  ..could it be from one of our conversations about dog fighting disqualification ???  

yes it did Chris? if I remember rightly we had that descussion Sunday?

BUT how do you get rid of the human error when judging what constitutes fighting!

 

[ChrisBishop]

yes it did Chris? if I remember rightly we had that descussion Sunday?
BUT how do you get rid of the human error when judging what constitutes fighting!

You are , of course , right we did ! And human error we'll never get rid of BUT i do beleive that perhaps if the rule was worded slightly different ie not a list of what does NOT constitute to fighting , were omitted perhaps we might all see things a little more clearly . :sweating: .

My intrerperatation of it is that a dog is deemed to be fighting if it turns it's head and AGGRESSIVELY has a go at another dog , but there again I have also heard of dogs being disqualified for impedeing . What does this mean ?Is this when a dog constantly and aggresively bangs another all the way down the track impedeing the other dogs progression ?

Clear as mud ehh... :unsure:

 

[Scott Frodsham]

Sorry! cans/worms!

 

[Judy]

Is this when a dog constantly and aggresively bangs another all the way down the track impedeing the other dogs progression ?

Probably not disqualifiable IMO because if it is banging the dog next to it who can say wether it is aggressive or not. It may be just trying to cross over. Nobody can say for sure what the dog is thinking. Even if it is barking or growling, if it's not turning its head, trying to bite the other dog then you have to give it the benefit if the doubt.

Also, IMO, if it just looks across at another dog but doesn't try to bite it then it's not fighting.

 

[Mark Roberts]

IMO a dog fights (and should be disqualified) when it turns it's head towards the dog next to it and actually tries to bite any part of the dog next to it.

but bumping and barking while running is often mistaken for fighting but again how do you get rid of human error and the differances in views?.

you do then see the odd dog that persistantly runs along side another bumping it all the way down the track this can and often does change the result of a race but where would you then draw the line between acceptable and unacceptable bumping ?

edited to change bumming to bumping :b

 

[Darcia]

Hi All,

I agree that this is an extremely difficult subject to interpret and as such is open to individual opinion. The current rules (well, my interpretation of them) allows for any discrepancy between judges. A dog has one opportunity to prove itself in the unlikely event that it was flagged when it shouldn't have been. If it was a genuine mistake from the judge or a one-off for the dog in question it will clear at the end of the day - if that same dog has a problem the next week then the procedures are clear to follow.

This seems to cover most eventualities although is not ideal in all situations (i.e. your comments Scott about passing the problem on to the next race manager).

 

[Mark Roberts]

It does not help to argue/openly comment about the decision after it was made.

Well said Darcia, I sometimes wonder where the sportsmanship has gone from racing.

on a possitive note Darcia our day out at the Gloucester Open was great, had a good time even if I did have to suffer a kiss from Steph after Smartie won :wacko: I now feel sorry forTony :- "

 

[Darcia]

Cheers Mark, I don't think that many people realise just how much effort goes into running an open. Everyone was great on Sunday and really rallied round to make it run smoothly. It was lovely when we finally got home at about 8 on Sunday night and could finally sit back, relax and have a proper look at some of the results.

Go Smartie!! (and Sky, Squeaks and Frosty who won their groups too)