Post by sylviag on Jul 13, 2012 10:41:41 GMT -4
Yes, it's me again..................
After reading the eventing selection competition criteria, general criteria and Hayley Beresfords case details I feel somewhat disheartened. It would appear at first glance that Hayley had a good point in relation to selection/nomination event (s) and the cut off date for the short list, but....................those familiar phrases: extenuating circumstances, discretionary nomination, selection panel may excuse a horse & athlete combination from compliance with the selection/nomination event(s). According to all of the criteria the dressage selection process was done legally. Someone correct me if I am incorrect but the point seems to be that Hayley met the criteria but due to selectors being able to take into account extenuating circumstances, use of discretionary nomnation powers etc another rider was able to be selected. What is the point in nomination events/cut off dates?
Just as I have in common with a lot of parents, what competition plan do we advise our young riders (children) to come up with? Aspiring eventers need to read these documents before starting the very expensive, time consuming & physically demanding journey.
It seems to me that the essence of it all is that selectors have far ranging and wide reaching general criteria with which a rider/horse can be selected or not selected at their absolute discretion. Even if you follow/attain the competition criteria there are many reasons that you can be overlooked for.
Much of the general eventing criteria is not measureable in competition terms (g)(iii.) the ability of the Athlete to contribute towards an effective team environment.
This seems to be the type of criteria that would be based on people's personal opinion. Does it mean that you may have the best performances going but if it is considered that you would be unable to contribute towards a team environment then you are not selected?
Is there any guidance/courses/seminars/psychology/councelling offered to athletes along the way so that they have every chance of meeting this type of criteria?
(f) Where the aspect of current form is to be considered, performances at recent events may be taken into account in comparison to performances achieved earlier. For the purpose of the nomination criteria, recent will generally relate to performances in 2012. The issue of the soundness of the horse will be taken into account in considering the aspect of the current form.
So when planning your campaign, do you concentrate on consistent early 3 star performances for 3.5 years or do you leave it until the last 6 months/recent performances? It would appear that good performances earlier or recently are acceptable but what a dilemma for the rider?? Plan on consistent early performances, you might get selected, you might not. Or only worry about recent performances in the last 6 months and hope you have a few good performance, you might get selected, you might not. Which way do you go??
The easier & less expensive option would be to worry about the last 6 months but, no guarantees.
Would be interested to see what other people's interpretations of the criteria are.
After reading the eventing selection competition criteria, general criteria and Hayley Beresfords case details I feel somewhat disheartened. It would appear at first glance that Hayley had a good point in relation to selection/nomination event (s) and the cut off date for the short list, but....................those familiar phrases: extenuating circumstances, discretionary nomination, selection panel may excuse a horse & athlete combination from compliance with the selection/nomination event(s). According to all of the criteria the dressage selection process was done legally. Someone correct me if I am incorrect but the point seems to be that Hayley met the criteria but due to selectors being able to take into account extenuating circumstances, use of discretionary nomnation powers etc another rider was able to be selected. What is the point in nomination events/cut off dates?
Just as I have in common with a lot of parents, what competition plan do we advise our young riders (children) to come up with? Aspiring eventers need to read these documents before starting the very expensive, time consuming & physically demanding journey.
It seems to me that the essence of it all is that selectors have far ranging and wide reaching general criteria with which a rider/horse can be selected or not selected at their absolute discretion. Even if you follow/attain the competition criteria there are many reasons that you can be overlooked for.
Much of the general eventing criteria is not measureable in competition terms (g)(iii.) the ability of the Athlete to contribute towards an effective team environment.
This seems to be the type of criteria that would be based on people's personal opinion. Does it mean that you may have the best performances going but if it is considered that you would be unable to contribute towards a team environment then you are not selected?
Is there any guidance/courses/seminars/psychology/councelling offered to athletes along the way so that they have every chance of meeting this type of criteria?
(f) Where the aspect of current form is to be considered, performances at recent events may be taken into account in comparison to performances achieved earlier. For the purpose of the nomination criteria, recent will generally relate to performances in 2012. The issue of the soundness of the horse will be taken into account in considering the aspect of the current form.
So when planning your campaign, do you concentrate on consistent early 3 star performances for 3.5 years or do you leave it until the last 6 months/recent performances? It would appear that good performances earlier or recently are acceptable but what a dilemma for the rider?? Plan on consistent early performances, you might get selected, you might not. Or only worry about recent performances in the last 6 months and hope you have a few good performance, you might get selected, you might not. Which way do you go??
The easier & less expensive option would be to worry about the last 6 months but, no guarantees.
Would be interested to see what other people's interpretations of the criteria are.