BrittanyS Posted October 4, 2010 Report Share Posted October 4, 2010 Why would it being a "huge national event" make a difference if the conditions are unfit for competition? If they canceled it, you can be certain that people would sue for them canceling it. That wouldn't be the case if people only drove like 1-2 hours to get there but since they flew there, took vacation time, etc., the directors figured 'might as well continue on and let handlers make the decision for themselves.' Besides, when entering an agility competition more often than not you have to sign a waiver for yourself and your dog (For the comps I've been to anyway). And I agree that this is getting out of hand, almost an agility vs. herding argument. I hope I haven't offended anyone with any of my posts, as this was not my intention. I love both my agility and herding peeps. <3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrittanyS Posted October 4, 2010 Report Share Posted October 4, 2010 or ... not worry about it because the idea is not to run the sheep, the dogs, or the handler around the course. Calm, effective movement of livestock. Good point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSnappy Posted October 5, 2010 Report Share Posted October 5, 2010 "... sheepy people ..." Nice. Yep, I'm into equal opportunity mockery, in good fun. Geez people, I thought the discussion of whether or not it was a good idea to run in adverse conditions, and whether those adverse conditions were dangerous or not was interesting. Most interesting is that the people quickest to judge were the least likely to be participating in it! I think only one other person in the whoooole thread decided to reserve judgment based on the fact that they themselves were not at the trial. The video was obviously made for shock value (admittedly accompanied by shitty tunes) but there were no reported injuries from the EO to dog or human, and it already happened - and it's a really rare thing that a trial would end up so muddy (IOW, Mudgility is not an extreme sport or anything) ... so really, this is all so much an exercise in pointless arguing! I for one though will assume that the majority (not all) of the agility folks I know are also smart enough humans to take a calculated risk, but one based on knowing what they can and cannot do, and what their dogs can and cannot do safely. How come nobody else gives other human beings credit for having brains? They aren't all mindless, ribbon obsessed overcharged competitors who want to win at any cost. Why does everyone assume that this is what agility people are universally made of? RDM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sue R Posted October 5, 2010 Report Share Posted October 5, 2010 How come nobody else gives other human beings credit for having brains? They aren't all mindless, ribbon obsessed overcharged competitors who want to win at any cost. Why does everyone assume that this is what agility people are universally made of? RDM Wherever did you get this idea? I don't feel this way and never meant to imply that I do - about agility people, flyball people, disc dog people, sheepdog/cattledog trial people, whoever - but I do feel there are at least some people in every venue who consider winning to be the most important thing. Anyway, here's to good dogs having a great time doing what they do well and enjoy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.