RCP2014#12 – Assistance when no groom

2014 RCP #
Assistance when no groom
Date Received
Hardy Zantke
Change Date
Next Rulebook
Closed for comments: 01Sep13
Recommended for Approval: 15Sep13
Initial Posting: 01Jun13

New Article 926.3.6 – Outside Assistance:Permitted Assistance

For turnouts without a groom on the carriage,
should groom assistance be needed, the driver may stop and ask for such
assistance from any capable person, who may then act as a
groom rendering the necessary help, and the turnout shall be penalized
with the normal “groom down” penalty.

Article 917.2.7 – Participation:The Athlete and Grooms

Addition:  See 926.3.6

Reason for change

To end uncertainty about how to handle and penalize
such needs in dressage and cones.

24 Response(s)

  1. shadowbrook says :

    August 4, 2013

    I agree.

  2. Candis says :

    August 4, 2013

    Should apply to all situations including marathon.

  3. MikeRider says :

    August 5, 2013

    This is just for combined driving, correct?

  4. Marjean McIntyre says :

    August 5, 2013

    I agree with this rule. It needs to be clarified and I think this is the fair penalty.

    I also agree that it should apply to all situations not just marathon.

  5. cmoss41 says :

    August 5, 2013

    I agree with this proposed Rule addition, to assure Safety First for competitors. It should be in effect for all phases, including Dressage, Cones and Marathon, both inside hazards and on course.

  6. hoofnit says :

    August 6, 2013

    This should be consistent in A, B and C.

  7. SandraHoyt says :

    August 6, 2013

    This is an important rule change that will clear up a bit of confusion, but I think it needs additional clarification to specify equines under 120cm in Competition B-inside Obstacles. This would clarify how a single small pony or VSE turnout would be penalized should they need to ask for assistance inside an Obstacle. If they had a groom present, they would put the groom down for assistance and so would get the groom-down penalty.

    However, as this RCP is currently written, it could indicate that the small pony or VSE turnout could be penalized for a groom down if asking for assistance during any phase. Correct me if I’m wrong, but turnouts with grooms who put a groom down in Section A, D, or E outside of the obstacles, are not currently penalized. Thus, equines under 120cm should not be penalized if requesting assistance (to avoid an unsafe situation) during those phases and outside of obstacles.

    1. keithy says :

      August 21, 2013

      There are groom down penalties listed for in Competitions A, B & C.
      In Competitions A & C it is call “groom dismounting”
      Article 903.3 provides the definition for dismounting
      Article 937.1.11 for groom dismounting in Competition A
      Articles 956.5.2 & 957.13 for groom dismounting in Competition C

  8. keithy says :

    August 6, 2013

    I support this change.
    While this will be listed in a section that applies to all competitions, adding the wording “In Competitons A, B & C . . .” would provide further clarification and hopefully avoid confusion.

  9. Marjean McIntyre says :

    August 7, 2013

    I agree with Sandra that for the marathon it should only apply inside obstacles, so maybe clarify that it would only apply the same as the groom down penalty applies to other turnouts i.e. when another turnout would incur a groom down penalty, a vse or small pony turnout would be assessed the penalty if assisted by a person on the ground, which I think is really the intent of this RCP.

  10. cathyjo76 says :

    August 11, 2013

    I also agree with Sandra’s post.

  11. Iris says :

    August 12, 2013

    I agree but it needs to include the same groom down penalties as are in Competition B.

  12. Price says :

    August 13, 2013

    I agree with Sandra’s post. Small ponies and VSE’s should not be penalized for not having a groom when other turnouts would not be if they put a groom down. but in a hazard if they need help, then having the same penality as other is fair.

  13. love2083 says :

    August 13, 2013

    I agree with Sandra’s post.

  14. Laurel says :

    August 19, 2013

    agree with Sandra’s post.
    Thank you

  15. raymansur says :

    August 19, 2013

    The rule change as suggested appears well worded. Since there is no groom down penalty “normally applied” between obstacles in section B, most of the above concerns are arguing against a situation where no penalty should be assessed. I agree with the change as presented

  16. Donene McGrath says :

    August 19, 2013

    I agree with Sandra Hoyt’s post. (On marathon, the only penalty should be imposed inside an obstacle.) I support the clarification and intent of this RCP; VSE’s and small ponies need to be able to have assistance when needed but have clear rules about how to go about it and what, if any, penalties will be imposed.

  17. Zantke says :

    August 20, 2013

    Just to clarify: My rule change suggestion does NOT restrict it to Dressage & Cones, so does also apply to the Marathon – for turnouts without grooms = VSE’s and Small Ponies. (I only made the mistake in not mentioning the Marathon in my Reason for Change). So we all should be fine with it the way the RCS is written.

  18. Zantke says :

    August 20, 2013

    …and to Sandra’s concern: My RCS says “shall be penalized with the normal groom down penalty” thus it follows, where normally there would be NO groom down penalty – like on the marathon outside of hazards as long as the carriage is at the halt, VSE’s and small ponies would also then not get a groom down penalty under my RCS.

  19. S Johnson says :

    August 23, 2013

    I agree with this change.

  20. cepinwv says :

    August 26, 2013

    I agree with the change as worded.

  21. CaroleSweet says :

    August 26, 2013

    Agree with above mentioned clarifications.

  22. ohiohorses says :

    August 28, 2013

    yes make it clear

  23. Pam Biggi says :

    August 30, 2013

    I support this change.

Comments are closed.