Any rule discussion should begin with a recognition of two principles. First, writing good rules is very very hard and second, no rule can make everyone happy. Also, please note that the open rules forum is just an open discussion for proposed rule changes and it is not certain that the rule changes will actually be approved by the USEF. With this in mind, let’s get to the discussion. Malcolm Hook led the rule discussion. Here is an overview of the most notable rule change proposals, saving the most interesting for last:
False starts — The false start rule change proposal is to eliminate the current 5 second penalty for leaving the start box before your start time. One potential issue with this is that without any penalty for leaving early more riders might false start more often. Brian Ross proposed that it might be time to think about eliminating the start box all together and just using a start line. This makes a lot of sense to me but this is yet another example of something that will probably only happen if the FEI also decides to change their rule.
Doing away with hollow PVC rails — A proposed change to the SJ fence construction wording would require top rails to have a wood core which would allow for either solid rails or the plastic rails with wood cores. This would not affect the warmup jumps and there didn’t seem to be any major objections from the room.
Larger advanced and intermediate divisions — At the request of the PHC, this rule change eliminates the rule that currently forces organizers to break up intermediate and advanced horse trial divisions with more than 40 entrants. This change gives organizers more flexibility and the potential for more prize money in intermediate and advanced. Again, this rule seemed to have wide support from the attendees other than a few wording clarifications.
Eliminating the one fall rule for training level and below — Let’s talk about falling off. This rule change proposal has been much discussed over the past several years and earlier this year the USEA Board voted unanimously to suggest a repeal of the one fall rule for training and below to the FEI. This would allow riders at training level and below to remount after the first fall of the rider. The current proposed wording is the same as the pre one-fall-rule-wording except that the rider can get back on only if he or she maintains control of the horse during the fall. There was a lengthy discussion about the best way to handle this so as to avoid encouraging riders to dangerously hang onto their horses while falling. This portion of the rule is clearly still under discussion.
There are two very legitimate sides to this issue and I’ll try to present both sides in their best form. One side of the one fall rule argument; Malcolm Hook emphasized the idea that there is no such thing as a “nothing fall.” He mentioned a story about a hunter rider who fell off several weeks ago when her horse bolted at a show. She got up, said she was fine, and went back to the stables. 30 minutes later she had symptoms of concussion and a few hours later she passed away from a brain injury at the hospital. That’s an anecdotal argument, but the big concern with this rule is that there is not a good way to make 100% sure that a rider is fine when you let them get back on their horse.
There is a liability issue here, but former USEA President and defense attorney Kevin Baumgardner said that legislating eventing against liability is simply impossible and we need to look at the safety issue first.
The other side of the issue is that fallen rider surveys indicate that 66% of falls happen at the lower levels and many of the survey respondents expressed interest in having an opportunity to finish what they started, continue to educate their horse, etc. The anecdotal model for this argument is the rider at novice level who pops off at the third fence and lands on their feet. A strong argument from proponents of the rule change was that riders do not want to have this safety issue legislated to them. One contributor to the discussion said that most of the time riders know enough about safety to know whether they can or can’t continue.
President Sabo spoke and said that the overwhelming feedback from USEA riders is that they do not want a one fall elimination rule. He mentioned that the Board of Governors feels strongly about changing the rule to eliminate the one fall rule for training and below. President Sabo also reminded the room that this opinion is based on considerable information from a British Eventing study that we have written about several times on EN.
The British Eventing study was a six year study which showed that having had a fall, a rider was no more likely to have a fall later on course. In the British Eventing study 40% of riders who fell elected to not continue. Admittedly, this study did not evaluate whether or not the riders had a brain injury when they got back on after the fall. British Eventing has decided to let riders get back on after one fall at any level. President Sabo also mentioned that British Eventing has happily lived without a one fall rule for a number of years.
The rule change will likely go through slight wording changes throughout today and it will be voted on by the USEF’s Eventing Technical Committee Saturday morning. Let’s have a quick Eventing Nation straw poll, admitting that we still don’t have final wording for the rule. We had a very similar poll on EN in June with 70% of voters supporting a change. Vote below:
Go eventing.
