# vet checks at Crufts fails 2 BOB's



## dexter

Bulldog and Pekingese fail Crufts vet checks - The Kennel Club

both bulldog and peke B.O.B.'S fail vet checks at crufts today.


----------



## gskinner123

I don't completely understand the system with dog shows... did the two actually win their class and were then rejected at the veterinary check which precludes them from going further in competition at the show?


----------



## shetlandlover

I am a bit puzzled as I would have thought the dogs in 2nd place of the best of breed would have gone through to best of group instead of the ones that failed. 

I do have to say the POM was adorable!!!!!!!!!!!!!! *dies of cuteness*


----------



## lucylastic

I know nowt about showing but I assume that the judge picks as BOB the dog that most closely resembles the breed standard. For the winner then to fail the vet check, has very serious implications for the whole breed. If the closest to the breed standard doesn't pass the vet, then in theory the 2nd and 3rd placed dogs would also fail the check. This is very tough indeed on the competitors involved, but is, IMO all part of the KC trying to be squeaky clean and address recent criticisms and ensure that dogs placed are fit for function. I think the underlying message here is that dogs true to the breed standard are not necessarily the healthiest. I think we will see the breed standards change in time. Of course I may be talking garbage. As I said, I know nowt.


----------



## DKDREAM

shetlandlover said:


> I am a bit puzzled as I would have thought the dogs in 2nd place of the best of breed would have gone through to best of group instead of the ones that failed.
> 
> I do have to say the POM was adorable!!!!!!!!!!!!!! *dies of cuteness*


my thoughts exactly


----------



## gesic

Yes but the vet didnt group the breed so really its egg on the face for the judge!
One of whom was bert easdon whos peke won crufts a few years back and again then their was controversy re the possability of an operation on that dog.


----------



## DKDREAM

gesic said:


> Yes but the vet didnt group the breed so really its egg on the face for the judge!
> One of whom was bert easdon whos peke won crufts a few years back and again then their was controversy re the possability of an operation on that dog.


ah maybe the peke was related to him? I am sure i heard somewhere too that Danny (the dog) had an operation when they looked into it


----------



## Sled dog hotel

Im assuming the veterinary check is the final leg to being awarded the best of Breed and if they pass this then they can have the prize? If so then the Judges must have made the decision and already picked them as best of breed as far as they were concerned subject to veterinary check.

I thought I read somewhere that crufts were ensuring that their judges were updated as regards to critera quite some time ago. If so it cant have been very succesful then. Whoops quite an embarrasing situation then for the Judges that picked them. Shutting the gate after the Horses bolted comes to mind.


----------



## Sled dog hotel

gesic said:


> Yes but the vet didnt group the breed so really its egg on the face for the judge!
> One of whom was bert easdon whos peke won crufts a few years back and again then their was controversy re the possability of an operation on that dog.


I remember that Danny apparently had surgery to correct breathing problems if I remember correctly, came out after he won. Old boys networks alive and well then.


----------



## Sled dog hotel

shetlandlover said:


> I am a bit puzzled as I would have thought the dogs in 2nd place of the best of breed would have gone through to best of group instead of the ones that failed.
> 
> I do have to say the POM was adorable!!!!!!!!!!!!!! *dies of cuteness*


That would make sense you would think, assuming of course they passed.


----------



## PennyGC

the judge (and vet) will have to explain to the KC why they made the decisions they did... I can only assume (in the light of no information) that the judges are still of the 'old school' and the vets are ensuring the KC's desire to move forward prevails. As this will now happen at all championship shows it should mean no unhealthy dog of those breeds will be awarded a cc. It's 'tough love' I guess....be interesting to see what happens in the others.

The 'second placed' dog doesn't get the CC and no dog from that breed progresses, under the 'beaten dog' rule. Really it's down to the judges to consider health as part of the package. Be interesting to see what happens to the judge, will they be fined for their errors? Will there be appeals and those dogs enter next time?


----------



## shetlandlover

Sled dog hotel said:


> That would make sense you would think, assuming of course they passed.


Yes exactly, if 2nd place or 3rd place passed the health check then why should they not get through to the best of group?


----------



## Devil-Dogz

The problem is people will insult judges for placing a dog that is 'known' to have had treatment for medical issue, please tell me how a judge can tell this!? The treatment is to 'correct' the problems therefore it surely isnt noticable to a judge on the day? The owners entering the dogs are in the wrong, yet will continue to while being placed - and yet they will continue to be placed as are 'covering' over 'issues'.

I would like to know the 'checks/tests' that are done on the Best In Show winners, and how a dog fails/passes?

I think its a good move forward for the KC to have vets in doing these checks, but untill I know ALL the facts myself on WHY the dogs failed, how the dogs been tested and what for and other such 'important' factors I will restrain from commenting on these failed dogs themselves.

However I am one of the few that feel if a dog does fail its check once placed BOB then that breed should NOT been represented in the overall group. I mean you cant just check a dog say you havent passed your checks, so we will go to the reserve BOB and so on. It doesnt work like, and that itself would cause many more problems. If a dog fails, I guess it does for a reason (still one I would like to know!)


----------



## Devil-Dogz

shetlandlover said:


> Yes exactly, if 2nd place or 3rd place passed the health check then why should they not get through to the best of group?


If a dogs already taken a CC which they would have to compete for the BOB then you cant hand placings down.


----------



## gesic

shetlandlover said:


> Yes exactly, if 2nd place or 3rd place passed the health check then why should they not get through to the best of group?


But then its the vet who has decided BOB rather than the so called breed specialist.
I think its good that the non fit for pupose dogs are pulled from the group it might get all those so called traditionalists to either change their opinion or leave the breed to those who want to improve it.


----------



## Devil-Dogz

gesic said:


> But then its the vet who has decided BOB rather than the so called breed specialist.


Exactly and vets may well be well up there in the know of general dog health, but they are not clued up on breed traits and characteristics!


----------



## hazel pritchard

Well done to the vet who thought these dogs were not "fit" to go further in Crufts, but i think this is going to cause uproar among judges who have chosen these dogs then to have someone over rule them,
The interview i saw with the vet at crufts before this happened said he was glad the KC was looking into improving certain breeds so maybe the vet thought these dogs were in danger of breeding on certain health issues, i will look forward to the report when it comes out.


----------



## Sled dog hotel

Just had a check back and found this, it seems Danny the Crufts winner was accused of a face lift, it was the owner who apparently said the op was to help breathing?? Which under fit for function banner the KC now promote is a bit strange as one would assume breathing is quite a neccessary function.

Below is from BBC newsround report.

Crufts winner accused of having facelift 

Updated 31 March 2003, 10.38 
The winner of this year's Crufts dog show could lose his title following claims he had a facelift. 
Pekinese Danny beat 22,000 dogs to be named "supreme champion" at the world famous competition in March. 

But Crufts organisers have now started an investigation into claims that Danny had surgery to improve his looks. 


Pets who have had their appearance changed in any way are banned from entering the competition. 

Danny's owners told The Sun newspaper that Danny did have an operation last summer, but they say it was to help his breathing and nothing to do with his looks. 

They reckon the rumours have been made up by people who are jealous of Danny's success. 

"People will say anything to make mischief. We haven't done anything wrong," said Bert Easdon, who co-owns Danny with Philip Martin. 

I suppose that if the op was an "internal" Op then it may be harder, although I thought judges looked in their mouths, unless its only to check jaws and bite and things like pallet etc are not checked.

However if they have been disqualified on things like breathing or over exaggerated features like the skin folds on the face of the bulldog, ie things you can see and hear then its a pretty poor show (No Pun intended)
Be interesting to see if the vets reason is stated later why.


----------



## happysaz133

I think its great they are making progress! However it should be EVERY breed at Crufts, not just those 15. Still, its a start. I bet the dogs owners/breeders aren't that happy!


----------



## PennyGC

well it may have been beneficial for the dogs health, but then he shouldn't ever have set paw inside a show ring - because people will use him and his 'faults' will be passed on to his progeny, and people will have assumed he was medically ok, which evidently it wasn't :-(


----------



## PennyGC

Depressingly it seems the bulldog was pulled due to an old eye injury, discovered by the vet shining a light into his eye. So, nothing the judge could have seen and nothing hereditary or affecting that dog's welfare on the day... a step too far I'd say :-(


----------



## gesic

PennyGC said:


> Depressingly it seems the bulldog was pulled due to an old eye injury, discovered by the vet shining a light into his eye. So, nothing the judge could have seen and nothing hereditary or affecting that dog's welfare on the day... a step too far I'd say :-(


Thats bad! I have a feeling they would have been looking for any excuse to pull this breed just to prove a point.


----------



## Dober

I think that two dogs not passing their health checks was very embarrassing for the Kennel Club and Crufts.

I think that judges should be able to spot a lot of, but not every, health problems the dogs entered in the class' might have. I don&#8217;t know the exact tests they do, but I believe they are checking for eye problems, breathing problems, skin problems and gait problems, most much all of which can be examined without the use of any extra equipment.

Let&#8217;s not forget that a judge should be an expert in the breed they are judging, so they should be fully aware of what to look for in terms of breed specific health problems.

It will be intresting to see what the actual problems with the dogs were.


----------



## dexter

Dober said:


> I think that two dogs not passing their health checks was very embarrassing for the Kennel Club and Crufts.
> 
> I think that judges should be able to spot a lot of, but not every, health problems the dogs entered in the class' might have. I dont know the exact tests they do, but I believe they are checking for eye problems, breathing problems, skin problems and gait problems, most much all of which can be examined without the use of any extra equipment.
> 
> Lets not forget that a judge should be an expert in the breed they are judging, so they should be fully aware of what to look for in terms of breed specific health problems.
> 
> It will be intresting to see what the actual problems with the dogs were.


i agree however if in the case of the bulldog who had an alleged old eye injury a judge would not neccessarily notice it on his initial examination.breathing, movement skin problems are easily to see for anyone even ringside.


----------



## dexter

Dotti the bulldog who was being interviewed with her owner by Claire Balding looked adorable btw.


----------



## PennyGC

ok I'm now hearing the eye injury was a red herring, the dog may have one but it was pulled for breathing/nose issues... that's a relief!


----------



## the melster

I know the selected breeds have obvious problems but to me as a complete outsider it seems unfair that some breeds have to pass a vet check and others don't ?


----------



## AlbertRoss

I'm fully in agreement with health checks (preferably on all breeds though). 

What is unfair though is that the vet gives his opinion in a report which isn't available to the person showing immediately or to the judge. Nor is there any way of challenging it i.e. using a different vet, on the spot. So, if you win and the vet throws you out but later his decision is overturned (although that's unlikely) you've lost your chance to go on in that show.

It's yet another Kennel Club cock up.


----------



## jo5

AlbertRoss said:


> I'm fully in agreement with health checks (preferably on all breeds though).
> 
> What is unfair though is that the vet gives his opinion in a report which isn't available to the person showing immediately or to the judge. Nor is there any way of challenging it i.e. using a different vet, on the spot. So, if you win and the vet throws you out but later his decision is overturned (although that's unlikely) you've lost your chance to go on in that show.
> 
> It's yet another Kennel Club cock up.


I disagree that its a cock up, I def think its a step in the right direction, it seems that the KC will always be 'damned if they do , damned if they don't' in a lot of peoples eyes

ETA I have just watched the link below, it was filmed before the Vets decision and icludes an interview with the Bulldogs owner, he will be in bits at the ruling as he was at pains to show the positive traits in his dog, I am a bit disapointed that the vet can't check hearts etc and just has to use his 'eye' maybe in the future?? Will be interested to see why the Bulldog was withdrawn although I agree with the Vet check wholeheartedly I can't help feeling a bit sorry for him?


----------



## Sled dog hotel

PennyGC said:


> ok I'm now hearing the eye injury was a red herring, the dog may have one but it was pulled for breathing/nose issues... that's a relief!


I was going to say if its a genuine injury then how can they pull him for that, its not going to affect him genetically, any dog could have an accident or injury. Unless of course the vet suspected something like cataract surgery or
entropian or ectropian which I believe bulldogs can suffer from inturning out out turning of the eyelids. That has to be corrected, and can cause things like ulceration that if wont heal sometimes needs cauterisation and the eyelids stitched shut to heal it. So thats initially what I wondered was the cause. It was more a repair then a healed injury.

The thing that worries me though, which has happened in the past, is not just
that a dog wtih problems has won, its the legacy too. Winners usually end up studding lots of litters, or winning females go on to breed if they havent already, and the puppys become in demand, to start and be included in other lines, so its just sent on down to future generations. Thats what has always worried me more the long term knock on effect.


----------



## Sled dog hotel

jo5 said:


> I disagree that its a cock up, I def think its a step in the right direction, it seems that the KC will always be 'damned if they do , damned if they don't' in a lot of peoples eyes
> 
> ETA I have just watched the link below, it was filmed before the Vets decision and icludes an interview with the Bulldogs owner, he will be in bits at the ruling as he was at pains to show the positive traits in his dog, I am a bit disapointed that the vet can't check hearts etc and just has to use his 'eye' maybe in the future?? Will be interested to see why the Bulldog was withdrawn although I agree with the Vet check wholeheartedly I can't help feeling a bit sorry for him?
> Preview of Day 2 at Crufts 2012 - YouTube


I find this a little dissapointing, if the vets can only do exactly what a judge does, or not much more, whilst they could well spot things that indicate ill health or problems
that a judge would miss, if they cant use things like a stethoscope (sp) what about breeds with known heart problems? What about breeds with known hip and elbow problems and things like luxating patellas. A quick manipulation of joints and using a stethoscope (sp) isnt goint to take that long and would give a better idea if hearts and joints are sound surely. Is this just half measures again, a step in the right direction granted but baby steps only.


----------



## AlbertRoss

jo5 said:


> I disagree that its a cock up, I def think its a step in the right direction, it seems that the KC will always be 'damned if they do , damned if they don't' in a lot of peoples eyes


As I said - I'm all in favour of the health check - and that is a KC positive. However, the way in which they've gone about it is typically short-sighted and it's like many other things they do which appear to be apparent knee-jerk reactions rather than being thought through properly. (Take labelling of crates as an example).

What they should have done is to have a panel of vets and allow the competitor to challenge the first vet by picking a different vet from the panel. They should also make it 100% clear, at the time of disqualifying, what the problem was. It's simply unfair to do it the way they have.

I'm certain the vets responsible for disqualifications are doing what the KC wants, which is to prove 'Fit for Function, Fit for Life'. However, as was pointed out on yesterday's TV coverage the function that most dogs perform nowadays is being domestic pets.

It would be interesting to see firstly, the reaction of breeders in the dog press next week, and secondly, if one of the disqualified owners feels strongly enough to sue the vet who made the decision. That would rock the KC.


----------



## Dober

AlbertRoss said:


> As I said - I'm all in favour of the health check - and that is a KC positive. However, the way in which they've gone about it is typically short-sighted and it's like many other things they do which appear to be apparent knee-jerk reactions rather than being thought through properly. (Take labelling of crates as an example).
> 
> What they should have done is to have a panel of vets and allow the competitor to challenge the first vet by picking a different vet from the panel. They should also make it 100% clear, at the time of disqualifying, what the problem was. It's simply unfair to do it the way they have.
> 
> I'm certain the vets responsible for disqualifications are doing what the KC wants, which is to prove 'Fit for Function, Fit for Life'. However, as was pointed out on yesterday's TV coverage the function that most dogs perform nowadays is being domestic pets.
> 
> It would be interesting to see firstly, the reaction of breeders in the dog press next week, and secondly, if one of the disqualified owners feels strongly enough to sue the vet who made the decision. That would rock the KC.


Upon what grounds would the disqualified owners have a right to sue the vet who made the decision? When you enter into the KC shows you agree to abide by their rules. The vet was paid to judge whether he thinks the animal was a healthy example of the breed, he can't be sued for giving his opinion!

Even if a dogs primary function is to be a pet rather than a working dog, an unhealthy dog is not fit to be pet either.

Im not a breeder, but as someone who takes the health of dogs very seriously, I would be perfectly happy for a judge to carry a stethoscope and inspect my dog thoroughly for any health problems. I think it should be for all breeds, not just high profile dogs however. Unfortunately some people (breeders, breed clubs, judges) cannot obviously be trusted to do what's best for the breed they apparently love, so I think there needs to be tests.


----------



## Sled dog hotel

I dont think vets can actually speak out against another vet, There is some code of conduct in place between practising vets I believe. In the case of taking your dog to the vet for example, a vet will refer you to another vet, or you can ask for a refferal or a second opinion, and you may find out more about the condition and have further/different treatment suggested, but usually one vet will not actually comment or overide what you have been previously told or comment on the previous vets diagnosis or finding. I believe from something I read that they can actually be taken to task for it.


----------



## babycham2002

I would like to know what is in the tests? Do we know for sure?
I would also like to see it on all breeds.


The clumber spaniel has failed its tests to attain BOB breed today

The only one of the 15 breeds that will be on today.


----------



## DoodlesRule

babycham2002 said:


> I would like to know what is in the tests? Do we know for sure?
> I would also like to see it on all breeds.
> 
> The clumber spaniel has failed its tests to attain BOB breed today
> The only one of the 15 breeds that will be on today.


I think the vet checks are a good thing & a step in the right direction, better still if all had to be vet checked before receiving BOB.

I do think though its incredibly sad that owners, breeders and judges to date(presume have had to be judged & won previously before crufts) have deemed these dogs "of the best" and were too blinkered to notice they were not healthy


----------



## dexter

babycham2002 said:


> I would like to know what is in the tests? Do we know for sure?
> I would also like to see it on all breeds.
> 
> The clumber spaniel has failed its tests to attain BOB breed today
> 
> The only one of the 15 breeds that will be on today.


be interesting to see why they've failed, unfortunately we're not going to know until KC put out a statement and goodness knows when that'll be, hopefully sooner rather than later.at the moment its pure speculation as and why these dogs weren't allowed in the group.


----------



## DoodlesRule

dexter said:


> be interesting to see why they've failed, unfortunately we're not going to know until KC put out a statement and goodness knows when that'll be, hopefully sooner rather than later.at the moment its pure speculation as and why these dogs weren't allowed in the group.


Looking on the notes on KC website unless the owner chooses to make a statement you will not find out at all. Its apparently between the vet/kc & exhibitor neither vet or KC can make any comment


----------



## dexter

i see the clumber spaniel bob today was judged by one one of our top all rounders ...................


----------



## Freyja

dexter said:


> i see the clumber spaniel bob today was judged by one one of our top all rounders ...................


The judge judged whippets at a champ show not long ago. Can only say I was not a fan of her judging and certainly wont be entering under them again.


----------



## Sled dog hotel

DoodlesRule said:


> I think the vet checks are a good thing & a step in the right direction, better still if all had to be vet checked before receiving BOB. 2
> 
> I do think though its incredibly sad that owners, breeders and judges to date(presume have had to be judged & won previously before crufts) have deemed these dogs "of the best" and were too blinkered to notice they were not healthy


Maybe this is the best and only way to make a point and get the message across, do something or Else.

Thinking back to PDE2 There was a breeder or possibly they may just have been an exhibitor and owned and showed the dogs but didnt atually breed them. When asked how they feel about changes to the Bulldog they were genuinely horrified and didnt want change. Maybe this is the only way change is going to happen, penalise the ones with problems that need changing then they have no alternative to do something about the breeding and conformation, if they want to keep breeding and showing top winning dogs.

This is been my gripe about the KC all along, none of this happened overnight,
none of the problems have just suddenly appeared, its all been a gradual decline thats been going on over years. If something was done back along the problems would have not got so bad and it would likely have been easier to put it right.

Some people may knock Jemima Harrison and even Beverley Cuddy and Dogs today, but am I the only one who thinks its rather odd, that after years of sitting on their hands the KC suddenly started to move at a rather rapid pace after PDE1.


----------



## lucylastic

I may be over simplyfing the issue but wouldn't it make more sense for dogs to be examined by the appointed vet BEFORE they are judged.


----------



## gesic

lucylastic said:


> I may be over simplyfing the issue but wouldn't it make more sense for dogs to be examined by the appointed vet BEFORE they are judged.


I pity the vet if that happens!
Some classes have 3-400 entries and he/she would have to check every last one.
Dont think if that was the case that some breeds would be finished judging before the end of the show let alone the group.
Nice idea though!


----------



## chaka

When I first started going to dog shows every dog WAS checked by a vet before it entered the show venue, but this was for disease such as distemper rather than breed related health issues. There used to be huge queues waiting to go in to the show.


----------



## Sled dog hotel

lucylastic said:


> I may be over simplyfing the issue but wouldn't it make more sense for dogs to be examined by the appointed vet BEFORE they are judged.





gesic said:


> I pity the vet if that happens!
> Some classes have 3-400 entries and he/she would have to check every last one.
> Dont think if that was the case that some breeds would be finished judging before the end of the show let alone the group.
> Nice idea though!


Thinking logically then yes I agree it would make sense. However with the high numbers then it wouldnt be pratical because of time alone.
However, to get to crufts the dogs had to win a number of places at several high profile shows I believe, you just cant pitch up and enter crufts. So makes you wonder if they have these problems then should it not have been picked up before? If the problems are that bad, should they be at crufts anyway, considering it should be the best of the best.


----------



## Tanya1989

dexter said:


> be interesting to see why they've failed, unfortunately we're not going to know until KC put out a statement and goodness knows when that'll be, hopefully sooner rather than later.at the moment its pure speculation as and why these dogs weren't allowed in the group.


News >Dog World >Dog World Home >Dogworld

This has been released by DogWorld tonight, it is the Clumbers veterinary certificate with reasons on failing. They came all the way from Croatia.


----------



## Sled dog hotel

Tanya1989 said:


> News >Dog World >Dog World Home >Dogworld
> 
> This has been released by DogWorld tonight, it is the Clumbers veterinary certificate with reasons on failing. They came all the way from Croatia.


If it had ectropion then which is a problem in the breed then quite rightly so it wasnt allowed to go through. If it has conjuntivitis as well likely caused by the ectropian or its a good possibility surely the owners or handlers must have seen it. Notice he seems to have ear problems as well although that want deemed the reason. However Im assuming this is BOB again so how did the judges miss it, surely you can see red conjunctivitis eyes and notice the eyelids.


----------



## Tanya1989

Sled dog hotel said:


> If it had ectropion then which is a problem in the breed then quite rightly so it wasnt allowed to go through. If it has conjuntivitis as well likely caused by the ectropian or its a good possibility surely the owners or handlers must have seen it. Notice he seems to have ear problems as well although that want deemed the reason. However Im assuming this is BOB again so how did the judges miss it, surely you can see red conjunctivitis eyes and notice the eyelids.


I don't know how you'd miss ectropian as a judge and I really can't think of any judge who would knowingly place a dog with it :confused1:


----------



## Cockerpoo lover

So far is it the Peke, Bulldog and Clumber Spaniel that have failed their vet inspections?


----------



## DoodlesRule

Sled dog hotel said:


> Maybe this is the best and only way to make a point and get the message across, do something or Else.
> 
> Thinking back to PDE2 There was a breeder or possibly they may just have been an exhibitor and owned and showed the dogs but didnt atually breed them. When asked how they feel about changes to the Bulldog they were genuinely horrified and didnt want change. Maybe this is the only way change is going to happen, penalise the ones with problems that need changing then they have no alternative to do something about the breeding and conformation, if they want to keep breeding and showing top winning dogs.
> 
> This is been my gripe about the KC all along, none of this happened overnight,
> none of the problems have just suddenly appeared, its all been a gradual decline thats been going on over years. If something was done back along the problems would have not got so bad and it would likely have been easier to put it right.
> 
> Some people may knock Jemima Harrison and even Beverley Cuddy and Dogs today, but am I the only one who thinks its rather odd, that after years of sitting on their hands the KC suddenly started to move at a rather rapid pace after PDE1.


Agree totally



lucylastic said:


> I may be over simplyfing the issue but wouldn't it make more sense for dogs to be examined by the appointed vet BEFORE they are judged.


Aren't Crufts judges supposedly breed experts so they should have picked up the issues and not placed them - perhaps thats been part of the problem along, can't see the wood for the trees and see nothing wrong with all the problems in "their" breeds



Sled dog hotel said:


> Thinking logically then yes I agree it would make sense. However with the high numbers then it wouldnt be pratical because of time alone.
> However, to get to crufts the dogs had to win a number of places at several high profile shows I believe, you just cant pitch up and enter crufts. So makes you wonder if they have these problems then should it not have been picked up before? If the problems are that bad, should they be at crufts anyway, considering it should be the best of the best.


Quite so


----------



## rocco33

> Aren't Crufts judges supposedly breed experts so they should have picked up the issues and not placed them - perhaps thats been part of the problem along, can't see the wood for the trees and see nothing wrong with all the problems in "their" breeds


I think that's a big problem - how can you see a problem when for so long it's been the norm and the changes don't happen quickly, they evolved over time.

It's interesting that the health tests only apply to things that are covered by the judging (ie no tests for health problems that would not be able to be judged in the ring), so really, the judges have no excuse. I do think there are some who have been in the game too long to see that any change is necessary, and this will be a rude awakening for them. But interestingly, I was at a breed workshop a while ago, and the usual (for my breed), show vs working debates were brought up. It was actually the long time breed expert/judge that was much less judgemental than the newer, less experienced show folk who were passionate in their opinions


----------



## pod

rocco33 said:


> I think that's a big problem - how can you see a problem when for so long it's been the norm and the changes don't happen quickly, they evolved over time.
> 
> It's interesting that the health tests only apply to things that are covered by the judging (ie no tests for health problems that would not be able to be judged in the ring), so really, the judges have no excuse. I do think there are some who have been in the game too long to see that any change is necessary, and this will be a rude awakening for them. But interestingly, I was at a breed workshop a while ago, and the usual (for my breed), show vs working debates were brought up. It was actually the long time breed expert/judge that was much less judgemental than the newer, less experienced show folk who were passionate in their opinions


I think you've hit the nail on the head there rocco. Living with a breed does tend to have a desensitizing effect, and I know that from experience. An outsider's view should always be valued. In the case of the Clumber Spaniel, it's all too tragic as this was a top allrounder judge.


----------



## viz

I don't know if you have seen the clumber's owner been interviewed so here is the link


----------



## AlbertRoss

According to the KC the point of the exercise is that if the dog is failed by the vet then the KC will 'have a word' with the judge to remind them that health is a priority in judging.

But that then leads to an interesting thought that if (as many of them have) the dog has won CCs at previous shows then ALL the judges that awarded the dog those CCs should also be hauled in for a 'word'. In pretty much all cases you can only qualify for Crufts if you've been at least placed at a Champ show (or are in stud book, etc.)

There's also another POV. The judge could decide that all the dogs weren't healthy and he picked the best of a bad bunch. It would take a very brave judge not to award a CC at Crufts.


----------



## dexter

The Crufts BOB Mastiff has failed the veterinary inspection TODAY and has not been awarded best of breed.


----------



## pickle

Sorry I have not read every post so I don't know if any of what I am about to say has already been said.

First of all to those who didn't know it is only 15 high profile breeds that are being vet checked. I won't name them all but the vets are independent vets who were asked to "apply" for the job of assessing them for certain problems. A thorough vet check on every single dog entered at Crufts would not be logistically possible. I think it might be better if each class winner in the breed in question was examined before the challenge.

The vets were asked (I am told) to use their hands and eyes (as that is all a judge can do) plus a stethoscope. However, apparently they did bring equipment (presumably an opthalmoscope or similar) to examine the eyes. They found scratches on the eyes of the Peke and the Bulldog, this is what I heard around the ring yesterday, and was why they were withdrawn. I fail to see *if this is true*, how a minor injury like that could affect the dogs fitness and health. Besides which a judge could not possibly have seen this, so it is rather unfair to slate a judge for sending the dog through in this scenario.

Today I was told that the Clumber owner, from yesterday, was told the dog had an ear and eye infection and ectropion (which is a listed inherited condition) so, if true, that is quite valid.

I do not understand the constant KC battering. The KC are damned if they do and damned if they don't in just about everything. Those of us that show our dogs are, in the vast majority, loving and caring owners, who cherish their pets (yes they are pets first) but there are bad apples in every barrel and the KC is doing its best to ensure they do not flourish. OK, so there are those of you who don't like dog showing,- but hey live and let live. Our dogs love to be with us on our day out, and let me tell you an unhappy dog won't win

There is plenty of advice out there to help people find the decent breeders and to get a healthy puppy and the KC are doing their very best to get that information across.


----------



## DoodlesRule

viz said:


> I don't know if you have seen the clumber's owner been interviewed so here is the link


Interesting & exactly the comments I expected to be honest


----------



## DoodlesRule

Mastiff failed as well


----------



## Severus

The vet is only allowed a pen torch, no stethoscope/thermometers etc. They do not fail the dog themselves, but give recommendations which the KC then chose to act/not act upon.

This is the clumber that failed the vet check:









The ectropion is visible in the photo.


----------



## Snoringbear

The Dogue BOB passed the health test today. The judge was checking eyes, ears, nose and wrinkles.


----------



## Jazmine

Bit confused, I thought it was only those 15 breeds that were subject to a BOB vet check, but on the Crufts show on More4 they keep saying that ALL BOBs are subject to it? They've said it several times now and I don't know which is true?


----------



## pickle

It is 15 breeds Jazmine, probably just the commentators slip of the tongue.


----------



## babycham2002

pickle said:


> It is 15 breeds Jazmine, probably just the commentators slip of the tongue.


as pickle says


----------



## Jazmine

pickle said:


> It is 15 breeds Jazmine, probably just the commentators slip of the tongue.


I thought it was a slip of the tongue too, but I've noticed them saying it on several occasions throughout the TV coverage. So maybe the commentator has got the wrong end of the stick but nobody seems to be correcting them for the next time!


----------

