Registered: Jun 2003
Location: COLLINS MO.
Posts: 218

THIS HAPPENED AT A LOCAL HUNT SAT. NIGHT. A CAST CAME IN WITH A WINNER WITH 425+. WHEN THE MASTER OF HOUNDS LOOKED AT THE CARD THE TIME AND ALL THE MATH WAS CORRECT. 3 OF THE HANDLERS HAD INITIALED THE CARD IN THE RIGHT SPOTS BUT THE 4TH HANDLER WHO WAS THE JUDGE AND CAST WINNER HAD NOT. BUT HE HAD SIGNED THE BOTTOM OF THE CARD IN THE JUDGES POSITION. THE MAN WAS SCRATCHED FOR NOT INITIALING OR SIGNING IN THE SPOT BY THE DOGS SCORE. THIS ALLOWED THE 2ND PLACE DOG IN THE CAST TO GET A NT CH. WIN WITH 275+. NO OTHER ?'S WERE ON THE CARD AND THIS TO ME SEEMS LIKE IT IS BEING A LITTLE BIT TOO RULES HAPPY. DOESN'T SEEM RIGHT TO SCRATCH A DOG BECAUSE A MAN HASN'T SIGNED BY HIS DOG'S NAME IN THE SLOT EVEN THOUGH HE HAD SIGNED AS THE JUDGE. IT ALSO ALLOWED A DOG TO GET THE WIN THAT HAD BEEN BEATEN IN THE CAST BY 150+. WAS THIS SITUATION HANDLED RIGHT OR SHOULD THE MAN HAVE FILED A FORMAL COMPLAINT? AND IF HE HAD WOULD IT OF HAD ANY BEARING ON THE OUTCOME. THIS SEEMS LIKE A TIME WHEN COMMON SENSE SHOULD PREVAIL AND LET THE TRUE WINNER WIN.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Butler, Mo
Posts: 251

I always thought Dave as long as the signature or intials was on the card it didn't matter where it was.


I think that is getting a little carried away by scratching him for that.

__________________
Bryan Davis
Rock Bluff Black and Tans
GRNITECH GRCH PKC CH Davis' Black Luke R.I.P.
NITE CH Davis' Black Sugar R.I.P.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Longview Texas
Posts: 801

The MOH was wrong,You were robbed.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: COLLINS MO.
Posts: 218

IT WASN'T IN MY CAST THAT THIS HAPPENED I WOULD JUST LIKE AN OFFICAL ANSWER AS TO IF THIS IS THE RIGHT RULING. IF IT IS WRONG UKC SHOULD MAKE IT RIGHT AS THAT MEANS THE MAN WAS CHEATED OUT OF A WIN.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location:
Posts: 136

Someone has has the problem of [ the lack of common sense] MOH was wrong.I have been in law enforcement for a number of years Rules without CS don`t work.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Kalamazoo, Mich.
Posts: 6113

As you well know, if there was not a formal complaint filed, then the outcome of that event cannot be changed. But yes, I think your friend should have filed a formal complaint. When the new Advisor Book comes out, it's right there in black and white. Hopefully that will never happen again.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: COLLINS MO.
Posts: 218

I'M NOT SURE IF A FORMAL COMPLAINT WAS FILED OR NOT. THEY WERE DISCUSSING IT STILL WHEN I LEFT. SEEMS TO ME THAT IF THE MASTER OF HOUNDS IS APPROVED BY UKC TO BE THEIR REP. THEN YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO CORRECT THIS PROBLEM. THE CLUB HAS TO PAY THE MASTER OF HOUNDS AND IT IS QUITE POSSIBLE THE MAN AND A COUPLE OF HIS FRIENDS WON'T BE BACK TO ANOTHER HUNT BECAUSE THEY FEEL CHEATED. THE WHOLE CAST WERE SATISFIED WITH THE OUTCOME WHEN THEY RETURNED TO THE CLUB NO ?'S ASKED. THE DOG THAT ENDED UP GETTING THE WIN WAS 2ND IN HIS CAST AND GOT AN UNDESERVED WIN. WOULDN'T IT HAVE BEEN BETTER TO SCRATCH THE WHOLE CAST THEN TO GIVE THE NTCH. WIN TO THE 2ND PLACE DOG. THE OTHER 2 NTCH CASTS BOTH HAD 200+ WASN'T ONE OF THEM MORE DESERVING OF THE WIN? WHAT I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO SEE IS THE MAN THAT WAS SCRATCHED GET THE WIN THAT HE DESERVES. HE WOULD BE HAPPY, THE CLUB WOULD BE HAPPY, AND THE OTHER HUNTERS IN THE OTHER CAST WOULD BE HAPPY. THIS ISN'T AN UNFIXABLE PROBLEM!

Last edited by DAVE FREEMAN JR on 08-05-2003 at 01:56 AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: COLLINS MO.
Posts: 218

.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Aug 2003
Location: West virginia
Posts: 20

Sounds to me like there was just a little buddy to buddy thing between the moh and the rest of the cast i seen this happen once here in west virginia and they scratched him for that and i seen it happen again and he didnt get scratched so u know how that goes
BlueWalkerman

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: west Ga. East Al.
Posts: 23

that would have never have happend in a PKC hunt

__________________
Take a Kid Hunting and You Want Have To Hunt Them

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2003
Location: Lockridge Iowa
Posts: 2848

Dave you are correct 1 of the other cast winners should have got the win. If the MOH scratched the dog after the card was brought in to the club house and there was no ? on the card then the MOH was saying card was not filled out correctly and it should have been throwin out. UKC can do something about this and should if they want to. They should investigate the MOH and make sure he knows the rules. They should also give the win to the right winner. I heard where there was a hunt 1 night and there were a couple of nt ch entered to get 21 dogs. When the dogs were drawn out the dogs that weren't there were withdrawn and everybody went hunting. The dog that won the hunt had a 4 dog cast and I here they found out about this and there are no winners. They never say you have to have your dog there you just need your card.lol

__________________
Tree Jar'n Black and Tans
Home of Tree Jar'n Coonhound Kennels


319-201-8445

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: COLLINS MO.
Posts: 218

I'M WITH THE REST OF YOU GUYS ON THIS. IT COULD BE EASILY CORRECTED. IT SEEMS UNFAIR TO ALL INVOLVED THIS WAY. THERE WERE 3 NT CH CASTS AND ALL HAD A PLUS POINT WINNER YET WHEN THE MAN THAT HAD 425+ IS SCRATCHED IT ALLOWED AN ACUTAL NON CAST WINNER TO WIN. THIS NOT A CASE OF HOME COOKING THOUGH BECAUSE THE MAN SCRATCHED WAS A CLUB MEMBER AND THE MASTER OF HOUNDS IS ALSO. THIS IS A CASE OF THE RULES BEING MISAPPLIED. I'M WITH STROUD CREEK IT WOULDN'T HAPPEN LIKE THIS IN A PKC HUNT ROY TRAMBLE OR LARRY MEEKS WOULD MAKE IT RIGHT AFTER AN INVESTIGATION.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Kalamazoo, Mich.
Posts: 6113

O.K., I'll take another shot at trying to explain this. First of all, licensed officials, MOH's and BSJ's are not UKC Reps. We do have Reps that work RQE's for us and in those events, the Formal Complaint procedure does not apply and yes, I'm held responsible for their decisions.

Licensed MOH's and BSJ's work for your club so that you can hold licensed events. These are average guys and gals out there giving up the chance to hunt their dog so that you can hunt yours. Some of them get paid and work many hunts. Some of them volunteer and work few hunts. At any rate, they are not interpreting the nite hunt rules backward and forward like I do 40 hours per week. If and when they miss on an interpretation (they are human right?) it is rarely a case of "home cookin" "robbing someone" etc. etc. It's a mistake, that's all.

Now, the nite hunt rules provide for us to correct simple mistakes. But there has to be a time limit to do so. The time limit that was set by whoever wrote the policy years ago is 30 minutes after the hunt. Any decision that you disagree with can be questioned up until 30 minutes after the deadline. Anything. But after that, it's over, unless a formal complaint was filed. Everyone has the opportunity to file a complaint. If you don't file a complaint, then it means that you accept the decision of the MOH. Even if you don't like it, you accept it.

For UKC to go skirt our own rules and policies and change that after the fact makes us a sitting duck for an arbitrary enforcement of policy suit. Been there, done that, don't care to again. I'm held within guidelines just like you folks are. That protects you from arbitrarily enforement of rules by big brother. Does that make sense? It is very, very consistent and has been for the more than 15 years that I've been involved.

One more thing, when a dog is scratched for a handler that did not sign the scorecard, then the next highest scoring dog in that cast that did sign the scorecard becomes the cast winner. It does not render the whole card as void. I know that's not exactly what happened here but that is how you handle it if that were the case.

Sorry that this was lengthy, just want everyone to understand it.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Aug 2003
Location:
Posts: 375

Todd, not trying to be critical and as you know I play somewhere else nowdays, but this is one of the reasons why.

Inspite of the fact that the handler failed to file a formal complaint and through no fault of his own, he is going to be penalized and a undeserving man/dog is going to receive credit for something they haven't earned? Why in the world should a dog that did not even beat the dogs it hunted against be GIVEN a 1st place win? If you can't go back and correct an error such as this what can you do?

Its times like this that UKC should step up and correct a very obvious wrong. To take away a 1st place win from someone just because they signed a card in what the MOH thought was the wrong place is to put it mildly is, incredibile.

While legally MOH may not be Reps of UKC, to the guys that attend your hunts THEY ARE. If they make an obvious mistake then UKC should step in and correct it. If you can go back and correct a mistake made by a formal representive of UKC such as Field Reps, then you should definetly be able to correct a mistake made by an informal representive i.e. MOH. I realize this may open up a big can of worms, but if you guys can't or won't correct the mistakes made who will?

If policy is that obvious mistakes can't be corrected unless a formal complaint is filed then change the policy. Policies must be updated to be effective. If I see a policy that's 15 years old then I know before I read it that it is for the most part ineffective.

Last edited by Chris.S on 08-05-2003 at 04:50 PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Virginia
Posts: 16

It is the hunters responsibility to have the card filled out and signed properly when handed to the MOH. Once you turn the card in with no questions it is official. Place the blame where it lies and not on UKC or the MOH.

__________________
Ricky B.
Bent Creek Kennel
Appomattox, VA

Blue and Gray Houndsman Club
Appomattox, VA

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Virginia
Posts: 166

RickyB don't play!!!!!!

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Kalamazoo, MI
Posts: 568

in the way either organization handles these type situations.

We have a question process, they have a question process. If you don't like the first answer you get, you either file a formal complaint(UKC) or put up a $100.00(PKC). The end result is the same. If you do not follow the correct procedures nothing will happen.

In the above scenario, the MOH's made a bad call. It resulted in a dog not winning his cast. All they had to do was fill out a formal complaint and send it in. It would have cost them nothing to do this. The club could have overturned the MOH or not. It would have come to us(me) and would have been fixed. Calling in on Monday morning is too late for anything other than misconduct charges. The whole idea behind rule 14 is that at some point in the night, the hunt is over. If no complaints are made by 30 minutes past deadline to return scorecards, the hunt is officially over.

I have never heard of any other organization going back and changing the hunt report on Monday if no appeal process had been filed.

__________________
Great minds discuss ideas
Average minds discuss events
Small minds discuss each other

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Aug 2003
Location:
Posts: 375

Actually the scratched dog did win the cast he just didn't credit for winning. The MOH's error has nothing to do with which dog won the cast, but everthing to do with which dog got credit for winning the cast. If I read the post correctly the handler even signed the card in an area which should have been accepted by the MOH.

Just because more than 30 minutes has elasped before anybody realizes an error has been made doesn't justify not correcting the error. I guess could understand if this involved something that happened during the cast like questioning a call, or maybe even an incorrect rules intrepretation during a cast. But this is totally different. A MOH made a clerical error, it has nothing to due with what happened during the hunt, he just made a simple clerical error which is simple to fix.

If I make an error adding up a scorecard and it doesn't get noticed until 1 hour after the deadline guess what happens. If it changes the cast winner then he/she gets credit for the win and I owe somebody some money.

"But we've always done it that way" doesn't make it right it just means that the way you've always done it.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2003
Location: embattled usa
Posts: 70

United Kennel Club holds and has reserved to itself certain inherent rights and powers in connection with conducting its business, registering litters, transferring ownership of dogs, licensing events, and awarding titles. These inherent rights and powers include but are not limited to the following: United Kennel Club has the right to inspect all reports, scorecards and documents related to UKC events. Some, but not all, of the items subject to inspection are:


a) scores;
b) disqualifications of dogs for fighting or other reasons;
c) errors by the recording person; and
d) documentation excluded for any reason. UKC reserves the right to correct any mistakes found during such inspection whether or not the document has the signature of a Judge or Club Officer.

?????????????
-

__________________
"I wouldn't trust you any further than I could throw ya, but I do love the way you lie."

Last edited by wood merchant on 08-06-2003 at 01:28 AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: COLLINS MO.
Posts: 218

I CAN TELL THIS DEAL IS GOING NOWHERE NOW. I CALLED THE MAN THAT WAS SCRATCHED TODAY AND ASKED IF HE WENT AHEAD AND FILED A FORMAL COMPLAINT? NO HE DID NOT BECAUSE THE MOH TOLD HIM THAT NOT SIGNING IN THE RIGHT SLOT AS HANDLER WAS AN AUTOMATIC SCRATCH OFFENSE. HE SHOULD OF PUT UP A BIGGER STINK AND FILLED ONE OUT BUT HE DIDN'T WANT TO CAUSE TROUBLE. IF A MAN NEEDS TO HAVE A LAWYER ON RETAINER JUST TO WIN A HUNT THAT HE WON HONEST ANYWAY WHY GO? IF THIS CAN'T BE CHANGED THAN SO BE IT. BUT WHEN THE NUMBERS KEEP SHRINKING IT COULD POSSIBLY HAVE SOMETHING TO DO WITH HOW THE HUNTERS ARE TREATED. RIGHT IS RIGHT AND WRONG IS WRONG.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2003
Location: Poplar Bluff,Mo.
Posts: 38

Amen, Dave

__________________
The road goes on forever and the party never ends......

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Aug 2003
Location: West virginia
Posts: 20

hey guyz,
I dont mean to be a @$$ hole but the MOH was right in this case if you do not sign inital your name you can and will be scratched but also it depends on the judge if he is an alright guy or not he might let it slide...
BlueWalkerman

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: COLLINS MO.
Posts: 218

I MAY BE ONE TOO BUT I WOULD OF LET IT GO. THE MAN THAT GOT SCRATCHED BY THE MOH WAS THE JUDGE AND SIGNED THE CARD IN THAT SPOT. WOOD MERCHANT BRINGS UP A GOOD POINT IN THAT UKC RESERVES THE RIGHT TO REVIEW ALL HUNTS AND SCORECARDS. SIMPLY USE THAT RIGHT AND REVIEW THIS ONE. TANK YOU WON'T HEAR FROM ME ON MONDAY MORNING BECAUSE I WILL HAVE ONE READY WHEN I GO AND IF I GET BEAT I CAN TAKE IT. BUT THIS IS ONE OF THE DEALS I THOUGHT YOU GUYS MIGHT BE ABLE TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Virginia
Posts: 16

In this situation, the way I understand it, there were mistakes made by two people. The handler screwed up twice, 1 not signing the card in the correct spot and 2 not filing a formal complaint. The MOH for not using a little commen sense.

With that said what should UKC do about the cast winner (the second place dog before the handler was scratched)? Would it be fair to hime to call him now and say we are changing to rules to fit the situation and taking your win away, please tear up your win slip? To me that would be the worse thing that they could do.

__________________
Ricky B.
Bent Creek Kennel
Appomattox, VA

Blue and Gray Houndsman Club
Appomattox, VA

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: COLLINS MO.
Posts: 218

RICKY THERE WERE ACTUALLY FOUR MISTAKES MADE THIS NIGHT. I HAD 400+ IN MY CAST AND TREED A TREE THAT WAS PRETTY SMALL AND HAD SEVERAL LEAVES. I WAS THE JUDGE AND HAD THE MOST TO GAIN ON IT. I COULD OF CRIED AND WHINED AND GOT IT CIRCLED BUT THAT WASN'T RIGHT. I TOOK MY MINUS AND WENT ON. ALL ANYONE WANTS TO SEE DONE ON THIS IS THE RIGHT THING. THE MAN THAT ENDED UP WITH THE WIN WAS ACTUALLY SORRY ABOUT THE DEAL. I DON'T THINK HE EVEN LIKED WINNING LIKE THAT. IT WAS JUST A BAD DEAL.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged