#92 Expert Perspectives on the FEI Blood Rule with Dr. Michael Köhler & Joachim Geilfus

[SPEAKER 4]
[00:00:01-00:00:12]
In this episode, we're talking with two insiders who both hold positions within the FEI, veterinarian Dr. Michael Kohler and Judge Joaquin Geilfus on the recent change to the blood rule.

[SPEAKER 2]
[00:00:13-00:00:33]
We must be able to represent our sport publicly and by publicly, I mean, especially for those individuals who don't interact with horses on a daily basis. And if there's any bleeding involved, then it becomes exceedingly difficult to justify allowing that person to continue riding.

[SPEAKER 4]
[00:00:34-00:02:37]
Welcome to the Equestrian Connection podcast from Wehorse. My name is Danielle Crowell and I'm usually your host. However, we have a slight change with this episode. A few weeks ago, WeHorse CEO Christian Kroeber interviewed veterinarian Dr. Michael Kohler and Judge Joachim Geilfus, who both hold positions within the FEI, regarding the change to what is known as the blood rule. Though this episode was originally recorded in German, I knew this was an important episode to air to our English audience as well, so we used translation software to dub the recording. And so here is this important topic of discussion, and I'll be back again as usual for our next episode. The International Equestrian Federation, better known as the FEI, has changed the so-called blood rule, sparking debate throughout the equestrian world. This rule concerns how to handle situations in competitions where blood is detected on a participating horse before, during, or after a test. From the date the new regulation comes into force on January 1st, 2026, horses will still be able to participate in the competition under certain circumstances despite visible blood. For example, in the second round of a Grand Prix or a jump off. What does this mean for equestrian sport? Why did the SEI General Assembly reach this voting result? And why do so many experts see it as a step backwards for animal welfare? In this episode, veterinarian Dr. Michael Kohler and Judge Joachim Gelfes explain how the controversial rule came about and why each nation only has one vote. what scenarios could arise at future competitions, what new responsibilities now lie with judges and veterinarians, and why they view the rule change critically and what effects they expect. This is an episode for anyone who wants to understand what happens behind the scenes of international sport and what the decision means for horses, riders, and trust in the sport moving forward.

[SPEAKER 3]
[00:02:39-00:02:42]
Welcome to our podcast, Dr. Michael Koehler. Hello, Michael.

[SPEAKER 1]
[00:02:42-00:02:44]
Good afternoon, Christian.

[SPEAKER 3]
[00:02:45-00:03:14]
Michael, we want to talk about a really controversial topic right now, namely the update of the FEI blood rule. You are an experienced veterinarian. You are the FEI national veterinarian for Germany, so essentially the FEI's chief veterinarian in Germany. Before we delve into what the true consequences of this update really are, what exactly is the FEI blood rule and what specific purpose does it actually aim to achieve?

[SPEAKER 1]
[00:03:15-00:03:49]
Yes, actually the purpose of the FEI blood rule when it was introduced was of course the welfare of the horse and also we must never forget the public's perception of our sport Who would want to see blood anywhere or even have it present? Here, of course, we're primarily talking about blood in the rider's immediate environment because there's a direct link that needs to be established between the sport itself and any blood that might have been shed during it.

[SPEAKER 3]
[00:03:51-00:03:58]
And what regulations from your veterinary perspective have changed now? What exactly does this update cover?

[SPEAKER 1]
[00:03:59-00:05:16]
Well, up until now, it's been the case that the moment such blood was discovered within the rider's immediate area of influence, and that's something we'll certainly be discussing first, it was, as a rule, identified by the stewards, either on the warm-up arena before the competition or quite often after the competition. This horse was then disqualified, all of that was documented, and the veterinarian was consulted. It could certainly be a larger quantity of blood but in many instances it's the so-called minor blood meaning just a small spot where blood is present where the skin or mucous membrane perhaps in the oral cavity has been injured and naturally it was also thoroughly investigated where that blood was coming from. Perhaps it's easier to observe on the chest wall where the spores are located than it is inside the mouth, so that one could clearly decide where this blood is actually originating from. And this regulation has now been, at the very least, minimally softened, if not indeed completely abolished. From my perspective, somehow it seems they want to eliminate her.

[SPEAKER 3]
[00:05:16-00:06:30]
It has definitely become significantly more complex. You just mentioned the role of the stewards as well. For all those not so familiar with international equestrian sport, the stewards are ultimately the ones who, outside the judges' direct sphere of influence, also ensure that in the warm-up arena and beyond, at the transitions between the competition arena and the warm-up arena, for example, the rules continue to be observed where the judges practically have no concrete insight because they sit in the judges' stand and can only assess what ultimately happens in the competition area. Well, the thing is, from your point of view, it's a softening. The whole thing has become much more complicated. There are actually many scenarios. We also looked at the presentation beforehand from the FEI's General Assembly in Hong Kong. It comes with about five scenarios. Depending on what happens, she gives examples, but perhaps, generally speaking, How is the so-called fit to compete interpreted under this new regulation? So the horse is fit enough to take part in competitive sports in the test. How is that regulated now?

[SPEAKER 1]
[00:06:30-00:08:02]
Well, it's no longer the situation now that this horse is not allowed to compete further. In the end, a judge is consulted. We veterinarians are also called in to then determine Is it just this small amount of blood from a minor injury which previously led to disqualification but which no longer necessarily has to be the case? That means the horse can continue. Let's just imagine, as is often the case at the end of a round, The horse comes out of the arena and due to some influence, malicious or not, I don't even want to say malicious, but an influence from the rider causes an injury somewhere, let's say in the spur area. Up until now, the rule was that the horse would be disqualified and would no longer be available for a second round or a jump off. This was, of course, for all those who had completed the first round clear, certainly from their own point of view, extremely frustrating. Or even in Nations Cups, if a rider, you know, had a clear round in the first leg, but that then led to their disqualification, then there was no second round for them because the horse was, for this particular event, and both rounds are counted as part of it, disqualified.

[SPEAKER 3]
[00:08:04-00:08:24]
But it's now within the realm of discretion. It doesn't have to be, it won't be an automatic process. I see blood in the rider's area of influence, for example, on the flank where the leg is. Automatic exclusion. Now there's a much wider scope for assessment.

[SPEAKER 1]
[00:08:25-00:08:45]
Of course, now there's a margin for evaluation. You can truly say that these minor blood incidents mean there's this jumping warning card and then the horse can even continue to be ridden. For example, in my specific case, in a second round, in a jump off.

[SPEAKER 3]
[00:08:46-00:09:34]
You just brought that up a moment ago. There is the so-called jumping recorded warning card. One could also casually say it's like a yellow card, which then, if minor blood is found, won't lead to an exclusion. But there's also a first and second warning, and two warnings within 12 months result in a fine of 1,000 Swiss francs and an automatic ban of one month. This sounds a little bit like in football, a yellow card, then a yellow-red, and finally a suspension from the association. Is this really sensible, particularly in a field where the public gaze is so intense and where equestrian sport is genuinely facing criticism concerning... animal welfare to implement such a rule?

[SPEAKER 1]
[00:09:34-00:10:48]
Well, from my perspective, no. And I'm certainly not alone in the veterinary field. No, absolutely not. We've already discussed this in various committees where I'm also active. Well, naturally, one would object to that, especially since the regulation states that if the horse were allowed to continue competing, this rider could still participate, even though the horse has a small amount of blood in the rider's area of influence. I'm assuming that for now. Otherwise, the margin of discretion should really reach its upper limit, and then it can't continue, so not fit to compete. But with these small amounts of blood in the mouth, on the flank, or on the chest, it's more like the flank is still a little bit further back. So even with the leg and spurs positioned there, the horse could still win this major prize. And that is, of course, for the standing of our sport, which is always under scrutiny and very openly observed, for me, an absolute step backward.

[SPEAKER 3]
[00:10:49-00:11:07]
The German Equestrian Federation has made its position clear. From a veterinary standpoint, you've just reiterated your view. How can this be? Is this a form of resistance to advice? There is a great deal of sports politics involved. What's your analysis of how we've reached this point now?

[SPEAKER 1]
[00:11:08-00:11:17]
I would say that at that particular moment, just about six weeks ago, I had the opportunity to supervise the Nations League final match in Barcelona for the FI organization.

[SPEAKER 3]
[00:11:18-00:11:20]
So the Nations Cup, now Nations League?

[SPEAKER 1]
[00:11:20-00:12:40]
Yes, the Nations Cup series, exactly. to oversee the final of this Nations Cup series. And there was a case of minor blood. And then you naturally notice how big the fuss is. And I'd say if I ask riders in this round, they'll also say for such little blood, Does it really have to be this way? I mean, you do get these contacts. The problem, of course, with the FI is always a little bit tricky. It's an association that operates globally. And naturally, we have in certain regions in some countries around the world and on other continents, however. Even in a survey that I once conducted in Europe, even in individual European countries, this is simply not viewed too critically. And it's like, oh, that's not really much blood. And then, of course, the voting system of the FA is such that every single nation or every federation has just one vote, regardless of whether it's the largest equestrian sports federation. is the one with the largest membership, like Germany, or it's simply small nations located in Asia or in Africa or perhaps in South America. Every person has a voice.

[SPEAKER 3]
[00:12:42-00:13:06]
The criticism is quite widespread now, even beyond the immediate equestrian community. The president of the Austrian Equestrian Federation, Sissi Max Theurer, has just made the following statement, and I quote her directly, If the FI continues like this, we will eventually lose our Olympic status for show jumping, dressage and eventing. Do you share this assessment?

[SPEAKER 1]
[00:13:07-00:14:08]
I completely agree with that assessment. I am familiar with the interview by C.C. Maxter. I have, of course, in the meantime, during my research, one naturally engages with these topics. Also read it completely. But in any case, it is true that equestrian sport holds a very special position within the Olympic program. as we are the only sport that involves animals, that actually performs sport with animals. But that doesn't automatically mean it's exclusively seen in a positive light. There are certainly people who see that very positively, but there is also a large part that simply sees it very critically. And in the past, we had many discussions about eventing. We've had cases of blood on the horse in dressage. And of course, always the issue with show jumping. And we look back at past Olympic Games. Yeah, there too, blood plays a role.

[SPEAKER 3]
[00:14:08-00:15:04]
And it's important to note the rule in show jumping, and we're only discussing that here, is such that disqualification always only happens retrospectively. So in dressage, there's a certain automatic process now. If a horse, for example... bleeds from its mouth and it's obvious the head judge at sea will ring the bell, which is no longer unusual, but it happens and you see it in show jumping, it's this retroactive disqualification at the end. The bell is practically not rung during the ride. Now, this also changes the role of the vet and you yourself are an FEI vet present at countless international events. This role changes because of that. How does it change for you personally?

[SPEAKER 1]
[00:15:05-00:16:06]
Yes, because you're naturally now also in the decision-making process or in the consultation process. We always have to say we have more of an advisory function. Whether we as vets always see that clearly, especially when it comes to animal welfare. the welfare of the horse. Actually, we are the professionals who deal with it every day who naturally have a very good medical understanding of everything that happens to the animal. But in this particular instance, we are brought in as advisors to determine if the horse is still truly fit to compete. That is certainly a very significant responsibility, but we also need to seriously consider if that might not ultimately serve as a powerful statement, demonstrating that we veterinarians here also remain critically engaged But then again, in the end, we are not the ones who decide, but the judge is the one who holds the final authority.

[SPEAKER 3]
[00:16:07-00:16:46]
How will that actually work in practice then? So, for example, stewards are currently doing checks. The horse leaves the competition arena. stewards are waiting there for a check, just like a bit check, for instance. And if you look at this now, I had this translated into German, that then means new mandatory review of competition eligibility by the ground jury in consultation with the veterinary delegate in all cases of bleeding. Now, this sounds a little bit like bureaucratic language, but what exactly is this ground jury then? How should one really imagine that?

[SPEAKER 1]
[00:16:47-00:17:53]
So in the normal course of events, you should have an independent judge at every tournament who isn't actively officiating from the judge's stand, but is specifically designated for these kinds of decisions. And that's actually already the situation today to be readily available. The stewards announced the inspections to the FEI official vet, that is the FEI veterinarian. you also have a very close connection that's already the case today and it's still true today that if you take this job when trying to do well you are you are close by so usually a hand signal is sufficient and the judge also obtains the veterinary opinion on it but still needs today to then declare it cannot continue it is a disqualification a judge And normally a judge must be independent, meaning not currently serving on the bench and must be available to preside over this to then issue this final decision. Right. It shouldn't be the case that a judge from the judiciary is pulled from their active duties.

[SPEAKER 3]
[00:17:54-00:17:56]
It would almost need to be stopped, right?

[SPEAKER 2]
[00:17:56-00:17:57]
That would then be the case.

[SPEAKER 1]
[00:17:57-00:18:36]
Exactly. This shouldn't be interrupted. Instead, an independent judge who should be available must then make the decision. The veterinarian is called in. They'll look at it from a medical point of view. Of course, we are then free to also critically state, for me, blood is blood. And for me, that then has nothing to do with welfare concerning obedience. But the final decision is made by the ground judge who should be on duty at the entrance or at the warm-up arena.

[SPEAKER 3]
[00:18:37-00:19:11]
Well, you've already mentioned it on several occasions. The position in Germany is different. There's the zero tolerance policy, which was also emphasized again by FN President Martin Rickenhagen. In recent days now, there's the national regulation. And from January 1st, 2026, the new international regulation. Do you believe that the national regulations as we have them will remain as they are? Is this now just something we're seeing on an international level, this development? What's your assessment of it?

[SPEAKER 1]
[00:19:13-00:20:10]
Well, I do believe that the regulations will remain exactly as they are. I certainly hope that's the case, but I'll tell you right now, I truly believe in that. The statement on this matter was very explicit and clear. It's obvious that the FEI, with all the regulations they are always making, The tendency is to say that the national federations, meaning the national associations, should also adopt this into their own national regulations. But that hasn't quite worked out in a few other specific instances. And I believe that's regarding animal welfare issues. welfare of the horse. We won't make any progress here because we simply must also state that from my perspective this truly represents a significant step backward for this area.

[SPEAKER 3]
[00:20:10-00:20:31]
Dear Michael, a controversial topic. Thank you for your time and your insights. I believe there will be much discussion in the coming days about the new FEI blood rule and perhaps the final word hasn't been spoken yet. We will closely monitor developments, but I thank you for your spontaneous time and wish you all the best.

[SPEAKER 1]
[00:20:32-00:20:33]
Many thanks, Christian.

[SPEAKER 3]
[00:20:34-00:20:52]
Beyond a vet's perspective, it's also incredibly important how the jury then applies it. And now we have one of the most experienced show jumping judges worldwide, Joachim Galfus. Welcome to our podcast, Joachim Galfus.

[SPEAKER 2]
[00:20:53-00:20:54]
Hello.

[SPEAKER 3]
[00:20:55-00:21:18]
Nice that you are with us. From a judge's perspective, we also want to shed some light on the recent update of the FEI blood rule, which was, as you know, decided just a few days ago in Hong Kong at the FEI General Assembly. From a judge's perspective, and you, more than almost anyone, are so deeply involved in top-level sport, what is your take on this update to the blood rule?

[SPEAKER 2]
[00:21:19-00:25:36]
I'll gladly address that immediately. But I want to make one thing absolutely clear before we now directly address this blood rule. Regardless of the level, whether in international sports, national sports, or even in grassroots sports, no person I know, and I've been actively involved in this sport for over 50 years now, would ever want to intentionally harm their horse. And I want to make this absolutely unequivocally clear right from the start. Despite that, something always happens. And now we come to the blood rule. Christian... I truly believe I was the very first person ever to disqualify someone simply because there was blood on the horse. And that was none other than Ben Meyer in Hamburg at the Derby during the prize of Europe or the prize of Hamburg. I was the very first one who did that. You know, it was also published on NDR. then that simply won't be possible anymore. I had offered Ben at the time, you start 20 horses behind and take off the spurs. He didn't want to do that, and that's why we had to remove him. Personally, the current regulation is when compared to the The regulation that has been in place until now, almost a bit clearer, because in my cases, and these are many situations that we frequently encounter, that the leg simply slips out of position. And now let's return to my opening remarks. No one ever wants to injure their horse. Absolutely not, but it does happen. It's happened to me as well, even when I was an active rider myself. This now ends with a warning, which will also be made public, and that a second offense leads to a ban with a monetary fine is almost more explicit than it has been up until now. But for the general public, it's just not something that can be explained because not even our own riders can under... They are fully aware of the rules and regulations in that regard. I have to say we had a meeting yesterday with the FN and also with the Board of the Judges Association. And we completely stand behind Germany's opinion that we in Germany will not soften the regulations and blood is blood. And that's the final word. That is our clear standpoint. This can be explained as well to the viewer who isn't familiar with equestrian sports because that is what this is all about. We must be able to represent our sport publicly and by publicly I mean especially for those individuals who don't interact with horses on a daily basis. And if there's any bleeding involved, then it becomes exceedingly difficult to justify allowing that person to continue riding and so on and so forth and so on. It's already quite difficult, in my opinion, to explain what constitutes blood within the rider's area of influence or what is simply blood that occurs because the horse accidentally steps on itself. Yes, I can give you a good example. I experienced that myself in Stuttgart many years ago. Yes, a horse in the jump off of the Grand Prix sustained a leg injury. Yes, it was withdrawn. It had zero faults, but its entire hoof was bloody. But the writer isn't responsible for that, and you won't change the performance if you take him out later. So the distinction between what's within the writer's influence and what else can happen, that has to remain, but even that is hard enough to explain.

[SPEAKER 3]
[00:25:37-00:25:59]
You mentioned it. There are national regulations. We're discussing international regulations under the roof of the FEI. And the new regulation, which is currently being publicly discussed, will take effect on January 1st, 2026. Just to clarify something, since you just brought that topic up, what exactly is the current regulation?

[SPEAKER 2]
[00:25:60-00:27:30]
The current regulation is, well, there are, and this is something that needs to be very clearly distinguished. There are always errors that happen because a limb slips or something like that. So the current regulation states that if blood is detected during the horse inspection and this is carried out at major tournaments after every significant test, then that automatically leads to elimination. That means he's excluded from circulation or eliminated from the tiebreaker. If he was zero before, he's still eligible for placement. And then there's the second rule. If that leads to excessive use of spurs or excessive use of the whip or any influence at all, then it can be decided that that this is no longer just a completely uh it's not a peter a blood was shed but that is uh for equestrian influence that's how i would describe it uh happened and then uh this rider whether male or female can be disqualified which also results in a yellow card due to uh abuse of force um Yeah.

[SPEAKER 3]
[00:27:30-00:27:33]
So, in English, it's mistreatment of horses.

[SPEAKER 2]
[00:27:33-00:27:38]
Yes, horse mistreatment. That's what is the undeniable fact right now.

[SPEAKER 3]
[00:27:39-00:27:47]
There was that incident which also had a very significant public impact at the Olympics in Tokyo in 2021. The Irish rider...

[SPEAKER 2]
[00:27:48-00:27:50]
Yes, yes, yes, Kilkenny.

[SPEAKER 3]
[00:27:51-00:28:31]
With the horse Kilkenny, this case is naturally quite well known here and there was no obvious reason for exclusion because, as you just mentioned, it must be within the area of influence of the rider, so on the flank. or where the leg aid is applied, or on the mouth. But then there was the regulation that you just described, well, that judges in the interest of animal welfare could then, at their own discretion, reduce the penalties. Yes. How would a situation like that, back when the horse was having a nosebleed, how would the entire process unfold with the new regulation?

[SPEAKER 2]
[00:28:32-00:31:01]
As for how things will proceed under the new set of regulations, to be perfectly honest with you, I cannot tell you with 100% certainty, but it will most likely be exactly the same as it has been up until this point. And I would like to make a comment regarding Tokyo. I was a judge there myself and was also very deeply involved. And first of all, from our vantage point up in the judges' tower, we only really noticed that right at the very end of the entire course, and the rule was that the horse had to be examined he had incurred a time fault so he wasn't qualified for the jump off but without that time fault he would have been qualified so the question then became was he allowed to compete or was he not and at such championships thankfully there are always enough veterinarians present to examine it immediately So it was Keane O'Connor, and it's certainly not wrong to mention his name. The whole world knows this. He truly had no influence whatsoever on the fact that his horse, Kilkenny, was bleeding from the nose. We didn't see it ourselves. If we had seen it... I don't know how we would have decided on that. We probably would have called someone to examine the horse because that is the highest priority for me. to keep the horse's well-being in mind at all times. But we really did. I mean, he came right towards us on the very last jump. That's when we really saw it. I believe otherwise we would have withdrawn him beforehand and had him thoroughly examined. Whether the regulations are right or wrong, even at the Olympics, horse welfare is the most important thing we must protect. And we would have done that there and our colleagues would have too. We couldn't because we noticed it far too late. Then we immediately called so that he would be examined right away at the exit by the veterinarians. They did that as well, but the vets had even said I could have gone on for another day. Then Keane withdrew him and we wouldn't have let him start either.

[SPEAKER 3]
[00:31:02-00:31:26]
Now it's like this, you as judges are involved, the veterinarians are involved, who ultimately also have a responsibility towards the welfare of the horses, but above all, of course, the riders. And there was, of course, criticism of the previous regulation beforehand. What, from your perspective, was the main criticism of the existing regulation, and why did it even come to an update of this blood rule at all?

[SPEAKER 2]
[00:31:27-00:33:58]
Well, I believe the criticism that has been present up until now is that at the beginning, when the rule was first introduced, it was applied far too strictly at many tournaments. And there, fields were also specifically designed and created, and it was also done by the race stewards, who we now also need to involve and take into account. It wasn't, you know, how can I possibly put it, it wasn't investigated the way the rules now state they tried to find something and that's why i'll repeat my opening statement no rider i know on any level wants to harm their horse but underlined and double exclamation marks but that became a little bit too much There have also been some restrictions put in place. It also resulted in certain pieces of equipment being changed. For example, spurs with sharp points or jagged edges are no longer permitted, as these can very easily cause injuries, even if that's not the intention. So in that regard, all of these developments were definitely heading in the right direction. And that the change has now finally arrived. Yes, because sometimes those are truly very difficult decisions. For, as one might say, shit happens. And I can certainly understand that from a show jumper's perspective. But I also want to state very clearly once again that we as judges can only support the opinion of the German Federation. And I'm not just some random person involved here. We have to be able to explain our sport clearly to the outside world. And if a horse bleeds, it must be absolutely clear what the consequences are. And you can't just say distinguish between a minor case and a serious case and all sorts of other things. No one understands it. I don't understand all the rules of handball or all the rules of basketball either. But our sport is very much in the spotlight and it's the greatest sport I know. And we absolutely must keep it that way.

[SPEAKER 3]
[00:33:60-00:34:58]
You're also very closely involved with international developments. As you just described, you're a judge, even at the Olympic level. How could it actually come to pass that at such an FEI General Assembly? 56 nations voted for it and 20 nations against it, including Germany. Germany, through FN President Martin Ritzenhagen, also adopted a clear position from the outset. As you just reiterated, the major equestrian nations like Denmark, Sweden, the Netherlands, and our neighboring countries, Austria and Switzerland, also voted against it. How can such a development, especially when one wants to explain the sport to the outside world in these major equestrian nations, how could it come to pass that this narrative was so completely lost that one has now attracted this massive shitstorm and all this media attention to this particular topic?

[SPEAKER 2]
[00:34:59-00:37:27]
Well, I believe, for one thing, to make this absolutely clear, unfortunately, that's just the way it is. I've long considered it incorrect. And many others feel the same way. But every single nation has one vote, whether that's Germany or Holland, Sweden, Denmark, Switzerland. They all only have one vote. And there are, I believe, 130 nations that are organized within the FUA. Don't hold me to that number. I'm not entirely sure. And there are so many of them who don't even own a horse on their island, but they still have a voice. That's politics. And I'm staying out of that. But that's how such voting results can come to be. The other thing is that we've already... We are under scrutiny. The societal behavior towards our sport has changed, massively changed due to many societal influences. Well, and that's why this is also often picked up by, well, how shall I put it, opponents of equestrian sports. I wouldn't go that far. But those who always declare themselves self-proclaimed animal welfare activists, it's naturally propagated by them. And the regulation of this kind, which in essence, if one is not entirely well-versed in the subject matter, an outsider can scarcely comprehend at all, with the sole exception of the fact that there is blood, and yet absolutely nothing occurs. And that is, you know, rather a superficial story, but that does make our sport much, much more difficult. And we all must work together, whether riders or trainers or the association and especially the judges, because we are the ones who have to implement this every single weekend. We're not always the ones making the decision. Well, I'm involved in many things, but I I'm one of 2500 in Germany and internationally, probably 250 or 300. We have to represent it. And that's sometimes difficult.

[SPEAKER 3]
[00:37:28-00:37:48]
And it can lead to difficult situations because there are many events where national and international competitions happen on the same weekend. You have the same situation twice and in competition one, which is national, you must immediately disqualify the rider. And in situation two, you now have the new regulation.

[SPEAKER 2]
[00:37:48-00:38:25]
Yeah, but let's actually talk about the real sport now about show jumping and not about dressage. You won't be able to just hang up on me right away because you're simply much too far away. All of that will then be decided in reverse. But of course, there are still two sets of regulations in place. And I have always advocated for this, truly, for many decades now, that we align them as much as possible, but we don't have to go along with every single piece of nonsense, to put it mildly.

[SPEAKER 3]
[00:38:26-00:38:48]
Perhaps to conclude, because this is a question that always comes up again and again, what is the reason actually that this isn't handled uniformly across all the Olympic disciplines? So blood in the mouth in dressage immediately leads to the aforementioned disqualification. That's known and accepted, but in eventing and show jumping, it's handled differently from your perspective.

[SPEAKER 2]
[00:38:49-00:40:22]
Christian, I also asked this question yesterday in a large group because I simply cannot answer it myself. What that's well, I would say in dressage, it is certainly due to the fact that they are much, much closer to the horse because the judges booths in dressage are perhaps 10 meters from the test sheet in show jumping at larger events. You are 100 meters away or even 50 meters further up. I believe that is one of the reasons. But unfortunately, I can't really give you a proper answer to that. But I asked that question yesterday, this very same question, and there was no real answer either. It's quite regrettable because if we truly wish to maintain our credibility, not just now, but also looking ahead to the future. And this is just my own personal and honest opinion. I haven't discussed this with anyone else. We absolutely must. these you know rules and you know the injuries i'd say specifically injuries to the horse blood And we must define this consistently across all disciplines. And because at the end of the day, if we no longer do that, and this is just my opinion, and I still believe I can think, we always make ourselves vulnerable and that should be avoided as much as possible.

[SPEAKER 3]
[00:40:24-00:40:38]
Dear Achim, thank you so much for your time and for agreeing on such short notice to do this together with me. I believe a very important perspective from an active judge and all the best. And thank you very much, Joachim Galtfuss.

[SPEAKER 2]
[00:40:38-00:40:42]
Yes. Thank you, Christian. No problem at all. It was my pleasure.

[SPEAKER 4]
[00:40:44-00:41:17]
with top trainers from around the world in a variety of topics and disciplines. Until next time, be kind to yourself, your horses and others.

‍