The following response has been received by our office today, March 2nd, 2006 along with permission for it's publication. Our thanks to Equestrian Federation of Australia, Chairman Mr Russ Withers for his response and we respect his request that the EFA not now be drawn into a "public stoush" over these issues.

I would suggest though that a good public discussion is much needed if the sport of showjumping is to go anywhere in the future - and it is our belief at jumpingaround.com that the Australian showjumpers can give the rest of the world a run for their money, but we must see changes to what is happening "at home" before that will ever become a reality and we believe that discussion is the best way to achieve this - we will accept letters for publication on this matter but will not accept nor publish anonymous views, no matter how good they are - sign your name and supply your land address for verification - no addresses will be published other than the state in which the writer is based.

We have had an offer from Mr Russ Withers in his email, to put make representation for change -here is the opportunity to have the discussion pubically, pulling fresh ideas and then perhaps seeing someone prepared to put plans forward which come from these discussions - the time for apathy must surely now be ended - Australian equestrian fans must speak up or else they will have to "button their lips" and accept whatever happens around them, to their sport - because that is the price you pay for apathy.

Dear Vicki,

I note your continuing concern over the selection of Tim Armitrano and Mr Innocent for the Athens Olympic Games and I know that you are aggrieved with that selection.

From the EFA’s position, we are between a ‘rock and a hard place’. We obviously want to achieve the best result for the sport, including the best competition results. We want to facilitate a scenario that allows ‘the sport’ and their properly elected representatives to have the power to make decisions fairly, competently and without undue interference. The best way we can achieve that is to make sure the whole process of who those people should be and how they go about their various roles, as open as possible.

As you know, we go out of our way to ensure that the whole process is transparent, both in the manner the selectors are chosen right through to the selection criteria applied. In turn, there is an appeal process whereby any aggrieved rider can have a selection decision reviewed, firstly by an EFA tribunal, and in the case of the Olympic Games, a further appeal to the Court of Arbitration of Sport is available.

I have difficulty in understanding how we could be more fair or open.

All of the matters you raise are subject to public scrutiny. Nothing is done in an underhand way. There are no ‘jobs for the boys’, no favourites played. Everything is on the EFA web site:

The criteria for the panel that chooses the Selectors can be found at:

http://www.efanational.com/content/attachments/governance/41215_Committee_By-Laws_appoint.pdf

The position description for the Selectors can be found at:

http://www.efanational.com/content/attachments/governance/412_Nat_Jumping_Selectors.pdf

All positions were widely advertised for several months, including an e-mail that goes to all EFA members for which we have e-mail addresses. There were 5 applicants for the Selectors position. The panel that appoints the selectors met and made a decision based on the people that were prepared to make themselves available. At no point did we receive any representations that the criteria for eligibility to be a selector were in any way unfair, despite that information being in the public arena for several months.

What is the alternative? You mention Rod Brown as being a more suitable choice. I have a great deal of respect for Rod, but I understand Rod is now riding and training Mr Burns. That would surely put Rod out of contention.

There are coaches that I know you have had strong disagreements over the years. If one of those coaches was also a selector and the rider he or she coached was selected in a team over you, I think you would have some grounds to be concerned about the possibility of bias. It is for this reason that ‘professional coaches’ are excluded. But again, if you think that this exclusion is too hard, please make representation to the National Showjumping Committee and I am sure the matter will receive serious consideration.

The issue with the selection of Tim Armitrano and Mr Innocent ahead of Andrew Inglis and Mr Burns has had lots of discussion and I am loathed to re-open that debate. As we all know, the decision by the selectors was appealed by Andrew Inglis and eventually, the CAS decided in favour of Armitrano.

Again, the selectors reasons for that decision were published and can be found at:

on the EFA site by clicking here

Vicki, I know you feel strongly on this matter, but I am not sure what we can do to be:

(a) fair to all parties

(b) be transparent and accountable to the sport and, with respect,

(c) satisfy you

If the ‘sport’ doesn’t like the job that the selectors do, then for goodness sake, nominate people that would do a better job. This time around, despite some well publicised concerns expressed over the Olympic selection, there were still only 5 nominations for the four positions!

If you think the eligibility criteria for selectors is wrong, then make representation to the National Jumping Committee. As you know, the Committee is made up of representatives of the Branch Jumping Committees, who are in turn elected by members in those Branches.

Too much democracy?..... perhaps so, but to change that democratic and transparent process is to travel down a very slippery path indeed.

The bigger question is what are we going to do about the standard of jumping in this country. We have been far below top international standards for a number of years. Results at WEG and Olympic Games have been very poor and we don’t seem to be improving. Now, this is a debate I would like to encourage within the Jumping community.

With best wishes,

Russ