Ankc Obedience Rules

[Dxenion]

Huh? A seriously hearing impaired person would surely just use signals. That is not against the rules, you don't have to use a verbal command. The bigger issue for someone with that substantial a hearing impediment would be hearing the judge's instructions!

If I understand this issue correctly, the command must be a single word and must not be repeated. Assuming that the hearing impaired person can lip read the judge's instruction (or has some other means of receiving the instruction), how does the judge assess if the signed command is a single word and not repeated?

I believe Echo has raised a very valid point that if a person (competitor or judge) is disadvantaged by a current rule (which could possibly be considered as disability or language discrimination), then it needs to be changed.

Giving the judge a list of the words/ signs you use may not overcome this issue because as another poster pointed out, how would a judge not familar with the language be able to independently confirm that it is one word? Maybe this is an opportunity for a volunteer translator. Provided the competitor advises the competition body of their requirement within a reasonable time frame, an approved translator can be provided by the organiser of the event. That way, the judge knows exactly what the competitor is saying, the competitor can use their language of choice and no one is disadvantaged.

[RubyStar]

Assuming that the hearing impaired person can lip read the judge's instruction

I'd love to see how a hearing impaired person would be able to lip read while executing a heel pattern...

But it does make one think how exactly does a hearing impaired person get to compete if they so wish (which has absolutely nothing to do with the OP.)

Provided the competitor advises the competition body of their requirement within a reasonable time frame, an approved translator can be provided by the organiser of the event.

Yes because clubs can afford to hire a translator for such an event..... I don't believe translation is required, what's the point? It's already been discussed that an English speaking person can cue their dogs with the names of fruit if they want to, so why the need to translate words of another language to English to see if their commands translate to "stay" or "pear"? As long as the commands are disclosed when they seek permission to use another language, the judge can just assess if they believe the foreign language commands comply with our rules (ie. one word).

Edited January 22, 2011 by RubyStar

[Starkehre]

oops, sorry.

Edited January 22, 2011 by dyzney

[Natsu chan]

Just on the hearing impaired person thing. In Victoria there is a lovely older lady who has a cochlear implant and a Lions hearing dog. She not only trials but has titled this wonderful little dog. She's not an experienced trialler either her lovely little dog is her first. Both of them enjoy themselves no end and the judges always come up with a way for her to participate. I have hearing and other health problems myself and the judges are always happy to accommodate me anyway they can.

There are people out there competing in obedience with all sorts of disabilities visible or other wise.

The rule for the use of English is there because Australia is considered to be an English speaking country (I'm fairly certain it's our official language) but mostly to make things easier on the judges who often have a lot of people to get through. Having said that I do see a lot of people who trial using German or other languages and most judges happily accommodate people.

[Echo]

The rule for the use of English is there because Australia is considered to be an English speaking country (I'm fairly certain it's our official language) but mostly to make things easier on the judges who often have a lot of people to get through.

If this is the reason why English is stipulated, then why is it not applied to ALL other ANKC disciplines?.(Which it is not)

I don't see the logic in this.

I believe these days, that the Agility judges usually have a lot more dogs to get through, so how does this help them, when any language can be spoken in the Agility ring?

[RubyStar]

The rules of agility and obedience are very different. You can't compare them at all, very different disciplines. You can say what you like in an agility ring, when you want to and as many times as you want to say it, whereas obedience the commands (when to say them and how many times you can say them) are very much apart of the rules.

[Natsu chan]

Echo I don't know since I didn't write the rules. However obedience is a lot older than agility, and it is after all meant to be a test of how well a dog responds to it's handlers commands. Agility is a completely different thing, it's a race over obstacles (with apologies to the agility people because I know there's more to it than that!). You can't really compare the two sports that way. The same goes for the number of dogs an agility judge (and many judges judge both) does not have to worry about tiny details, in relation to handling and position, nor does a single agility round take anything like as long as a single obedience round. A UD dog can be in the ring under the judge for 15 minutes and agility round would be lucky to last more than a minute and a half.

Obedience is the only dog sport where individual commands and responses matter. Tracking, herding, agility none of these sports have anything like the same scoring system. In obedience the voice matters it is after the main cue to the dog and the dog is being asked to do a lot of fairly complex exercises in a very particular way.

The rules don't say you can't use another language only that it's at the judges discretion and most judges don't have a problem with it, but as they donate their time and effort then frankly they should have some leeway. These people give of their time so we can compete with our dogs, often they are older people as well and they will sometimes be spending 12 hours out in all weathers for little more than a cup of tea. If they're a bit hard of hearing, and find it easier if everyone speaks English then so be it. If you have a concern about it you ring the trial sec before you enter and ask.

Think about it you have 20 plus dogs to get through in x amount of time, if everyone uses 'heel' then it's easier your subconscious becomes attuned to it, you only have to listen for a repeat of the word 'heel' or if the handler uses another word (which would then be an extra command) the rest of your concentration can be focused on the quality of the actual performance. If when the handler leaves the start peg they use a word you've never heard before in a language you don't know it requires a lot more concentration to pick up an extra or changed command, and if your hearing is starting to go then that only compounds the issue.

In agility you can change the command or give any command you like.

Without judges, stewards, trial secs, and all the other helpers there would be no trials. The judges are given some leeway so as to make their often thankless job easier. The same rule applies to protective clothing for the dog and a few other things aside.

I've been trialling on and off (mostly off I must admit) for 20 years and in that time there's been all sorts of changes. People can make suggestions when the rules come up for review of course but the reality is that there is no way we could ever please everyone and we all have an exercise or two we'd love to change but rules are rules and if we want to compete then we abide by them.

Edited January 23, 2011 by Natsu chan

[Red Fox]

Personally I would like to see the more common (dog sport) languages approved for ANKC. ie; English, German, French, Dutch.

There are not that many commands, they are all fairly simple, not like a judge would have to be fluent in German to be able to understand German commands for example... Though in reality it would probably be more trouble than it's worth.

As far as being able to repeat a command simply because you are using a foreign language, I don't see how Regardless of which word or language you use you only get to give the command once. One word = one sound, therefore repetition of any sound, language or word should be obvious due to the pause between repetitions.

[bedazzledx2]

Because no other discipline requires either a single word or a specific word.

The rules state that a single word or signal may be used. For example you may not say "get it" or "line up" etc. How is a judge meant to know what the translation in a foreign language is? One word or two????

The rule for the use of English is there because Australia is considered to be an English speaking country (I'm fairly certain it's our official language) but mostly to make things easier on the judges who often have a lot of people to get through.

If this is the reason why English is stipulated, then why is it not applied to ALL other ANKC disciplines?.(Which it is not)

I don't see the logic in this.

I believe these days, that the Agility judges usually have a lot more dogs to get through, so how does this help them, when any language can be spoken in the Agility ring?

Edited January 23, 2011 by bedazzledx2

[Diva]

If I understand this issue correctly, the command must be a single word and must not be repeated. Assuming that the hearing impaired person can lip read the judge's instruction (or has some other means of receiving the instruction), how does the judge assess if the signed command is a single word and not repeated?

I don't think you understoood my point. Why would anyone sign a command at all when there are hand signals already? The command under the rules is a word and/or a signal. You don't have to use a verbal cue at all and if you can't use a verbal cue you don't have to replace it with sign language. Using a hand signal but expecting the dog to wait before complying for a second visual clue like a sign that means the same thing does not make sense.

[angelsun]

The first time I was made aware of this rule was when we were beginning to work on putting Rally O rules together and most of the obedience rules from the ANKC are used to keep confusion at a minimum. In Rally, there are no double commands, so the handler speaking in the ring isn't an issue to those of us that judge, however because the rule is there, we've had to sit and figure this out more.

Coming from a bilingual country (French/english) and with strong populations of other languages in areas where obedience is strong, I never had to deal with that issue of 'english only' for commands. I do understand the theory behind extra commands in a language a judge doesn't know, so how can they mark properly.

What language are hand signals? I've seen my share of CD participants not speak at all but opt for the higher level of command in visual signal....they aren't english.....would this sort of thing be penalized? I teach my dogs to return to heel (from the front recall position) with a wave of my hand....would this be considered 'non english' at the novice level and penalized?

(still trying to figure out some of the rules here that are very different than what I am used to)

[Diva]

What language are hand signals? I've seen my share of CD participants not speak at all but opt for the higher level of command in visual signal....they aren't english.....would this sort of thing be penalized? I teach my dogs to return to heel (from the front recall position) with a wave of my hand....would this be considered 'non english' at the novice level and penalized?

(still trying to figure out some of the rules here that are very different than what I am used to)

No, you are not penalised for just using a hand signal. Under the rules, a 'command' is a verbal word and/or a hand signal unless stipulated otherwise.

There are a couple of exercises where you can't use both, but none I can think of where you must use a verbal command. The closest to that I can think of is that you may say the dog's name at the start of a heel to get it's attention, but it's not obligatory. And you should read out the number of the scent article to the judge.

[Staranais]

Innocent and possibly silly question here - why is Aboriginal not accepted as an alternative language (is it even a single language), since that's about as Aussie as it gets, right?

[Diva]

Innocent and possibly silly question here - why is Aboriginal not accepted as an alternative language (is it even a single language), since that's about as Aussie as it gets, right?

Good point, but which of the several hundred distinct Aboriginal languages did you have in mind?

[Rusky]

Innocent and possibly silly question here - why is Aboriginal not accepted as an alternative language (is it even a single language), since that's about as Aussie as it gets, right?

there are more than 200 Aboriginal languages in Australia

[Rusky]

I suppose that having judges learn a host of different language commands is one way to completely lose your ANKC judges, we are short enough already so why not ?

I really think that it is much easier for the handler to teach basic commands in English here in Australia than for your judges to learn several languages.

We now have a suggestion of Aboriginal language

off you go chaps ...for your licence to be approved you have to learn basic commands in every competing country in the world and an additonal 200 plus native languages

[Staranais]

Innocent and possibly silly question here - why is Aboriginal not accepted as an alternative language (is it even a single language), since that's about as Aussie as it gets, right?

there are more than 200 Aboriginal languages in Australia

Oh interesting, thanks. I guess it's far simpler when you only have one native language. It's different here - I can't imagine anyone here getting away with telling someone they can't talk Maori, in the ring or anywhere else.

[bedazzledx2]

Handing in my licence as of the day that comes in!!!!!

I suppose that having judges learn a host of different language commands is one way to completely lose your ANKC judges, we are short enough already so why not ?

I really think that it is much easier for the handler to teach basic commands in English here in Australia than for your judges to learn several languages.

We now have a suggestion of Aboriginal language

off you go chaps ...for your licence to be approved you have to learn basic commands in every competing country in the world and an additonal 200 plus native languages

[Mason_Gibbs]

Australians speak English and all migrants have to pass an IELTS ( English written and spoken exam) to comply with visa requirements. Therefore technically everybody living here should speak English so why should obedience be judged in many other languages? It just does not make sense to me...

[Elina]

I didn't vote because I am not going to trial in obedience here in Australia. I just don't understand the whole problem here. In Finland you are allowed to use any language you want (Swedish is other official language). Many people compete in our neighbour countries as well and there is also European championship competitions etc. I haven't ever heard language would have been an issue even you can hear multiple languages in one competition. Rules are same about commands, have to be only one word.