|
Location: Beautiful Wiltshire, Uk
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,122
|
14-04-2007, 07:29 PM
Originally Posted by Nicci_L 
Yes, but my whole point is...The standard was first changed in 1948 11 years after the standard was first introduced, do you not think or believe that the standard was changed in 1948 by the very same people that created that standard in 1937? 11 years in the great scheme of things is not a long time, most of the people originally involved within the Stafford circles were quite possibly still alive.
I don't see anywhere in todays standards as it only says 'desirable height' that Staffords would be penalised for being perhaps an inch taller. So to me the standards haven't changed a great deal and people should adhere to the standards that are set, instead of breeding badly bred leaner, taller non KC staffords.
But of course thats just my opinion
|
|
Location: UK
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,415
|
14-04-2007, 07:40 PM
I'm not a huge fan of 'alternative staffs' after seeing more than a few in the flesh, I'll make no secret of that, they are not any more healthier than today's KC stafford in my opinion and it's wrong for owners of 'alternative' Staffords to profess that they are otherwise as they are not.
Infact, 'alternative' staffies seem to be the latest trend around my way badly bred and 'typey' springs to mind and as far as I am concerned 'typey' is badly bred especially when I am looking at dogs that are 'supposed' Staffords that look nothing like one or even resemble one in any way.
As I said I don't see anywhere in todays standard that a dog would be penalised for being taller - it says 'desired height' as long as the dogs were in proportion I personally can't see where or how a taller dog would be penalised.
The KC states a list of breed faults that are highly 'undesireable' height isn't given a mention anywhere within that standard. The standard hasn't changed a great deal - but I merely corrected the few posters that replied saying the standard was changed without giving proper facts on when the drop in height occured it certainly was not 1987, the standard was re-worded, not re-written.
|
|
Sorry For My Post
|
|
Location: Beautiful Wiltshire, Uk
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,122
|
14-04-2007, 07:47 PM
Originally Posted by kristian
good to see your admitting your wrong
at the end of the day it's nothing to do with tempremant it's just size and some people prefer taller athletic type compared to fat unhealthy little pigs!
I will not continue to say what I think of 'longer legged' staffords as I have more respect,
just becaus you do not like show standards stafford that are breed standard does not mean other people dont
|
|
each to they're own 
