This is a placeholder text
Group text
by kimbailey on 09 May 2010 - 23:05
Bazza, I'm sure Wildmoor doesn't need your defence, posting what she has and now photos invites some comments - mine are that I was concerned about the dog as he's clearly uncomfortable, now answered by Wildmoor. I've made my comments - which include that on the photos it was difficult to assess the angulation and carriage - I'd like to see more, particularly before the injury mentioned. It's impossible to tell much from these photos but they were posted as part of a package and thus invited comments, which I'm sure was the point of posting.
Bazza, it's not for you to say what forum members can and can't make comments on - no offence intended :-)
Bazza, it's not for you to say what forum members can and can't make comments on - no offence intended :-)
by kimbailey on 09 May 2010 - 23:05
Pam - the link didn't explain what had caused the injury, was he hit by a car? It seems similar injury to a cat I had many years ago who suffered similar damage, probably by a vehicle hitting her. It certainly explains why he was looking unhappy.
by bazza on 09 May 2010 - 23:05
Kim, No offence taken. And I know Wildmoor does not need mu defense, I gave an opinion, like everyone else, which I am entitled to do, as are you. I think however if you read her first post you will clearly see where she mentions RECENT TRAUMA, to me that says that the dog would obviously be looking UNCOMFORTABLE, no?? I do not get your idea of part of a package, nor do I understand why people give a critique on conformation when it is not asked for. The only reason as Wildmoor has already stated was to clear up comments made on another thread about this dogs rear angulation, nothing more nothing less. And I can Guarantee you if and when Wildmoor reads this she will agree with what I have said. Giving a critique from a photo is never really a good idea to be honest. Just my opinion and no offence intended, good night.
by bazza on 09 May 2010 - 23:05
Kim, having now read your previous comments on the colour thread, amongst others, I now fully understand your AGENDA sorry comments here. Take that which ever way you like, goodnight.
by Prager on 10 May 2010 - 05:05
by Member on 10 May 2010 - 06:05
I have just noticed this thread with regards to Wildmoors dog. Once some one has commented that this dog looks to have problems in the rear and is over angulated all the communication in the world will never convince the person this is not a problem with this particular dog. Far to often people make these type of comments with no knowledge of our breed which is why I would suggest they go and learn before they submit these type of statements. Remember also this dog is not moving which makes it very hard to determine the way in which he would move and make use of the angulation he has, in my opinion he actually lacks the angles which I would like to complete the overall picture of a balanced GSD. As for looking unhappy from a photo this is debatable. The croup which is also mentioned as being steep is a direct result of the position of the croup which when you look at the rear angulation which lack the desired angles this gives the overall look of a square dog quite bunched up. Maybe his injuries have caused this stance. Looks a nice dog to me with which at first glance is too steep in the croup and requires better angulation in the rear.
John Ward
John Ward
by bazza on 10 May 2010 - 07:05
Well said John,
by kimbailey on 10 May 2010 - 08:05
Bazza you are a pratt and so far up your own arse that you're not worth bothering about! The comments on here have been ...well the dog doesn't like being stacked as he hasn't been for ages, he looks uncomfoortable because he's stacked... etc all showing a considerable lack of knowledge and a lack of reading Pam's posting.
My postings stated that he looked uncomfortable (confirmed by Pam that he was still uncomfortable following an injury - he may have recovered and I included the possibility that he might not have done in my postings)
Not sure why you're having a go at me, or assuming any knowlege or lack of it! Other postings have confirmed what I said, so totally bizarre!
Bazza, you get my point now! hurrah! you are entitled to post... so am I
My points still stand as far as I can tell and confirmed by most of you that the dog has a steep croop and looks uncomfortable. He's had an injury. The photos make it impossible to tell his angulation and more, particularly showing movement would be needed. He is a nice colour.
These latter postings show just how far up your own ***es most of you are, how unwilling to even listen to other people's points of view you are an illustration of the problem with the breed today really, yes that would be folk like you guys! By the way Member if your comments about 'overangulated' refer to my postings why don't you actually read them and then you'll realise that I've never said it was 'overangulated', Pam is the only one who has done that (in parenthasis) I merely said 'less angulation' it's a pity that you are all prepared to comment yet do not read/understand the postings that you love to jump down people's throats for. No wonder the breed is in such a mess if people like you lot have anything to do with it.
The one thing that shouldn't be debateable in this thread - I spotted it and Pam has confirmed it - because he is uncomfortable. The wonder is that all you self-called 'experts' didn't! Not even when Pam had said he was recovering from an injury....seems like I know a lot more than you guys!
My postings stated that he looked uncomfortable (confirmed by Pam that he was still uncomfortable following an injury - he may have recovered and I included the possibility that he might not have done in my postings)
Not sure why you're having a go at me, or assuming any knowlege or lack of it! Other postings have confirmed what I said, so totally bizarre!
Bazza, you get my point now! hurrah! you are entitled to post... so am I
My points still stand as far as I can tell and confirmed by most of you that the dog has a steep croop and looks uncomfortable. He's had an injury. The photos make it impossible to tell his angulation and more, particularly showing movement would be needed. He is a nice colour.
These latter postings show just how far up your own ***es most of you are, how unwilling to even listen to other people's points of view you are an illustration of the problem with the breed today really, yes that would be folk like you guys! By the way Member if your comments about 'overangulated' refer to my postings why don't you actually read them and then you'll realise that I've never said it was 'overangulated', Pam is the only one who has done that (in parenthasis) I merely said 'less angulation' it's a pity that you are all prepared to comment yet do not read/understand the postings that you love to jump down people's throats for. No wonder the breed is in such a mess if people like you lot have anything to do with it.
The one thing that shouldn't be debateable in this thread - I spotted it and Pam has confirmed it - because he is uncomfortable. The wonder is that all you self-called 'experts' didn't! Not even when Pam had said he was recovering from an injury....seems like I know a lot more than you guys!
by missbeeb on 10 May 2010 - 08:05
I think the point is.... that Wildmoor never asked for anyone's opinion, Kim. The photographs were posted in relation to another thread.
by Member on 10 May 2010 - 09:05
Kim , to help me out could please name a dog or post a picture of a dog with less angulation than the one mentioned on this thread. We could then discuss what you believe you are seeing when you discribe Wildmoors dog. This is where I think we have a problem when comments are made which do not support what we can actually see!! in this case in the photos of this dog. I have no reason to question your views and opinion but would like for you to demonstate why you would think this dog should have a little less angulation and point me in the direction of one that has.
John Ward
John Ward
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top