Equine sport employs an open reporting culture - time to think again?

Equine sport employs an open reporting culture - or does it?
©Harveywetdog

Transparency, Trust, and the Things We Don’t Say

There are moments in sport that stop the conversation dead. Not because there is nothing to say, but because what can be said suddenly feels fraught, loaded, or dangerous. Everyone lowers their voice. Statements are weighed. Words are checked by lawyers, by committees, by that invisible fear of getting it wrong.

Those moments matter more than most.

Equestrian sport, like any high risk activity, trades on trust. Riders trust organisers. Volunteers trust systems. Families trust that when something goes wrong — as it sometimes will — the response will be thoughtful, honest, and rooted in learning rather than defensiveness. Trust is not built in the good weeks. It is built in the difficult ones.

And this is where things often get uncomfortable.

There is a growing habit in modern sport to confuse silence with respect. To assume that saying less is always kinder, safer, more appropriate. Sometimes it is. But sometimes silence is simply easier. Sometimes it protects institutions more than it protects people.

Learning, real learning, is rarely neat. It requires admitting that systems are fallible. That decisions are made with imperfect information. That risk can be managed, but never eliminated. When organisations speak openly about what they have learned — not speculating, not blaming, not sensationalising — they demonstrate maturity. They show that safety is not a slogan, but a process.

None of this is simple. There are families to consider. Individuals whose grief is not theoretical. There are legal frameworks, coronial processes, and the blunt reality that words, once published, cannot be taken back. Anyone pretending otherwise has never sat on the wrong end of a serious incident.

But acknowledging complexity should not become an excuse for opacity.

Participants in this sport are not naïve. They understand risk intimately. They accept it every time they leg up. What they ask for, quietly but persistently, is reassurance that when the worst happens, the response will not be to retreat behind stock phrases and closed doors.

This is where the idea of being a critical friend matters. Criticism does not have to be loud to be serious. It does not need to be hostile to be sincere. Sometimes it is simply a hand on the shoulder saying: this matters more than you think.

Openness does not require publishing everything. Transparency does not mean ignoring sensitivity. It means showing your workings. It means explaining, in broad terms, how conclusions are reached and how lessons are applied. It means recognising that confidence in the sport depends not on pretending incidents don’t happen, but on demonstrating what happens next.

There is also a longer view to consider. Today’s decisions become tomorrow’s precedents. Each time an organisation chooses silence, it quietly resets expectations. Each time it chooses measured openness, it reinforces a culture of shared responsibility.

"They are asking for evidence that learning is continuous, visible, and taken seriously"

This is not about blame. It never was. It is about whether the sport is confident enough to look at itself honestly, even when that is uncomfortable. Especially when it is uncomfortable.

Because the truth is this: people are not asking for certainty. They are asking for evidence that learning is continuous, visible, and taken seriously. They are asking to be treated as adults who can hold nuance, not as a risk to be managed.

Trust, once lost, is hard to recover. But trust, when carefully tended in difficult moments, becomes remarkably resilient.

The sport will face moments like this again. That is not pessimism; it is reality. When it does, the question will not be whether the balance between sensitivity and openness is easy. It never is. The question will be whether we are brave enough to keep trying to get it right.

Silence may feel safer in the moment. Learning lasts longer.

Link - safety case for the ethical involvement of horses in sport

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Harveywetdog/Author - David Robinson CEng FIET 

David spent approaching 50 years in Her Majesty's Electricity Supply Industry before retiring

He was part of the highly successful design team on the Sizewell B Nuclear Power Station Project before spending 25 years producing safety cases to keep our aging AGR fleet generating for the good of the nation

He is responsible for the Harveywetdog YouTube Channel which he maintains as an outlet for his creative talents

David has twice experienced blood cancer treatment but absolutely refuses to be a victim

All views are of course his own but might be influenced by the medication he's had to take