Plushcourt Rebate

Many thanks to the Officers and the committee for kindly inviting me to Judge at this show. I thought the breed generally especially in the early classes was of a very high standard. Head shapes were very good, I only had one bad bite although some teeth could have been larger. Eyes generally were very good. I would have preferred to see some smaller ears. Body shapes were very good although a tad long. Movement was generally good going but I was a little disappointed with the front movement; ie small strides & too much knee action.

Sincere apologies to my exhibitors, the committee failed to inform me the proposed order of group judging had changed & the Terrier group was brought forward, the tannoy call was the 1st thing I knew about it. My back spasm during junior dog meant I was reduced to shuffling, sorry. Most dogs were new to me & temperaments in the ring were good, my winners could do the job they were intended for being free from coarseness & lumber, spannable & narrow, with corresponding good construction & movement. Several heads were short in skull & blocky, more resembling the balance of an Asian Short Clawed Otter, than an English one, the latter have longer than broad flat skulls, clean cheeks & relatively short muzzles parallel in profile to their skull, Borders should have large teeth with good scissor bite to be effective. Today, square, deep skulls, often with round eyes & very short narrow muzzles with small teeth were in evidence. These too strong square heads tended to have heavy fronts & frames to match. Many fronts were placed too far forward with pro-sternum behind point of shoulder, which lacked length & layback, the too short & steep upper arms having no support, badly affecting movement, the dogs moved away with their fronts crossing, when only two legs should be visible. As an alternative a few were close behind & swung in front, so again "four legs". Profile movement lacked ?travel?, being up & down short choppy strides rather than smooth & forward going with drive off the hocks. Although bone wasn't generally too fine nor too heavy some didn't have enough through pasterns into feet, & they lacked the depth of pad to ensure soundness if worked regularly. My major concern, however, was coats & especially pelts. When I came into the breed Borders were shown in deep double coat, always.Dogs then looked heavier than they were due to these double coats & lots of pelt which the standard says MUST be thick - not because they had big frames with drum tight skins.. Coat density & pelt are directly related, no coat, thus thin skin, but they should still be loose & pliant. Tight, paper thin skins without depth of under or topcoat is not what the standard calls for, nor any use to a working terrier. A great advantage to the dog is a continuous double coat that can be worked or shown all year round.