You’ve figured it out—it’s about Tine Magnus and her suspension. I want to make it clear that I find what this rider is going through absolutely terrible. I cannot imagine what kind of nightmare this must be… I don’t want to point fingers here. Not because I’m Belgian, not because I want to take sides, but because I lack sufficient knowledge of the case. But let me take a moment to point fingers at my colleagues—where is your fact-checking? There are stories circulating, but are they actually true?

In all this commotion, I simply ask myself: why?

As I said, I don’t have enough background information to determine who, if anyone, should be held responsible in the “Tine Magnus case.” The only available information comes from statements made by the FEI (International Equestrian Federation), the rider, and the Belgian federation. Meanwhile, the veterinarian (via social media) and the supplement brand involved have also issued statements. But that’s all the information we have at this moment. So, I am not taking a stance on guilt or innocence!

However, what does matter to me is, first: why? And second: the need for clarity!

First of all, has the relationship between (international) federations and riders become so strained that the (international) federation can no longer support riders without complications? Innocent is innocent, guilty is guilty. Although the horse tested positive, the rider (according to the FEI’s statement) is not guilty of intentionally administering the banned substance Trazodone—yet she was punished.

Let me put it another way: at a time when our social license to operate is questioned daily, the (international) federation sends a message that, despite good intentions and correct behavior, someone is still punished. What does this mean for the future of equestrian sport? How should this be interpreted? That no rider or person in our sport has good intentions? Or rather that the federation refuses to take context into account?

I simply cannot comprehend it… Is there a need for an overarching policy framework (an international federation)? I say a resounding yes. But that framework must act in the interest of the sport, not its own bureaucratic institution. It is clearer than ever that policymakers must reconnect with the sport and its participants and adjust their policies accordingly.

In this entire case, the FEI could have sent a completely different message! They could have considered the context, conducted a deeper investigation themselves (which apparently did not happen—despite their efficiency in bureaucracy…). By clearing Tine of all consequences, they could have demonstrated unity. Again, this conclusion is based on the press releases from the FEI, KBRSF, Tine Magnus, the veterinarian, and the supplement brand.

A need for clarity!

As much as this connection seems like a utopia, one thing becomes even more apparent: clarity. We are a sport that enforces a zero-tolerance policy regarding foreign substances. The complexity of banned substances, along with the constant risk of contamination—whether in the stable, at the vet, or through a manufacturer—does not make things any easier.

At the last IJRC (International Jumping Riders Club) meeting in Geneva, Max Kühner already pointed out that it is becoming impossible to know what a horse can and cannot eat. “The list of banned substances is so long that I question its accuracy,” Kühner said at the time. Several other top riders had already raised concerns (and previously, since the EHV-1 outbreak in Spain) about the need for better stable security policies and the inclusion of contamination risks in exclusion criteria within the regulations.

Nowadays, you practically need a university degree just to understand FEI rules. And then suddenly, there is no room for context? How out of touch have they become? An open question…