What should a standard Blue staffies look like? Discussions

Personally I can't see why these dogs are called Staffordshire Terriers, they are nothing at all like them being lighter in bone with less overall muscle, longer in leg and not the overall balance of the original Stafford. Sure they are just what their owners want but why call them Staffs, even if they carry Staffie blood, there are loads of dogs that carry Staffie blood but are not called Staffordshire Terriers or any variation thereof. In body they are more like a boxer than a Staffie, not that I am suggesting for one moment they should be called Irish Boxers heaven forbid.

Couldn't have worded it better myself,there are all sort of names they call them,such as pompey staffords,liverpool staffords,Irish Staffords,etc.
They are not recognised by the offical KC nor The Irish Kennel Club.
IKC is a registration club run by Ed Reid,and the registration's are not worth the paper they are written on.

You have a much better way with words than me lol!
The old KC standard of 16 - 18" in height suits me ust fine too + the way i see it (all be it very niavely), although our basic principle is to breed to standard, at some point personal preference plays a big part, just look at the variety of staffs out there today.
IMO a standard blue staffy conformation would depend on its registration, both my bitches are 'standard' for what they are.
LEADSTAFFS - If taller, IKC reg stafies are cross breeds then please explain to me 2 things, 1 - How comes many 'taller' staffs pedigrees go back to KC dogs? and also 2 - Do you have any idea which 3, yes 3, different breeds of dog the KC staffy was produced from by crossing them?
HAYLEY - Remi is mainly KK bred but has alot o unknown dogs/new blood in her 1st 3 generations, we are hoping this new blood will allow us to line breed her without some of the problems known with breeding too close and doubling up on a lines bad points.
I am very happy with her head but will be working on her ears lol, she has the typical KK bred ears that almost stand up from quite abit of the tips.
Im learning soooo much + would love to have a chat with you about my dogs to get your perspective, i think i shall PM you in a moment.
But your preferences for your ideal staffy mirror mine completely - i just dont have the lingo lol, jo xx

Hey Jo
I thought she may have KK in her, the ears are the give away, there has been some nice dogs from the KK line!
IVE PMed you back Jo x

Pita and nissian its a shame you think like that, nissian your views are very typical of a KC snob! (my biggest pet hate)
DO you Know anything about ed ried and IKC ? to make such a very damaging sweeping statement?
Why do you show you dogs nissian?
DO you think because your dogs have papers and you show them in a ring, it makes them better than a dog without papers?
DO you think that your dogs are perfect because they have papers?
Be truthful do you think you stafford is anything like the ones you would see in the early 1900's?

PITA can you say that all staffords without papers are cross breeds?
Staffords never looked like the show standard kennel club over bullish dogs till the standard change! They drop the height and never the weight which eventually made L2 become apparent in the staffordshire bull terrier. You can bang on about looks but health,temperment and true breed traits should come first

So as long as the stafford meets the current standard, the kennel club dicates what they should look like, so you can gain a title for your dogs and some pretty ribbons, and your staffords have the kennel papers, then nothing else matters! and any other dog that does not meet hte current standard (the true standard was the first one) and without papers, are cross breeds?

Great, makes me want to change my mind and get clone copies, not care about the breed, get a name for myself and some pretty ribbions and if im lucky i can boast my dog has a CC yeah im special, opps i mean my dog is special

NOT

ive said it once anne staff about my forum, and been as its invite only there is hardly a chance on many getting on it

Pita and Nissain saying all staffords with out papers, so im giving my view on what they think!

Hayley,
I would rather be a snob and know my dogs history and know where and how my dogs are bred.
I think you have a real problem problem with anyone that disagree's with your comments.
A bit like a child in the school playground throwing a temper tantrum.
I have two kc registered,well bred dogs,Tyler is nearly 9 months old and is standing at 16 inches,and 38lb in weight.He is last photo is on the forum.
So because i like showing and our dogs enjoy it,we are kc snobs. So be it!

Hayley - don't try to insult other members.

If you want to discuss things go ahead but don't get personal. If anyone get's personal with you use the report post icon to alert a mod.

You have been given 1 Infraction point - all infractions are recorded so we build a database of bad behaviour. At certain numbers of points automatic punishments are given, eg a temp ban at 3 points and a permenant ban at a few more.

Just slightly off topic here, but it was mentioned earlier did someone think all unregistered staffords were cross breeds, just my tuppence worth BUT; for a dog to be considered a "pure breed" it must be of pure blood content-NO mixing, with a traceable blood line, a vast "family" history etc.
A dog that is bred to a certain look, usually to fullfill a certain job is what one would call a type-like the beloved Jack Russells, Patterdales etc. A "type" of dog, sometimes with a documented history-many good proper working folk (in the case of the stated dogs) who can tell you the history of the dogs blood as far back as twenty/thirty years in some cases-but they aren't a breed, as there originally and still, probably, to this day is new blood added (occasionally-not all too often) to alter the breed slightly, widen the gene pool etc. Therefore aren't a purebreed, as such.
Any dog with an uncharted history, a history which can't be traced beyond the dam and rarely the sire-is of uncertain heritage, therefore could have different blood in there along the way. I myself own a wonderfull x breed terrier bitch, bred for the working field by a true working terrier family who had kept the dogs that made up Florrie's ancestry as far back as twenty five years-but still nothing is documented, she is off two different breeds of dog-and who knows if within the twenty five years a little "something else" wasn't added to allow these terriers to fullfill the desired job better.
I've rambled and probably contradicted myself along the way-but the plain and simple is this:
Any dog with an untraceable/undocumented/unknown (fully) history can't be reffered to as a certain breed because you just don't know for sure-despite what one may think.

Very few breeders/handlers/owner hold such a view as you are implying-and it just shows how small minded and wrong that view is
The Kennel Club, in my eyes, is about the welfare of breeds-preserving breeds-furthering breeds and so on. If they are so bad then why do they have such strict stipulations in order for breeds?
Such as number of litters, health scores etc.
If they nor the people who own KC registered dogs didn't care about first and foremost the dogs and the breed then wouldn't they have no rules and regulations and just allow bitches to be bred with little care just to churn out winners?
Hmmmn you don't seem to be making a very convincing argument Hayley:?
IMO it is people who breed these leggy, lean, "athletic" (how laughable) so called "staffords" that are doing the harm, breeding without care, breeding dogs of mixed blood and passing them off as a certain breed, breeding them to be a 'harder' breed for "hard man" fools, allowing them to go to anyone who pays the right price-these, in my eyes, are the ones doing damage and jepodising (breeds), and if you think these are the breeders who "do it right" as the produce the staffords "You want" (which frankly don't even look like staffords!) then i am afraid you are oh so mistaken...

I will answer your questions as honestly as i can,No i don't want to know anything about Ed Reid and his Registration system,the only one that counts in my eyes is the offical KC.
Yes i do think my dogs are better with papers,no it doesn't make the dog but i have a history on how they were bred,what lines they have and i can trace them back,plus i am aware of genetic problems through different lines,you can't do this with non kc reg dogs.
No i don't think my dogs are perfect because they have papers,every dog has a fault whether it be eye colour untidy ears, pigmentation problems, constuction faults ,bad mouths etc,if i have perfect dogs why i am trying to improve my lines by establishing a breeding programme for the future?
I have seen all sorts of different pictures from the early 1900's and i prefer the staffords we have now.Would i use a stud dog on my bitch that was over 16 inches,yes i would if he was right for my bitch and everything i was looking for was there,it's not about height alone it is about a well constructed balanced dog and getting as close to the breed standard as possible.

Old tyme and Irish staffords are not a recognised breed and not pure bred staffords.

No problem with any dog but don't like that they are called staffords when they are not.

nissian what about the staffords before they were reg with the kennel club? were they not real staffords?
Snobbery is thinking your dog is better because it has papers
Think about it, what is the need of the kennel club if you dont show your dogs, you can still have a pedigree, how do you think they did it before the stafford was not reg with the kennel club?

Thanks for answering the questions

No one said anyone or dog was better just stating facts and that is.

Old tyme staffords and Irish staffords are not recognised as a breed, Fact.
Opinion, I personally would prefer they were called something else.
Why? Take a look at DEFRAs web site and their information given regarding these breeds.

This attitude is nonsense, people buy and breed KC registered dogs because that is the best way of controlling the health and conformation of the breed they love, not perfect I grant but the best available. Not snobbery just a desire to do the best we can for the dogs we own and dogs and breeds in general.

There seems to be too types of dog owners/breeder, those who are interested in caring for the welfare of the breeds handed down to us by the people who developed them for a particular purpose and those who think that those breeds are just not good enough and think they can do better by crossing breeds and in some cases making claims that are not able to be confirmed (poor or unreliable records) these too sides of the dog world will never see eye to eye because they are aiming at a different target, one to keep and improve on the breeds handed down to them and the other determined to produce new breeds and ditch the breeds from history.

Well said Pita

Hayley you have mis quoted me!
I said my dogs were better with KC registrations as i know how they were bred and i know what lines they came from,like i said it doesn't make the dog.
Pita has explained it in her post,i don't feel the need to keep repeating what has been gone over hundreds of times.This is now and the future,i don't believe in living in the past and keep covering old ground.
I do show my dogs,they enjoy it,we enjoy it,we have been kicked with our previous dog more times than i care to remember,but to us it's not about been placed or a rosette,it's about competeing,our dogs and us enjoying what we are doing and catching up with old friends.I wonder out of all the staffords that are in rescue how many were actually bred with no papers and knowlege.Quite a few i would imagine,and i'm not saying that kc reg staffords don't end up in rescue because i know they do.It's makes me sad when i see ads saying full pedigree but no papers,so what was the point in breeding that litter?Breeders out for money and little or no regard for the breed.
I gather from your posts you don't like the KC,you don't like show dogs or people and we should all be breeding non registered dogs.What a very sad attitude.

Pita what do you discribe conformation as?

nissan
well pedigrees are Important, the kennel club is not! do you really have that much faith to think that if it has the kennel club logo on top of a bit of paper means that its worth more, remove the kennel club logo and then u just have a pedigree, a pedigree is IMportant but with or without the logo of the kennel club it still means the same! Even in the kennelclub you get fake papers!

IF the stafford standard were orignal ones that the kennel club show under, then i would show, IF the kennel club didnt support on ruining many breeds then maybe i would like them that much more
Neos, Stafford, English Bulldogs, GSDs, Mastiff, Bull Mastiffs, DDB's, English Bull terriers, Daxies, Collies, and so many many more breeds are not only going down hill rapid, but are already down hill

Doesnt take anyone clever to understand that none of the dog mentioned above could ever do the job they were bred for, now thats sad!