Whats an Irish Staffie? Discussions

Maybe im being dumb, but i dont think this is an actual breed???

My neighbours have a dog that i thought was a staffie cross. She is very small and has a different shaped head to a "normal" staffie. She is very sweet, but seems to hate other dogs (goes for mine and the other dogs who live nearby!!). I asked them if she was a purebred staffie or cross and the owner said she's a purebred Irish Staffie, but i couldnt find anymore out

Am i missing something here?? She's a cute dog, but a bit odd looking... Has a head similar to an english bull terrier, but wider. So strange!!

normally code for a pit isnt it?!

not saying thsi dog is one - but the name normally is used to cover it up....

Really???

It wouldnt suprise me in the slightest actually with them....

They are not a breed but a breed type,they are usually leaner and taller than your SBT.Apparently alot are bred to the original standard 1935 for the SBT.

It is a Staffie cross but when and what is any ones guess most I have seen are rather poor canine specimens, poorly constructed and having no particular type at all beyond a vague Staffie look.

I have been told that in Eire they are Pits called ISBT think in some cases that may be true but most are just crosses even if they have been bred cross to cross for several generations, the big question is crossed with what and that I believe is where the Pit Bull stories come from.

In my area pit bulls are called Irish Staffies for obvious reasons. TBH it doesn`t really matter what it is, it should be muzzled round other dogs if it`s dog-aggressive.

yes, tis often a pseudonym for pit by dodgy breeders.

as is also American Staffie, Old
Fashioned Staffords, Traditional Staffords, Old Tyme Staffords

however in saying all that ur neighbours doesnt sound anything like a pit if its smaller than a staffie so i wouldnt worry about that.,

as others have said its just a another way of saying a staffie cross really.

Although I find mostly its the blue staffies that are referred to as Irish staffie??

Thanks for all the replies, very interesting!!

To be honest, if i had to guess (from my very limited knowledge of bull breeds) i'd guess that she is a cross with a staffie and an english bull terrier. However, she is tiny. Very finely boned and not too much taller than my pugs!! So its hard to tell.

Do agree that she should be muzzled, and i have said so to the owner. Everytime they open the front door (opens straight onto pavement) and a dog is nearby she is gone, and she has bitten. He said she's not agressive, just protective... But i expect to be able to walk my dogs on a lead, past their house on the pavement without having them attacked. I must be SO demanding

I thought Irish staffies were just staffies larger than staffie breed standard.
Then again iv limited experience.

Does not matter what reason the dog has for making an attack if it is in public the dog is out of control and the matter could be reported, perhaps you should warn him you have had others tell you the next time they will report it and the dog may then be ceased and put into kennels until the matter goes to court. Tell him you don't want that to happen to the dog so would he please take better care of her.

generally speaking, yes.
taller, longer legs.
but that happens to be *one* of the identifying features when assessing if a dog is section 1 type.

Thankyou, Iv learnt some thing else now, thanks to Dogsey.

you also have kc staffs with longer legs so is that irish as well???? as the sparpit dogs are leggy along with amos banes stuff and also stockade stuff all kc reg some of those irish dogs are bred like it is a science and can be traced way back and a lot of it comes down from ch gentleman jim as they are not exactly irish at all as they were english imports sent to ireland used in the trials and pits and if it was a good un sent back to the uk and used in breeding programs with stuff sent backwards and forwards between the uk and eire with most stuff bred here in the uk and exported to holland norway sweden and the us some lines have a bit of bull terrier some are pure and still kc reg basically an irish dog is like the pitbull in the us you have the american staffordshire that is a show dog and the apbt that is a working breed so an irish is like the kc dog but is a working dog. back to the first post it is either a poorly bred mutt that isnt irish or its one that has been to inbred and its wired wrong

welcome to the foum longford.

your post looks like it might have some interesting historical info.

would you mind re-posting using punctuation and without the abbreviations,
as i got confused.
no offence intended.

to answer your first sentence though, the answer would be no

yes i know the answer as for reposting dont think so as its only a message board not an english essay and most of us that own these dogs are thick anyway only joking

heres a website of real irish dogs and take a look http://realstafford.20m.com/photo.html

thank you for your link. i will take a look in a minute. although i do know that ISBT's arent a recognised breed by Irish KC, so im not too sure about the validity of a standard, as such?
but will scour you link to see id there is an answer.

re your post, if you arent concerned about making yourself understood, and you also know the answer to the question you asked, im a bit confused as to why you posted or how it fitted in with the topic of this thread?? :?

Just checked your link.
nice photos, but not so informative.
i was looking for more information about what you just posted above.

Krusewalker...seems a bit cheeky coming from someone who doesn't seem to use capital letters...
Having said that it does help people if people can use some punctuation at least, otherwise people can't understand the posts. No one wants an English essay, far from it....just the odd full stop! Especially in a post that seems really interesting.

hi ramble.
i was conscious of the fact i dont use capital when i posted to longford before .
but i do so out of personal aesthetic preference.
i wasnt making a point about grammar, im not one of those grammer nazis.
george bernard shaw didnt approve of surplus grammar.
but what he excelled at, and what i try to do as well, is writing things that can be understood reasonably well.
to that end, i always proof read and edit before i press post.
so am i just like yourself ramble, i just like to see some full stops to avoid a post being one long sentence, otherwise i cannot make head nor tail of what i am reading.
also longford used some abbreviations i didnt understand as well.
so when i said i was interested in what he had to say, but needed it re-explaining, so i could benfit from his post, that's all i meant.
so i'm a bit disappointed now longford has said he isnt interested in helping me to understand his intriguing looking post?