Rules

[maddmatt]

Just a curious question, but, should rules in shooting be rigidly applied or should there be some common sense and some flexibility? There have been plenty of threads about shooters seeing the rules being broken and seemingly nothing being done by ref's. Is it acceptable at all shoots or should the rules only be enforced in the majors with no exceptions?

This becomes particularly tricky with disciplines like fitasc, for example all ref's should check you have a line and that the line is the correct distance from the top of the shoulder, but in teh last 10 years I have not seen any ref checking that, here of abroad. It is also against the rules for the squad to influence a ref's decision, but that happens almost constantly, so does that make the rule redundant or should it be reinforced?

 

[Sian]

I like rules generally speaking and I do think they should be enforced.  I have to admit to being someone who does not have a line for Fitasc at the present time on my lower layers of clothing but then I have only really been dipping my toe into the fitasc world relatively recently.  It is my second discipline, sporting being my first.  I abide by the rules of Fitasc and make sure my gun is below where the line should be, sometimes quite significantly and I will always check my gun mount before calling.  I do carry tape and I have no objection to a chalk line being drawn on me.  I will eventually have clothing for winter and summer with lines on them just need to get my act together.  

I think more experienced refs and fitasc refs do check gun mount albeit not very obviously and I have been on squads where refs have gently warned shooters - I haven't seen a card yet.  I have seen very experienced shots gun creep (and ironically they probably don't need to), I haven't said anything as I don't really know them that well and I don't really want to spend the rest of the day in an unpleasant atmosphere.  I just make sure I follow that rule.  It is a hard one where the squad are concerned because I do think in some circumstances refs do miss some things (they are human) and if an entire squad is confirming this, most refs take on board what they say even if it is only to make the shooter take the shot again.  Apart from some numpties, generally squad members are not out to dupe a ref or help a friend.  I wouldn't do it for my own husband let alone anyone else and he certainly would not do it for me.  Sometimes a ref calls upon the squad to help verify something, it depends on the circumstances.

Where you have obvious newbies, a ref is often very gentle and the warnings are gentle.  I always remember one of my first Fitasc shoots, I was actually really nervous about breaking the rules and that probably didn't help my shooting that day but I accidentally and without thinking pre mounted my gun.  As soon as I did it, I realised and shouted out loud "I've broken the rules, I pre mounted".  The ref just said lets start over, breath, relax and carry on.  I was grateful for that, my intentions were good but I got flummoxed.

I supposed if it were a toss up between rules becoming redundant or being reinforced I would be in the reinforce camp.

 

[Les53]

Well Matt, rules are rules as they say! So I would say yes, they should always be applied, otherwise rules are pointless! 

 

[Dog Tyred]

Rules are there for everyone's benefit and they should be applied equally and consistently. Being pulled up for making a mistake is the best way to learn.

As the previous discussion it is the lack of knowledge of the rules by refs which needs to be addressed.

DT

 

[maddmatt]

Les - this is the general feeling among shooters so I am a little lost why ref's are not applying the rules. Is it just a case of the ref not wanting to get 'in to one' with a shooter, apathy seems to be the order of the day with some ref's - especially in Fitasc, simply not doing what they should be. This includes calling one or zero (kill or miss), some of them dont say a word and it causes confusion and then lengthy discussions when the shooter think he shot 25 and finds the ref has put them down for a 23! 

Personally I think ref's should be paid more a day, especially for the majors, right now it feels like the ref's are volunteers and without them the event would be a joke, it simply cannot be that hard to ensure we get a steady stream of new blood in the ref arena.

 

[Les53]

Les - this is the general feeling among shooters so I am a little lost why ref's are not applying the rules. Is it just a case of the ref not wanting to get 'in to one' with a shooter, apathy seems to be the order of the day with some ref's - especially in Fitasc, simply not doing what they should be. This includes calling one or zero (kill or miss), some of them dont say a word and it causes confusion and then lengthy discussions when the shooter think he shot 25 and finds the ref has put them down for a 23! 

Personally I think ref's should be paid more a day, especially for the majors, right now it feels like the ref's are volunteers and without them the event would be a joke, it simply cannot be that hard to ensure we get a steady stream of new blood in the ref arena.

Matt, as you probably know, the ref situation in Trap has been discussed many times and there is a current thread on the subject on here. I do believe that we should have proper PAID refs doing the job, even if it costs a little more to shoot a comp. I've never liked the idea of other shooters in a comp also being refs. Also I don't like idea of having to work between squads, being a lazy git myself! So yes, we need proper paid refs for ALL disciplines as far as I'm concerned and by proper I mean they should have done the relevant training course! 

 

[Paul120]

Having paid refs if you can find them. In previous  times in manual trap days it was hard enough to get trappers at any cost. 

TBH I'm happy reffing in trap and if it keeps cost down by any smount, all thebetter IMO.

The only nightmares I've had are with paid or ground refs. 

 

[maddmatt]

We have associations for pretty much everything in shooting, is there one for referees? If not why not? If a ref is being paid properly then you have a good chance that they will conduct themselves appropriately, when you pay them love all then you have no real means of redress if its going a bit wrong.

 

[Nimbusgb]

eyes,ears and hats ...... them's the rules but I have only ever been asked to don a hat at one ground.

 

[maddmatt]

I think the hat rule is a ground thing and is not actually part of the CPSA Rules: Funny thing in the current rules - I have never in 20 years seen any of these enforced:

DRESS STANDARDS 17.3 At all CPSA events described above, competitors’ clothing will be expected to be in a tidy and clean condition and should not contain any messages, images or slogans that may reasonably cause offence to others. Offensive messages or images of a sexual or racial nature are specifically forbidden, as well as any that break accepted standards of decency and good taste. The byword for the standard to be achieved will be: ‘smart/casual’. Listed below are specific examples of personal appearance or garments that will be considered unacceptable under this Code:

a) Nakedness of the trunk or limbs other than lower arms or legs.

b.) Wearing of shooting vests over naked flesh.

c) Shirts or tops that have sleeves that when measured from the armpit seam are less than 10cm long (other than shooting vests).

d) Cut-off jeans or trousers or any type of shorts other than tailored *shorts.

e) Torn, slashed or shredded shirts, jeans, trousers or skirts.

f) Military or camouflaged wear, balaclava helmets or camouflage paint.

g) Any excessively worn, dirty or dishevelled clothing or footwear.

h) Any footwear that exposes the foot, for example sandals and flip flops

i) Any other garments or personal appearances that go against the spirit of this Code or that seek to exploit any possible loophole within it, at the discretion of the persons named in paragraph 17.2 above.

 

[Les53]

I think the hat rule is a ground thing and is not actually part of the CPSA Rules: Funny thing in the current rules - I have never in 20 years seen any of these enforced:

DRESS STANDARDS 17.3 At all CPSA events described above, competitors’ clothing will be expected to be in a tidy and clean condition and should not contain any messages, images or slogans that may reasonably cause offence to others. Offensive messages or images of a sexual or racial nature are specifically forbidden, as well as any that break accepted standards of decency and good taste. The byword for the standard to be achieved will be: ‘smart/casual’. Listed below are specific examples of personal appearance or garments that will be considered unacceptable under this Code:

a) Nakedness of the trunk or limbs other than lower arms or legs.

b.) Wearing of shooting vests over naked flesh.

c) Shirts or tops that have sleeves that when measured from the armpit seam are less than 10cm long (other than shooting vests).

d) Cut-off jeans or trousers or any type of shorts other than tailored *shorts.

e) Torn, slashed or shredded shirts, jeans, trousers or skirts.

f) Military or camouflaged wear, balaclava helmets or camouflage paint.

g) Any excessively worn, dirty or dishevelled clothing or footwear.

h) Any footwear that exposes the foot, for example sandals and flip flops

i) Any other garments or personal appearances that go against the spirit of this Code or that seek to exploit any possible loophole within it, at the discretion of the persons named in paragraph 17.2 above.

Matt......I reckon they just knicked an ips list there mate!!!  :lol:

 

[maddmatt]

think you are right, maybe we should get ips to be the enforcer...

 

[ips]

rules is rules. They should be rigidly adhered to all times times otherwise it would be anarchy. Once rules are allowed to have interpretation then by definition they cease to be rules and become guidelines.

only a cheat would ever wish to reinterpreted rules, you would never get away with flexibility of a rule that loses a shooter a target only ever flexibility for the shooter to claim one.

 

[Wonko the Sane]

Well Matt, rules are rules as they say! So I would say yes, they should always be applied, otherwise rules are pointless! 

Rules are there for everyone's benefit and they should be applied equally and consistently. Being pulled up for making a mistake is the best way to learn.

As the previous discussion it is the lack of knowledge of the rules be refs which needs to be addressed.

DT

Without rules the GAME is pointless.  If you don't like the rules get them changed or change games.

 

[Salopian]

Could you lot get it sorted before next Wednesday please?

 

[chippy]

I think the hat rule is a ground thing and is not actually part of the CPSA Rules: Funny thing in the current rules - I have never in 20 years seen any of these enforced:

DRESS STANDARDS 17.3 At all CPSA events described above, competitors’ clothing will be expected to be in a tidy and clean condition and should not contain any messages, images or slogans that may reasonably cause offence to others. Offensive messages or images of a sexual or racial nature are specifically forbidden, as well as any that break accepted standards of decency and good taste. The byword for the standard to be achieved will be: ‘smart/casual’. Listed below are specific examples of personal appearance or garments that will be considered unacceptable under this Code:

a) Nakedness of the trunk or limbs other than lower arms or legs.

b.) Wearing of shooting vests over naked flesh.

c) Shirts or tops that have sleeves that when measured from the armpit seam are less than 10cm long (other than shooting vests).

d) Cut-off jeans or trousers or any type of shorts other than tailored *shorts.

e) Torn, slashed or shredded shirts, jeans, trousers or skirts.

f) Military or camouflaged wear, balaclava helmets or camouflage paint.

g) Any excessively worn, dirty or dishevelled clothing or footwear.

h) Any footwear that exposes the foot, for example sandals and flip flops

i) Any other garments or personal appearances that go against the spirit of this Code or that seek to exploit any possible loophole within it, at the discretion of the persons named in paragraph 17.2 above.

I hope they don't enforce  g.  I will have take up golf instead.

 

[move-mount-miss]

I hope they don't enforce  g.  I will have take up golf instead.

Wouldn't be much of a golf club that allowed you to wear g)

 

[chippy]

Wouldn't be much of a golf club that allowed you to wear g)

I was thinking of hunstanton putting green.

 

[Dog Tyred]

Nobody every won or lost a championship because of what they were wearing. 

Claiming a repeat lost target due to perceived 'distraction' is another issue.

There are rules and there are 'Rules' and the later should be understood by all and properly implemented. 

DT