It is time for SUBJECTIVE penalties...

[Creeker, SASS #43022]

Spirit of the Game as a penalty has out lived it's usefullness and needs to go away.

It is rarely applied, is always subjective and has no place in a real shooting sport.

 

SoG requires that we have innate knowledge of a shooters decisions, that they committed an infraction "Willfully or intentionally" "to gain a competitive advantage".

 

It is based not on what the shooter actually did, but "Why" they did it and did they mean to do it?

The exact same action can be performed by two different shooters and will result in two different penalties.

 

Alternate 10 rounds on two rifle plates. One a 4 foot square at 7 yards, the other a 4 inch circle at 70 yards.

 

Shooter one, a non gamey mid pack cowboy comes up and places 10 rounds on the close square target.

When asked, he grins and says I never even realized there was a second target, sorry.

He is assigned a 10 second procedural for shooting targets out of order.

 

Shooter two, an extremely fast, highly gamey cowboy comes up and places 10 rounds on the close square target.

When asked, he grins and says I never even realized there was a second target, sorry.

He is assigned a 30 second SoG penalty for trying to gain a competitive advantage.

 

We do not assign ANY other penalties in this manner.

Every other penalty; be it for misses, breaking the 170 or having a hammer down on a loaded chamber.

We assign those for what the shooter actually DID, not what they meant to do or thought they were doing, or any other made up criteria.

 

But the harshest time penalty we have at our disposal, 30 seconds SoG, is a wholly subjective assignment.

 

But Creeker you say; we have to have something.

If not, that fast gamey cowboy will always shoot the big close target and just take the 10 second penalty.

Ah, not so fast. If we do away with the subjective penalty, we can change the objective ones as well.

 

You can earn more than one safety on a stage, so why limit the "P" to a single one per stage? Assign a "P" for every error.

Our cowboys placing all ten rounds on the close target and not shooting at the distant target? A "P" for each shot that struck the wrong target. 5x10 seconds, they EACH earn 50 seconds extra. No subjectivity, and they both get the same penalty for the same infraction.

 

If we ever want to be considered a real shooting sport, subjective penalties are one of the things we are going to have to let go of.

It's time.

[Brother King, SASS #69031]

Creeker that just makes too much sense to EVER become a SASS RO Committee ruling.

[Jack Houston # 35508]

Creeker that just makes too much sense to EVER become a SASS RO Committee ruling.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

[Manatee]

I always worry when a person refers to himself in the third person.......

[The Shoer 27979]

I'm game Creeker how are you going to get it changed

[PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L]

You can earn more than one safety on a stage, so why limit the "P" to a single one per stage? Assign a "P" for every error.

Our cowboys placing all ten rounds on the close target and not shooting at the distant target? A "P" for each shot that struck the wrong target. 5x10 seconds, they EACH earn 50 seconds extra. No subjectivity, and they both get the same penalty for the same infraction.

 

Creeker that just makes too much sense to EVER become a SASS RO Committee ruling.

 

 

 

FWIW - That would require a rule CHANGE...which means it would have to be approved by the Territorial Governors.

Good luck with THAT.

 

[Brother King, SASS #69031]

FWIW - That would require a rule CHANGE...which means it would have to be approved by the Territorial Governors.

Good luck with THAT.

 

So you're saying that the TG's is the black hole of common sense rule changes? Is that it? NAWWW.... a hybrid of that would be to make it a "P" for each string rather than each stage. Which would do nothing to alleviate your scenario. It's virtually impossible to make a rule/penalty for every conceivable contrivance by creative gamers.

 

And we're right back to the subjective SOG.

[Grizzly Dave]

Gonna need to authorize and mandate high speed video equipment on each stage for slow motion replays to assist spotters in decided how many Ps there were along with how many misses. Good luck getting a consensus otherwise.

 

Both of your examples are clear cut SOG/FTE no matter the skill of the shooter or what they say.

 

EDIT - Even if you want to assert that the shooter truly didn't know there was another target and thusly doesn't deserve a SOG, the fact remains he failed to engage the other target.

[Gateway Kid SASS# 70038 Life]

Sorry Creeker,

We have met a couple of times and chatted. Just want to say I highly respect your viewpoint and opinion but reading your OP I could not disagree more. The example of the 2 cowboys indicates a lack of consistancy in application of the rules not an interpretation of what they did.

 

I have only seen a SOG given twice in the last 5 years - one was for a mandatory reload where the penalty was stated in the shooters book at a major match. The other was for not carrying a prop in the shooters hands from one shooting position to another at a monthly.

First one shooter had a really rough go after several tough stages in a row, forgot the reload, was reminded by the TO (and the spotters) it was mandatory, basically said "I have had enough, I am not going to reload and I am done" (personally agreed with the shooter at the time but their choice not mine). Result - SOG

Not subjective - overkill yes

Deserved? - if you are following the rules yes

Appropriate in this case? - I thought pretty harsh, but the PM made a point of bringing up that part of the stage in the briefing (several times as I recall) so no one could say they had not been warned.

Second one shooter did not feel carrying the prop, then putting it down then picking it up then setting it down at each of 3 postions was really "shooting" so stated at the start that they were not going to do it. Was told that it was a required element of the stage and responded that they were there to shoot not carry props.

Result - SOG

I agree that 2 times in 5 years qualifies as "rare", but I think CAS is a "real shooting sport" with its own rules (however quirky you think they are). both times were deserved under the rules and clearly objective so you now have two examples that SOG is not always subjective.

 

As far as "a real shooting sport" I guess we should get rid of the cowboy outfits and follow the NASCAR example so other shooting venues will "accept" us. Many seem to think our costumes look a little "goofy" compared to tactical vests, specialized running shoes, ball caps and high efficiency ear muffs. and don't forget the Kydex holsters and mag pouches.

Maybe we should allow heads up sights on the rifles and pistols with hi-viz optics on the shotguns. or better yet open the game to any rifle/pistol/shotgun out there since we want others to think well of us and we want to be inclusive and a "real shooting sport" Besides if the cowboys pre 1900 could have laid hands on an AR-15 or a Glock or high speed Beretta auto loader I am sure they would have used them so why not us?

The CAS rules generally seem to be well thought out. Clearly they don't cover every thing that comes up - if they did we would not need the Wire to discuss every minute detail of every situation that occurs from time to time. In the same vein we should probably rewrite the Constitution/Bill of Rights since they are only a few pages long but those who interpret them have found enough examples that are not covered that their interpretations have filled an entire wing of the Library of Congress! What were the Framers thinking to leave so many loopholes in their guiding documents?!? And think of all those other countries superior to us that just want us to be a "real country" like them!

So please help with my confusion and explain what are you talking about when you say "real shooting sport"?

 

 

Sorry for the rant

 

Regards

 

 

Gateway Kid

[Widder, SASS #59054]

Creeker,

 

I agree with the part about getting rid of the SOG penalty.

 

But on the subject of 'collective P's, I would hope that our minds lend more towards fewer penalties in matters such as this.

 

Actually, the slower shooter would be the one who probably gained an advantage. The faster 'gamey' shooter probably hurt his/her time even by earning just one P.....in this type of circumstance.

 

Anyhow, I always enjoy your post. They stir spirited conversations.

 

 

..........Widder

[Doc Shapiro]

If you want to do away with subjective penalties, then we ought to paint the targets between each shooter so that we can be sure to assign the shooter the correct number of hits/misses. Spotting can be a difficult job and it's not possible to get it right every time. This particular aspect of the game is quite subjective.

[Gunner Gatlin, SASS 10274L]

If you want to do away with subjective penalties, then we ought to paint the targets between each shooter so that we can be sure to assign the shooter the correct number of hits/misses. Spotting can be a difficult job and it's not possible to get it right every time. This particular aspect of the game is quite subjective.

 

 

 

Kinda like the situation with MLB referees these days

 

 

 

GG ~

[Okie Sawbones, SASS #77381]

If you want to do away with subjective penalties, then we ought to paint the targets between each shooter so that we can be sure to assign the shooter the correct number of hits/misses. Spotting can be a difficult job and it's not possible to get it right every time. This particular aspect of the game is quite subjective.

 

You hit the nail on the head here.

[Rance - SASS # 54090]

Ima thinkin' somebody opened up an ant hill this can go everwhich way

 

Rance

thought winter was over

[Captain Bill Burt]

For me part of what separates CAS from most if not all of the other shooting competitions is the camaraderie, esprit de corps isn't quite the right expression, but close. It seems like the SOG penalty attempts to address that aspect of the game/sport. It's subjective nature is problematic, but it has been my experience that at the local club level, rules in general are applied fairly. Admittedly I feel fortunate to be able to shoot with the people here in Georgia, and have no idea how things are run elsewhere. In the twenty matches I've shot in I've seen a grand total of one call disputed and that particular gentlemen I haven't seen since. It's comes down to trust that rules are being enforced even-handedly.

 

I can see how subjective calls like the SOG, could become an issue if called at a bigger match where the shooters are less likely to have a personal relationship with the RO, Spotters, etc. I want to shoot as fast as possible so I guess that makes me a gamer. But I would hate to see the sport become entirely about shooting fast.

[Creeker, SASS #43022]

Sorry Creeker,

So please help with my confusion and explain what are you talking about when you say "real shooting sport"?

Regards

 

 

Gateway Kid

 

 

"Real" shooting (ah, even take shooting out of the sentence), just real sports, may have questionable rules. But generally rules are in place and penalties exist to create consistency in the way a game is played. The SoG rule does exactly the opposite.

 

As you rightly point out, we dress differently than other games, that has nothing to do with being a real game. I don't expect a football player to wear a NASCAR firesuit, nor a soccer player to wear hockey pads. I don't base my opinion on the uniform or attire.

 

What I don't expect, is an offsides offense to recieve a different penalty depending on whether it was a Packer or a Bengal who jumped (and whether or not they think the player meant to do it).

 

I don't expect speeding on pit road to be treated differently if it is Jimmie Johnson rather than Andy Lally committing the offense.

As the driver grins and says "I never even realized I had a tachometer in my car"

 

Cowboy has hurt its own image with its "Aw shucks, we's just all folks here" attitude.

"Shoot, aint no one winning a Caddy at the end of the day, so what difference does it make?"

 

I never want to take the fun out of a game, but "Real" games treat themselves seriously and as a result, others view them as serious.

Subjective penalties are at odds with being a serious game.

[Creeker, SASS #43022]

I always worry when a person refers to himself in the third person.......

 

If there are two of us engaged in discussion, I am actually fat enough to be eligible for a third person reference.

[Creeker, SASS #43022]

If you want to do away with subjective penalties, then we ought to paint the targets between each shooter so that we can be sure to assign the shooter the correct number of hits/misses. Spotting can be a difficult job and it's not possible to get it right every time. This particular aspect of the game is quite subjective.

 

 

Absolutely correct. But the topic of the day on the wire semed to be Spirit of the Game, so I went with that one.

But I am all for ANYTHING that achieves fair and consistent calls for every shooter based on what they actually did, not on what someone else thinks they might have done.

[Brother King, SASS #69031]

As far as "a real shooting sport" I guess we should get rid of the cowboy outfits and follow the NASCAR example so other shooting venues will "accept" us.

So please help with my confusion and explain what are you talking about when you say "real shooting sport"?

 

Sorry for the rant

 

Regards

 

 

Gateway Kid

I think he means that NASCAR drivers should have to wear chaps/ spurs and shoot SAA's?

 

Ok.... but it's a funny image and I think driving a car that only turns left and has detergent labels all over it isn't real racing anyway.

 

SASS needs an "OPEN" division that has real money purses and real referees (4 line RO's; 3 spotters and 1 TO). Then we'll be a 'real' sport with purses, prizes and fist fights in the parking lot.

[PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L]

Gonna need to authorize and mandate high speed video equipment on each stage for slow motion replays to assist spotters in decided how many Ps there were along with how many misses. Good luck getting a consensus otherwise.

 

Both of your examples are clear cut SOG/FTE no matter the skill of the shooter or what they say.

 

EDIT - Even if you want to assert that the shooter truly didn't know there was another target and thusly doesn't deserve a SOG, the fact remains he failed to engage the other target.

 

Which fails to fulfill the "WILLFULLY" component necessary for an SOG penalty.

 

 

The one time I assessed a Spirit of the Game penalty, there was NO DOUBT WHATSOEVER as to the shooter's INTENT.

That determination was made by ASKING him WHY he did what he did (even though it was obvious to the entire posse).

 

[Shooting Bull]

"Real" shooting (ah, even take shooting out of the sentence), just real sports, may have questionable rules. But generally rules are in place and penalties exist to create consistency in the way a game is played. The SoG rule does exactly the opposite.

 

As you rightly point out, we dress differently than other games, that has nothing to do with being a real game. I don't expect a football player to wear a NASCAR firesuit, nor a soccer player to wear hockey pads. I don't base my opinion on the uniform or attire.

 

What I don't expect, is an offsides offense to recieve a different penalty depending on whether it was a Packer or a Bengal who jumped (and whether or not they think the player meant to do it).

 

I don't expect speeding on pit road to be treated differently if it is Jimmie Johnson rather than Andy Lally committing the offense.

As the driver grins and says "I never even realized I had a tachometer in my car"

 

Cowboy has hurt its own image with its "Aw shucks, we's just all folks here" attitude.

"Shoot, aint no one winning a Caddy at the end of the day, so what difference does it make?"

 

I never want to take the fun out of a game, but "Real" games treat themselves seriously and as a result, others view them as serious.

Subjective penalties are at odds with being a serious game.

 

I haven't made up my mind on this one yet so don't take this question as being argumentative. You've used football as an analogy, I'll stick with that. If football is such a serious sport and thus doesn't have subjective penalties, what do you call unsportsmanlike conduct?

[Grizzly Dave]

FAILURE TO ENGAGE/SPIRIT OF THE GAME

30-Second Penalty

• Willfully shooting a stage other than the way it was intended in order to gain a

competitive advantage.

• Shooting ammunition that does not meet the power factor, minimum velocity. The

penalty is applied for each stage a competitor is checked and their ammunition is found

not to meet the power factor or minimum velocity.

 

So, even though the stage scenario was read, every other shooter in the match shot it correctly, all a shooter has to do is say "I didn't do it willfully" and that absolves him from the penalty?

 

I may be overruled, but I will call it.

[PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L]

I haven't made up my mind on this one yet so don't take this question as being argumentative. You've used football as an analogy, I'll stick with that. If football is such a serious sport and thus doesn't have subjective penalties, what do you call unsportsmanlike conduct?

 

Good question in the context of this discussion...

Under SASS rules, the penalty for that is a MDQ...a bit more "harsh" than a 30-second SOG.

[Creeker, SASS #43022]

I haven't made up my mind on this one yet so don't take this question as being argumentative. You've used football as an analogy, I'll stick with that. If football is such a serious sport and thus doesn't have subjective penalties, what do you call unsportsmanlike conduct?

 

I don't really have a good comeback for that one.

I can only say that , regardless of the game, a rule applied subjectively and inconsistently is wrong.

 

And just because somone else jumps off the bridge, you gonna do it too?

[Shooting Bull]

Good question in the context of this discussion...

Under SASS rules, the penalty for that is a MDQ...a bit more "harsh" than a 30-second SOG.

 

And completely subjective in both SASS and the NFL.

 

On one side of the coin I agree with Creeker that subjective rules are ripe for abuse and thus should be limited as much as possible. On the other side of that coin I think we need a certin amount of subjectivity to allow match directors the ability to run their match the way they see fit.

[Creeker, SASS #43022]

FAILURE TO ENGAGE/SPIRIT OF THE GAME

30-Second Penalty

• Willfully shooting a stage other than the way it was intended in order to gain a

competitive advantage.

• Shooting ammunition that does not meet the power factor, minimum velocity. The

penalty is applied for each stage a competitor is checked and their ammunition is found

not to meet the power factor or minimum velocity.

 

So, even though the stage scenario was read, every other shooter in the match shot it correctly, all a shooter has to do is say "I didn't do it willfully" and that absolves him from the penalty?

 

I may be overruled, but I will call it.

 

 

Aye, there lies the rub.

 

I don't have issue with penalties per se, I have issue with penalties that can be applied so inconsistently that good spotters, informed RO's and the shooter themself can be unclear on what just occurred and how it should be scored.

[Guest Kid Sopris, Regulator, #3290]

Next thing you know Someone is going to want "Instant Replay"...It's a fantasy Sport, leave it alone..

[Shooting Bull]

I don't really have a good comeback for that one.

I can only say that , regardless of the game, a rule applied subjectively and inconsistently is wrong.And just because somone else jumps off the bridge, you gonna do it too?

 

 

I don't necessarily agree that just because a rule is subjective it's automatically wrong. But if it's enforced inconsistently I'm 100% with you, that's COMPLETELY wrong.

[Brother King, SASS #69031]

Aye, there lies the rub.

 

I don't have issue with penalties per se, I have issue with penalties that can be applied so inconsistently that good spotters, informed RO's and the shooter themself can be unclear on what just occurred and how it should be scored.

OH! You mean like 170 violations and the basketball traveling rule?

[Abilene Slim SASS 81783]

It is rarely applied, is always subjective and has no place in a real shooting sport.

Then why beat this dead horse?

[Hacker, SASS #55963]

I am split on this one.

Part of me says lets get rid of the SOG since it is hard to apply.

The other part says keep it because it may deter some gamer from doing the truly gamer move.

 

(Remember MADD. It hasn't been applied yet either. Perhaps it is doing its job, so far.)

 

The number of times SOG has been applied may confirm its difficulty in application yet may also confirm that it is working.

Or perhaps indicates the number of ROs/TOs that don't know the rule or are simply unwilling to call it.

(As there are also a number of folks that don't call things locally.)

 

I do agree that something should be done so that a P being earned isn't a recipe for the whole stage to be shot other than intended just because the shooter cannot earn another P. Perhaps multiple Ps, one for firearms order, one each per shooting string, plus any other reason.

[Creeker, SASS #43022]

Then why beat this dead horse?

 

Because it's Wednesday; I can't go play cowboy until Saturday and if I didn't have this dead horse to beat, I would be forced to go in the garage and load ammo.

And it's hot out there.

[Fast Enuff]

Ok I'll bite. The answer to this scenario is to head off the confrontation at the front end by having good stage design and write up.

 

The simplest solution is don't design a stage that sets people up for a situation like this, but if you do make sure you spell out the penalty for doing it wrong. In the stage writeup it should clearly specify a SOG for not engaging the 70yd target no matter the reason. This solves the determination of intent or hard feelings from the call afterward. Although in your example since it could be easy for a new or novice shooter to have a brain fade and forget it just specify in the stage instructoins a 30 second penalty for not engaging it instead of an actual SOG. The SOG is for intentionally disregarding the instructions and seems harsh if the stage is potentially a SOG trap. (Never heard of a SOG trap before, but hey, I'm still new and that's what the Wire is for right?)

 

Since the stage instructions can supercede the rule book, it appears that all this can be handled without changing the rules.

 

In the end either way works for me as long as the penalty is spelled out in advance when a stage is purposely built like that.

[Brother King, SASS #69031]

+1... I'm waiting for a UPS shipment and CNBC market news has been on all day. So this or any other horse is fine by me.

[Abilene Slim SASS 81783]

Because it's Wednesday; I can't go play cowboy until Saturday and if I didn't have this dead horse to beat, I would be forced to go in the garage and load ammo.

And it's hot out there.

Grab a beer, put your favorite cowboy flick on the TV and this will all melt away!