Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

You Make the Call


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 160
  • Created
  • Last Reply

If the match is that big, and the time saved is that important, then the shooter's investment in the match is probably significant as well. IMO, if the PM is going to give those instructions it should be with the understanding that no adverse calls will be made based on the status of firearms handled by anyone other than the shooter.

 

Nice thoughts and comments,,,,,, BUT,,,, to stay on topic,,,,,, what is your call 'if' presented the information that the OP gave? That is the question the OP is looking/asking for.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the shooter was that fast, the TO would be struggling just to keep up with him. I find it hard to believe he'd be able to definitively say the lever was completely closed without taking a second look. In this case though, a second look wasn't possible because the rifle had been moved.

Having a little trouble keeping up there, Big Guy? ;)

BOD goes to the shooter.

RO either saw it or he didn't. You just said the shooter is too fast to look. Do you think maybe a good RO looks? The RO said he saw it closed.

(But after removing that penalty I'd drop the hammer on him for the outburst. :angry: )Oh YEAH! THAT should seal the ambience on your posse! The smoke cloud will just sort of hover on ya no matter how the breeze it blowing. :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice thoughts and comments,,,,,, BUT,,,, to stay on topic,,,,,, what is your call 'if' presented the information that the OP gave? That is the question the OP is looking/asking for.

I already gave my call, the post you quoted was a follow up to my original response. To reiterate had I been the RO my call would have been no call due to the 'XO' handling the rifle. Had I been the MD, the original call would have been upheld due to the shooter's failure to appeal within the required time frame. As the MD, I would have added a MDQ for the shooter due to interpersonal conflict, instructed the RO not to make calls based on firearms handled by people other than the shooter, and instructed the XO not to handle firearms that are in a 'faulted' condition.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will be checking in from time to time over the few pages to see how this one turns out :)

 

I have my opinion......well see

 

Wyatt

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

what's the difinition of open

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

No one has stated if protestor put up the $$$'s in protest fees.

 

Your call!

What does protest fees have to do with the outcome? Not every club requires the rip-off fees. That just keeps some people from protesting. Fifty dollars is a lot for some people to put up to make a protest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will be checking in from time to time over the few pages to see how this one turns out :)

 

I have my opinion......well see

 

Wyatt

 

 

 

OH PLEASE.... DON'T MAKE US WAIT... TELL US NOW@ :lol:

 

 

Snakebite

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

what's the difinition of open

Link to post
Share on other sites

Several mistakes made. Poor shooter attitude. RO should have informed shooter of lever issue. RO should have stopped gun runner from touching gun. Shooter did not file timely protest. MD should have over ruled RO since gun closed evidence compromised.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I already gave my call, the post you quoted was a follow up to my original response. To reiterate had I been the RO my call would have been no call due to the 'XO' handling the rifle. Had I been the MD, the original call would have been upheld due to the shooter's failure to appeal within the required time frame. As the MD, I would have added a MDQ for the shooter due to interpersonal conflict, instructed the RO not to make calls based on firearms handled by people other than the shooter, and instructed the XO not to handle firearms that are in a 'faulted' condition.

 

Good enough and thanks for the reiteration.

 

So if you were the RO and knew in your own mind (as the state of the OP was in), for certain, that the action was closed, you would reverse your call to a no call just because the XO had touched the gun? How about calls for sweeping someone or breaking the 170 rule that only you saw? Would you make them no calls?

 

Good direction and instructions you would give to XO. Something that should be anounced anytime an XO is used on any stage.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What does protest fees have to do with the outcome? Not every club requires the rip-off fees. That just keeps some people from protesting. Fifty dollars is a lot for some people to put up to make a protest.

 

Keeps the non serious complainers and gamblers and bully type from protesting every since thing and clogging up the system.

 

If a shooter is so adement about thinking he is right and can prove it and put money where his mouth is, then he will put up the money.

 

If a shooter is correct in their protest, they get their money back. So it isn't a lot of money to make a protest, but it does make the protestor think twice before taking it all the way to the top.

 

You all need to read the appeals process, it really does favor the shooter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If a shooter is so adement about thinking he is right and can prove it and put money where his mouth is, then he will put up the money.

 

You all need to read the appeals process, it really does favor the shooter.

 

I have read the appeals process and understand them, thank ya very much. The point I was trying to make was that nobody has mentioned the protest fee in this thread at all, except for the two times you mentioned it. Not every club has that requirement, so it wasn't mentioned in the OP.

 

And, I can guarantee that not every shooter at a big match would have fifty dollars in his pocket to use as a protest fee on a call, with the chance of it being returned in the hands of a MD. Maybe one that he has had problems with before and knowing he would lose.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good enough and thanks for the reiteration.

 

So if you were the RO and knew in your own mind (as the state of the OP was in), for certain, that the action was closed, you would reverse your call to a no call just because the XO had touched the gun? How about calls for sweeping someone or breaking the 170 rule that only you saw? Would you make them no calls?

 

Good direction and instructions you would give to XO. Something that should be anounced anytime an XO is used on any stage.

 

Yes, I would change my call because from the shooters perspective there is a reasonable question as to the condition of the rifle. It's a minor call, by definition, and from my point of view the shooter's guns shouldn't be handled if their condition is going to be the basis for a call.

 

Sweeping and the 170 are not minor calls and are never 'provable' by independent evidence. In that case I would not change my call, doing so would open the door to changing all sweeping and 170 calls based on a shooter challenge. I'm not saying my call perfectly resolves the situation, but from my POV it's the best that can be done with an imperfect situation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have read the appeals process and understand them, thank ya very much. The point I was trying to make was that nobody has mentioned the protest fee in this thread at all, except for the two times you mentioned it. Not every club has that requirement, so it wasn't mentioned in the OP.

 

And, I can guarantee that not every shooter at a big match would have fifty dollars in his pocket to use as a protest fee on a call, with the chance of it being returned in the hands of a MD. Maybe one that he has had problems with before and knowing he would lose.

 

 

Fair enough.

 

If there was no formal appeals process ($xx protest fee for example) then the situation can get uglier. I think it is a very good idea for a club putting on a major match to have that written formal appeals process written into their match book for all to see, understand and for documentation.

 

If there is no appeals process, then every stinking complained should/has-to be hear by the MD. I wouldn't want to hear all the complains from all shooters and have to make the final call.

 

I asked the question because it could be a huge go/no-go decision for the MD to make to pursue the protest or not. Even though the OP didn't say in his first post, it still is a valid question on my part, which the OP still hasn't answered.

 

I asked the question only because if there was an appeals process so stated, and the shooter did not post the appeals fee, then the appeals process was not followed as stated and thus the shooter objection would be rejected without further review no matter what shiny evidence may have been shown.

 

I can not imagine you or me, as MD really enjoying hearing a yap-yap complainer shooter barking from behind a berm without first putting up some bucks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

All right here we go.

 

If I was the TO and could not furnish sufficent proof to the shooter that I saw the lever CLOSED I would not make the call.

 

If I was the MD in this case I would support the TO and the call would stand.

 

Wyatt...Monday Evening Pennybacking

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to make certain assumptions to give a clear, concise opinion.

 

1. The MD picks qualified and "stand-up" RO/TOs. Said RO/TOs are generally experienced shooters, ROs and quick thinkers... knowledgeable about the rules and all aspects of the game. They also generally (from my experience), been good judges of character and personalities, as well of good character and personality themselves.

 

2. RO/TOs that I've had the pleasure to shoot with could really give a tinker's damn what category a shooter is in, except inasmuch as it relates to his costuming or gear. Some of the very best RO/TOs that I've had were shooters that have competed or are competing in my category, and ones that obviously compete at levels higher than my own.

 

Those being said, the "expeditor" pointed out the closed lever, the RO concurred and stated something to the effect that "yep, I saw that." Ergo, trusting the veracity of average RO, the closed lever seen by the RO before the gun was moved IS a fact in evidence, and therefore IS admissable. Whether the RO had time to see that AND inform the shooter before the shooter grabbed the next gun and had it cocked is a fact not in evidence, ergo... not admissable.

 

Cowboy shooters are known to exaggerate... even those asking for opinions on the Wire... maybe especially those! :ph34r: Doesn't make 'em bad guys... I've been known to do the same... sometimes a story just "sounds" better with a bit of hyperbole!

 

MSV. That's a period following the abbreviation for a Minor Safety Violation for a reason.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If two spotters says there is a miss, no matter how much protesting is done by the shooter, a miss is still earned. Where in the rule book does it say the shooter has right to verify an infraction before it is awarded? That TO saw a closed lever. If I was MD, I would have backed my TO. Benefit to the shooter is not defined by the shooter complaining he didn't agree with the call. Benefit to the shooter is defined by a spotter not being sure of what he saw, or two "official" not agreeing on what went on. In this case, the shooter's opinion doesn't count. I don't like the fact the MD bowed to the pressure applied by shooter. KCDrover

Link to post
Share on other sites

From the RO II, pg 12:

 

"So, if there is not absolutely conclusive evidence of a missed target, shooter error, safety or rule violation, the Chief Range Officer must make every effort to assist the shooter by relating any necessary scoring changes to the score keeper immediately upon resolution."

 

The call is made by the T.O. We try to get all of our T.O.s on the same page, but every situation has it's peculiarities which might result in different outcomes. It is very difficult for the T.O. to be certain that the lever was closed. I just don't see the "CONCLUSIVE" evidence.

 

Leave the damned gun alone. That should give the T.O. all the conclusive evidence that he/she needs to make the call.

 

Snakebite

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re-assign the over eager blind XP. A FULLY closed discarded rifle is an extremely rare event. I don't wonder the shooter had a cow. He knows he opened it and it was still partially opened when the clueless XP picked it up.

 

No match is big enuff to need an XP. No match. Let him go shag brass. If that is beneath his dignity let him join the palaverin' people at the back of the stage where he can't muck up anything.

 

The shooter has to re-trace his steps back thru the stage no matter how much down range movement has occurred. It only takes a second to pick up the rifle on the way. At that point the shooter and the TO can look down and verify the condition of the rifle lever. 99.99% of the time it will be at least partially open.

 

No call except to ditch the XP position.

Link to post
Share on other sites

From the RO II, pg 12:

 

"So, if there is not absolutely conclusive evidence of a missed target, shooter error, safety or rule violation, the Chief Range Officer must make every effort to assist the shooter by relating any necessary scoring changes to the score keeper immediately upon resolution."

 

The call is made by the T.O. We try to get all of our T.O.s on the same page, but every situation has it's peculiarities which might result in different outcomes. It is very difficult for the T.O. to be certain that the lever was closed. I just don't see the "CONCLUSIVE" evidence.

 

Leave the damned gun alone. That should give the T.O. all the conclusive evidence that he/she needs to make the call.

 

Snakebite

Agreed, looking at a lever while timing a fast shooter, it would be very difficult to see that the bolt was completely closed, and it the bolt not the lever position anyway isn't?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re-assign the over eager blind XP.

 

Go ahead, I've seen upwards to 6-8 different people act as XP at those kind of matches. The average shooter does not have the training, knowledge or awareness to evaluate and look for a closed action and thus know better than to pick up the firearm until RO is notified.

 

A FULLY closed discarded rifle is an extremely rare event. I don't wonder the shooter had a cow. He knows he opened it and it was still partially opened when the clueless XP picked it up.

 

 

The lever and action can reclose after discarding gun if gun is discarded in a somewhat forward direction AND the lever is slide forward on the carpet. Don't ask me how I know this and it happens more than you think, or yer just not looking.

 

 

No match is big enuff to need an XP. No match. That is a solution. Did WR with 850 shooter have XP?

 

Let him go shag brass. If that is beneath his dignity let him join the palaverin' people at the back of the stage where he can't muck up anything.

As I mentioned above, most of your posse fits into the catagory you are bemoaning.

 

 

The shooter has to re-trace his steps back thru the stage no matter how much down range movement has occurred. It only takes a second to pick up the rifle on the way. At that point the shooter and the TO can look down and verify the condition of the rifle lever. 99.99% of the time it will be at least partially open.

 

No call except to ditch the XP position.

 

Then you are calling the RO a liar if he saw and truely believed the action close? Bad judgement there Mr. MD. Besides, in this thread, you are the MD and making the call. Turn around question would be, why did you put in XP'ers?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If this is the lever gun of a top shooter, more than likely the action of the gun is soooo slick that by simply lifting the gun off the table with muzzle up, the lever is going to close. Besides picking up a rifle with a closed lever makes it difficult to see whether or not there are any unfired bullets in the chamber.

Bad Eye Bobolu

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm with those that say "No Call" and here's why. If you move my gun while my back is turned, you cannot 100% prove to me that it happened as you are telling me. This is NOT calling anyone a liar, but pure fact. One cowboy that I trust without question is Ivory Jack McCloud. As much as I trust him, even if he was the RO and this happened to me, I would challenge the call. This is part of doing what's right. I don't agree with the shooter losing his temper, but in the moment no one is perfect. I'd let it slide...unless the shooter was a know hothead.

 

Same can be said for the timing of the protest. I know the rules say it should've been made as soon as possible, but strict adherence to that rule means you are giving a royal reaming to an undeserving cowboy. That's not the Cowboy Way at all, is it?

 

No call.....As Snakebite said, leave the gun alone until the shooter can verify the penalty.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm with those that say "No Call" and here's why.

 

 

As MD, you would overrule your TO, 'much later', his call?

 

If you move my gun while my back is turned, you cannot 100% prove to me that it happened as you are telling me.

 

No one could 'prove' you sweep someone or broke the 170 either. So all sweeping of peope or breaking 170 rule violations go out the window?

 

This is NOT calling anyone a liar, but pure fact. One cowboy that I trust without question is Ivory Jack McCloud. As much as I trust him, even if

he was the RO and this happened to me, I would challenge the call.

 

 

It appears to me by what you just wrote, you do not really trust Ivory Jack McCloud.

 

This is part of doing what's right. I don't agree with the shooter losing his temper, but in the moment no one is perfect. I'd let it slide...unless the shooter was a know hothead.

 

Same can be said for the timing of the protest. I know the rules say it should've been made as soon as possible, but strict adherence to that rule means you are giving a royal reaming to an undeserving cowboy. That's not the Cowboy Way at all, is it?

 

Protesting much later as OP stated is OK by you? After posse has gone home, dust is settled, witness have dispursed and so on, you would reverse the call to a No Call? You, as the MD sure could, I guess.

No call.....As Snakebite said, leave the gun alone until the shooter can verify the penalty.

 

I agree, the gun shouldn've been touched, but as the OP stated, you as the fictional MD has to work with the stuff presented to you as the OP pointe out.

 

 

Good topic of discussion Brother King #2.

 

Another thought and observation. No one has brought up the part about the MD going to his three designated judges (per the Match Directors Handbook or ROII pg 12 &13) who should be TG's or very knowledgable and seasoned people that know the rules to rule on the grievenance. If those people are gone to the winds because of the such late timing of the filing of the protest, then I would be even more inclined to leave the call as was made.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well,

 

This has been a learning experience.

 

1) Closed = Bolt/Action completely closed.

2) Open = Bolt/ Action not completely closed.

3) Best not to handle others firearms. If instructed to do so, CAREFULLY inspect firearm condition before handling. Good idea to instruct everyone about this issue during required safety/match briefing and/or when each posse has gathered on first stage of the match.

4) Anyone, shooter, R/O, T/O, XP/O, LT/O & ULT/O can be mistaken. Let the evidence speak for itself.

5) Follow procedure for protests as outlined in SASS regulations/rules.

6) SASS/CAS is a great shooting sport with many wonderful cowboys & cowgirls.

 

Hasta Luego, Keystone

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm all for keeping the shooters moving along faster especially a long stage BUT that said if the gun caused a penalty I'm with the others that say at that point leave it be and let the shooter pick it up. It may slow that particular shooter down but it would have prevented a bigger issue.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Everybody is in total agreement concerning the XP should not touch any gun if there is a penalty being earned. No question about that. But, when he does, what then. If the TO said he didn't notice whether the lever was closed are not, then it would have been a "no call". However, the TO saw it closed. Where and when did proof become a factor in making a call? I have, and I would bet that most have us walked off a stage knowing, absolutely knowing, we were "clean" and the spotters saw and called a miss. They never had to prove the miss to the shooter. The fact that it might difficult to see it while timing a fast shooter, or how "closed is closed", just doesn't matter. The TO saw it closed and called it. I again ask, how can a simple protest of "I didn't do it" create the situation where a "benefit to shooter" condition exists?

 

Is anyone suggesting the TO made the call because of some extenuating circumstance, and the lever was NOT really closed?

 

Respectfully, KCDrover

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Is anyone suggesting the TO made the call because of some extenuating circumstance, and the lever was NOT really closed?

 

Respectfully, KCDrover

 

 

Maybe, who knows?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Drover;

 

The T.O. made the call. It is his/her call to make. What more can you ask for? The discussion has been about how things could have been "Best" handled... and everyone agrees that the "Best" way was to not touch the gun if a potential call might be made on it. People forget that when running a posse, someone must do something... that "Something", unfortunately, will not always be right. In that case, the shooter has little choice other than to appeal the call... that must be done in a timely manner or it will not be entertained... such as this case. So, in the case presented, what do you think should have been done differently? The T.O. said that the lever was closed... he made the call and it was upheld. What more??

 

Snakebite

Link to post
Share on other sites

From the RO II, pg 12:

 

"So, if there is not absolutely conclusive evidence of a missed target, shooter error, safety or rule violation, the Chief Range Officer must make every effort to assist the shooter by relating any necessary scoring changes to the score keeper immediately upon resolution."

 

The call is made by the T.O. We try to get all of our T.O.s on the same page, but every situation has it's peculiarities which might result in different outcomes. It is very difficult for the T.O. to be certain that the lever was closed. I just don't see the "CONCLUSIVE" evidence.

 

Leave the damned gun alone. That should give the T.O. all the conclusive evidence that he/she needs to make the call.

 

Snakebite

 

Eye witness testimony (from RO and XO) is in fact conclusive evidence unless the credibility of the eye witness is destroyed. As noted above, we presume the RO and XO were chosen because they are credible participants. If they were selected because they happen to be staningd around idle, then I suppose there is reasonable doubt.

 

What about the credentials of the competitor? Its the person a prima donna? Are they a stand up cowboy/cowgirl? Does the person complain a lot or is complaining to sway match officials part of the arsenal to win?

 

Are scratch marks on targets needed to verify hits? Take photos of staged/restaged firearms? Makes ya want to film contestants. :angry:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Drover;

 

The T.O. made the call. It is his/her call to make. What more can you ask for? The discussion has been about how things could have been "Best" handled... and everyone agrees that the "Best" way was to not touch the gun if a potential call might be made on it. People forget that when running a posse, someone must do something... that "Something", unfortunately, will not always be right. In that case, the shooter has little choice other than to appeal the call... that must be done in a timely manner or it will not be entertained... such as this case. So, in the case presented, what do you think should have been done differently? The T.O. said that the lever was closed... he made the call and it was upheld. What more??

 

Snakebite

I totally agree with this view. Yes, it MAY have been better handled if the lever/bolt closed was pointed out to the shooter. However, I have also seen a shooter argue vague rules to wit: a lever isn't closed if you can pass $1bill between the lever and stock...ahemm.. closed ain't open is the rule.

 

In this case, for those calling for "evidence" to be shown to the offending shooter, think for a moment; what if Billy Jo Shooter's best buddy saw the lever closed and XO'd that gun off the table to erase the penalty by picking it up before it was shown to the shooter?

 

My own sensibilities as a TO/RO are simply that while I don't make the rules: I do make the call. PERIOD.

 

While I was not the RO nor the shooter on this particular planet. Pretend that the RO is one of the best shooters, MD's and RO's in the game and the shooter is a top gun and otherwise excellent volunteer as well.

 

All that said, also now pretend that WITHOUT INTERVIEWING THE RO.... the call was overturned.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.