Procedurals

[Six-Shot]

 

Obviously NOT.

The statement regarding "personal observations" has been pointed out numerous times on this thread.

 

 

OK...got back to page 6 of the RO1 (G) ...when reading it with a CLOSED MIND, you'll only read/see/comprehend what YOU want to...then continue arguing for the sake of argument in the face of the actual WRITTEN RULE (even if YOU think it is "poorly written") rather than allowing oneself to be enlightened.

Might consider taking an RO1 Course from a certified Instructor, rather than relying on your own interpretation of the rules.

 

I am RO1 ceritfied. I'm CLOSED MINDED? Look who's talking? The omnipotent one!

I'll NEVER over-rule spotters or make a unilateral call if/when I'm the TO. it is a violation of "the spirit of the game" if nothing else. Benefit of the doubt should ALWAYS go to the shooter.

[Steeldust Dan, SASS #2631Life]

I'll NEVER over-rule spotters or make a unilateral call if/when I'm the TO. it is a violation of "the spirit of the game" if nothing else. Benefit of the doubt should ALWAYS go to the shooter.

 

While there are a couple of aspects of our rules I don't agree with I feel obligated to enforce them anyway. It's part of the job as TO. Without it, the system falls into chaos. If you so strongly disagree with a particular rule, then write up a change in the wording and submit it. Otherwise, enforce all of the rules or turn in that ROI pin and don't pick up the timer.

[Six-Shot]

There are many times that the TO is the only person that catches the P. The rule is fine as written and works just fine on the firing line.

 

Stan

 

Apparently not because it keeps coming up over and over throughout the years.

[Captain Bill Burt]

 

I'll NEVER over-rule spotters or make a unilateral call if/when I'm the TO. it is a violation of "the spirit of the game" if nothing else. Benefit of the doubt should ALWAYS go to the shooter.

Let me get this straight, overruling spotters or making a 'unilateral' call is a spirit of the game violation? And you're comfortable with this ruling because you're RO1 certified?

 

Who knew?

[Bones Z]

 

This is a really poorly written rule that has caused a lot of confusion and consternation which is why the OP asked for clarification in the first place. It is contradictory in that it asks for spotter input on misses procedurals and safety violations and then attempts to over-ride them and give the authority to one person with one set of eyes from only one perspective when in another section of pages 7-9 in the RO1 manual it says that the function of the TO is to be watching the timer and not looking for misses, procedurals, etc.

 

Seems pretty plain and straight forward to me. It seems to me that you just don't agree with it.

[Six-Shot]

While there are a couple of aspects of our rules I don't agree with I feel obligated to enforce them anyway. It's part of the job as TO. Without it, the system falls into chaos. If you so strongly disagree with a particular rule, then write up a change in the wording and submit it. Otherwise, enforce all of the rules or turn in that ROI pin and don't pick up the timer.

 

OK

 

Let me get this straight, overruling spotters or making a 'unilateral' call is a spirit of the game violation? And you're comfortable with this ruling because you're RO1 certified?

 

Who knew?

 

No, not because I'm RO1 ceritified. I didn't bring that up. PWB did. Because it goes against sportsmanship and being judged fairly by our peers and majority rule and the American way of justice.

[Santa Fe River Stan,36999L]

 

I'll NEVER over-rule spotters or make a unilateral call if/when I'm the TO. it is a violation of "the spirit of the game" if nothing else. Benefit of the doubt should ALWAYS go to the shooter.

So if you're the TO and observe the shooter doing something that would earn them a P and the spotters don't see it then you are not going to make the call?

 

You're screwing all the other competitors in that shooters category. Where is the "spirit of the game" in that?

 

Stan

[Steeldust Dan, SASS #2631Life]

OK

 

 

 

No, not because I'm RO1 ceritified. I didn't bring that up. PWB did. Because it goes agains sportsmanship and being judged fairly by our peers and majority rule and the American way of justice.

Are you kidding? Ever play organized baseball? Remember the guy in the black suit who stood behind the catcher? He made UNILATERAL decisions because that's what the rules called for. Same for our TO. He has the authority to make unilateral calls. Not all calls, but specific ones. Life isn't always decided by a jury of our peers nor majority rule. Neither is SASS. I think you're mixing politics and sports. They are not always the same.

[PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L]

`

 

[Six-Shot]

So if you're the TO and observe the shooter doing something that would earn them a P and the spotters don't see it then you are not going to make the call?

 

You're screwing all the other competitors in that shooters category. Where is the "spirit of the game" in that?

 

Stan

I would point it out to the spotters and ask if they saw it the way that I saw it and ask if they were aware of how it was supposed to be shot or whatever because they may not have been aware of how it was to be shot to see if they are in agreement with the way that I saw (or thought I saw it). That is the purpose of polling the spotters in addition to counting misses. Anyone can call a safety violation. Do you ever watch football, baseball, basketball, hockey officials confer with each other when there is a questioned call? The purpose is to get the call right with as many eyes as possible and sometimes they need to slow it down on camera and see it from different angles/perspectives. No one person is right. That's why we have 3 spotters and the TO makes 4.

[Six-Shot]

 

RO1 p.14

 

You're the one misreading and misquoting the rules...advise a refresher course ASAP.

Might pay attention this time...there have been a few changes/clarifications...that you apparently choose to ignore.

 

 

 

No I'm not. I read the rule. I know what it says and I'm interpreting what it says just like you are interpreting what it says. I guess we need a "supreme court" of SASS to interpret what it says. Who might that be? The TG's and Wild Bunch after next year's EOT?

[Straight Arrow Hombre]

Non shooting procedurerals are often called by the TO without spotter input as often times the TO is the only person watching the shooter. This game needs good TOs that are able and willing to make the right calls. We need to support them in their job.

[Straight Arrow Hombre]

 

No I'm not. I read the rule. I know what it says and I'm interpreting what it says just like you are interpreting what it says. I guess we need a "supreme court" of SASS to interpret what it says. Who might that be? The TG's and Wild Bunch after next year's EOT?

That Supreme Court is the RO committee and PWB is a member and the spokesman. Keep Up

[Appaloosa Amy, #63949, CT]

There are times when you shoot out of order, don't realize it, and no one else spotting or holding a timer notices and everyone is blissfully ignorant.

 

There are times when you shoot out of order, don't realize it, and get called for a "P". Usually someone explains what you did and you see the light.

 

There are times when you shoot out of order, know it, and the P is assessed and you move on to the next stage or cry into your towel.

 

There are times when you shoot out of order, know it, and don't get called for it then suck it up and tell the scorer to give you the P because you know it isn't fair to all the other folks playing this game. (Like Punch did at the New England Regional a few years back and it cost him the match but I bet he sleeps pretty good).

 

Then there are the folks that know they shot out of order and the only one that saw it was the TO who calls it and somehow the shooter convinces himself that he was robbed.

 

Really?

 

 

AA

 

 

 

 

 

[Blackey Cole]

Then the the shooter who think they shot it right but didn't and can't understand why they are getting a p. In their mind the shot it right but in actually they shot it wrong.

[Painted Mohawk SASS 77785]

There are many times that the TO is the only person that catches the P. The rule is fine as written and works just fine on the firing line.

 

Stan

.....yep +1

[Noz]

`

Start music " You say it best when you say nothing at all" end music

[Gold Canyon Kid #43974]

 

I am RO1 ceritfied. I'm CLOSED MINDED? Look who's talking? The omnipotent one!

I'll NEVER over-rule spotters or make a unilateral call if/when I'm the TO. it is a violation of "the spirit of the game" if nothing else. Benefit of the doubt should ALWAYS go to the shooter.

So if you as an RO/TO clearly see the shooter break the 170 by a wide margin (say pointed at the loading table) and no one else does, you ignore it??

[Gold Canyon Kid #43974]

Anyone can call a safety violation.

Just like Procedurals, anyone can "call a safety violation" but the RO is the one that has to agree and report it to the scorekeeper.

[Gold Canyon Kid #43974]

 

No I'm not. I read the rule. I know what it says and I'm interpreting what it says just like you are interpreting what it says. I guess we need a "supreme court" of SASS to interpret what it says. Who might that be? The TG's and Wild Bunch after next year's EOT?

PWB's interpretation of the rule carries a lot more weight than yours. As the SASS Wire representative of the RO committee, his word is golden when it comes to existing rules. If you want to change the rule, talk to your club TG and if he agrees with you he can propose a change to the rules. That change will either be accepted or rejected for an agenda item by the RO committee and eventually the Wild Bunch has to approve it to put it on the agenda for a TG vote. Then if 2/3s of the TGs agree, the rule gets changed. Might as well live with it as is since you are not getting much support for a change at least by this thread. It should be noted that in every single RO class I have taken this rule has been discussed and PWBs statements on how many spotters are needed to call a P or S are discussed at length.

[Madd Mike #8595]

I was attending a CAS match just the other day

I was standing at the loading table and was up next

It was a friend of mine shooting the stage in front of me so I paid attention to her run at it

She did a bla tent Peeeeee, in one shooting sequence, timer operator asks spotters for their response

"Clean" and nothing else was said

I know the shooter well, so I then say ya but ??????? You should have gotten a p,

Several spotters gave me the friendly evil eye and told me I was not a counter or TO, so I was basically chopped liver

I MEARLY REPLIED, ya but I know that ??????.... Would really like to know what happened, and she smiled and said THANKYOU to me, as her state championship shoot is coming up soon, the spotters then admitted her transgression after they did their memory bank replay

They then said, you know what, you were correct and gave her the peee, which she gladly accepted

I think it all played out fair under those exact given circumstances, even at the monthly shoot level

Mileage seems to always vary, I spoke a truth with no malice intent, counters then admitted they did not call it

She respects and honors the truth which helps her in the long run, as she is a multi-multi overall women's state champ and does it with practice, talent, good equipment combined, and on big match day she does it with integrity, on top of all of that

[Captain Bill Burt]

 

OK

 

 

No, not because I'm RO1 ceritified. I didn't bring that up. PWB did. Because it goes against sportsmanship and being judged fairly by our peers and majority rule and the American way of justice.

 

LOL now that there is funny! You probably didn't mean it to be, but it sure is.

 

BTW, I definitely not laughing with you.

 

 

No I'm not. I read the rule. I know what it says and I'm interpreting what it says just like you are interpreting what it says. I guess we need a "supreme court" of SASS to interpret what it says. Who might that be? The TG's and Wild Bunch after next year's EOT?

Ha, we have a 'Supreme Court' and the Chief Justice (PWB) just issued the court's ruling. That's the point where lower courts (that's you) salute the flag and interpret the laws as your seniors have instructed you to.

[Gold Canyon Kid #43974]

I was attending a CAS match just the other day

I was standing at the loading table and was up next

It was a friend of mine shooting the stage in front of me so I paid attention to her run at it

She did a bla tent Peeeeee, in one shooting sequence, timer operator asks spotters for their response

"Clean" and nothing else was said

I know the shooter well, so I then say ya but ??????? You should have gotten a p,

Several spotters gave me the friendly evil eye and told me I was not a counter or TO, so I was basically chopped liver

I MEARLY REPLIED, ya but I know that ??????.... Would really like to know what happened, and she smiled and said THANKYOU to me, as her state championship shoot is coming up soon, the spotters then admitted her transgression after they did their memory bank replay

They then said, you know what, you were correct and gave her the peee, which she gladly accepted

I think it all played out fair under those exact given circumstances, even at the monthly shoot level

Mileage seems to always vary, I spoke a truth with no malice intent, counters then admitted they did not call it

She respects and honors the truth which helps her in the long run, as she is a multi-multi overall women's state champ and does it with practice, talent, good equipment combined, and on big match day she does it with integrity, on top of all of that

As you clearly know the peanut gallery sees a lot of misses that are not called, a lot of hits that are called misses, Ps wrongfully given and Ps not given that should be given and safety issues not called and incorrect penalty calls for complex miss/p issues. As a member of the peanut gallery I have developed a rule for myself to NOT get involved (not being a range officer for that shooter) unless I see something I suspect is not proper (maybe a gray area in the rules being challenged too far-and suggest a shooter be warned) or a serious safety issue. I developed this rule as I was the TG for a club I shoot at for many years. I find it better to try to instruct someone off line than get involved in stage scoring. Sometimes the match director came to me for advice on a call and by getting involved before hand it might taint my advice. I try to do any of this after the scores have been recorded and the RO is done with the shooter. Safety issues are different. If the shooter is clearly not safe to shoot by his or her actions, I talk to the Posse Marshall and let him act if he feels it is necessary. If the shooter broke the 170 and it was not called, especially if way over the 170, I will tell the ROs later off line to carefully watch the shooter for a 170 infraction in the next few stages, etc. I do not believe it is my job or right to get involved in "helping" the RO/TO add or subtract penalties for the shooter until the scores are posted and then do it off line if necessary at all as in instruction/help not to change scores. I have seen spotters that clearly are not paying attention, I see spotters that only look at other spotters fingers to report misses, I see RO/TO giving shooters breaks not allowed under the rules. Again, an offline discussion with the Posse Marshall is the right way for me at least in many if not most issues to handle this instead of attempting to change a shooters score for that stage. If the PM does not act, I feel I have done my best and stop and just concentrate on my own shooting.

[crosscut hardy]

I agree with Possom, a TO can & should call a "P" even if all three spotters missed it. And, I think I understand where

 

Possom is coming from about ignoring 3 spotters ... because it would be very very rare to ignore all 3 spotters that called

 

a "P" as most probably at least 2 of them could tell you exactly how the shooter earned the "P". Spotters should be able to

 

explain the "P" or not call it in first place.

 

...crosscut

[Kid Ziggy SASS 76870]

Okay ... I know a TO can (and should) call a P when observed even when the spotters don't see it such as breaking the 170. And, to me as a TO, it is always a good idea to ask for input from the other ROs (spotters & score keeper) for that shooter prior to assessing a penalty.

 

I had the understanding (from my RO classes and local TGs) that any ONE of the 5 ROs (TO, spotters, score keeper) can call a P without agreement from the others. I am not saying I like that, but will appreciate input on whether or not it is correct.

[Allie Mo, SASS No. 25217]

Okay ... I know a TO can (and should) call a P when observed even when the spotters don't see it such as breaking the 170. And, to me as a TO, it is always a good idea to ask for input from the other ROs (spotters & score keeper) for that shooter prior to assessing a penalty.

 

I had the understanding (from my RO classes and local TGs) that any ONE of the 5 ROs (TO, spotters, score keeper) can call a P without agreement from the others. I am not saying I like that, but will appreciate input on whether or not it is correct.

Hi Ziggy,

 

Anyone can tell the TO what they saw. However, it is up to the TO to make the call that is written down.

 

Regards,

 

Allie

 

PS Tell Alli I said "hi!"

[Captain Bill Burt]

Okay ... I know a TO can (and should) call a P when observed even when the spotters don't see it such as breaking the 170. And, to me as a TO, it is always a good idea to ask for input from the other ROs (spotters & score keeper) for that shooter prior to assessing a penalty.

 

I had the understanding (from my RO classes and local TGs) that any ONE of the 5 ROs (TO, spotters, score keeper) can call a P without agreement from the others. I am not saying I like that, but will appreciate input on whether or not it is correct.

It's my understanding that the TO is the only range officer who can call a P by himself. All the others must get the TO to agree with their call before it gets recorded.

[Gold Canyon Kid #43974]

+1

 

That clearly is the rule. I would hope the TO explains his actions to the shooter so many folks and spotters hear it.

[Phantom, SASS #54973]

Okay ... I know a TO can (and should) call a P when observed even when the spotters don't see it such as breaking the 170. And, to me as a TO, it is always a good idea to ask for input from the other ROs (spotters & score keeper) for that shooter prior to assessing a penalty.

 

I had the understanding (from my RO classes and local TGs) that any ONE of the 5 ROs (TO, spotters, score keeper) can call a P without agreement from the others. I am not saying I like that, but will appreciate input on whether or not it is correct.

Score Keeper?????

 

Really????

[Anvil Al #59168]

Okay ... I know a TO can (and should) call a P when observed even when the spotters don't see it such as breaking the 170. And, to me as a TO, it is always a good idea to ask for input from the other ROs (spotters & score keeper) for that shooter prior to assessing a penalty.

 

I had the understanding (from my RO classes and local TGs) that any ONE of the 5 ROs (TO, spotters, score keeper) can call a P without agreement from the others. I am not saying I like that, but will appreciate input on whether or not it is correct.

 

 

TO and spotters. Not the score keeper. Unless the score keeper is also a spotter.

 

 

If you add the score keeper into it. Might as well add the brass picker and the target puller

while you are at it.

[Captain Bill Burt]

 

 

TO and spotters. Not the score keeper. Unless the score keeper is also a spotter.

 

 

If you add the score keeper into it. Might as well add the brass picker and the target puller

while you are at it.

Al I'm pretty sure the spotters can't call a P on their own. The TO can overrule them if he disagrees with the call.

[Krazy Kajun]

Al I'm pretty sure the spotters can't call a P on their own. The TO can overrule them if he disagrees with the call.

Pretty sure...come on Capt. Bill...you know it FOR sure the spotters can't call a P on their own. TO has finally say so on any P call.

 

See ya on Sat.

[Dirty Dan Dawkins]

Pretty sure...come on Capt. Bill...you know it FOR sure the spotters can't call a P on their own. TO has finally say so on any P call.

 

See ya on Sat.

I had a smart a$$ remark but for once I'll keep it to myself. Don't want to hurt Bill's feelings. He's sensitive ya know.

[PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L]

Score Keeper?????

 

Really????

 

 

My sentiment exactly...who's teaching THAT in RO classes??

 

 

Suggest an RO1 refresher with emphasis on the "MATCH PROCEDURES AND TERMS" section (i.e. RO positions and "job descriptions")

[Anvil Al #59168]

Al I'm pretty sure the spotters can't call a P on their own. The TO can overrule them if he disagrees with the call.

 

 

They can call it. Did not say that the TO could not over rule it.

 

My point was that the score keeper don't not have anything to do with it.

 

Unless they are also counting.