Chantry Posted June 9, 2021 Share Posted June 9, 2021 On 6/7/2021 at 9:37 AM, Singin' Sue 71615 said: Again...in most cases, Yes. If it is a shooter who "does not want to be talked to before I shoot, from loading table to unloading table" or "I don't want ANY coaching" (we all have encountered that shooter) then TO was right to keep quiet and shooter earned the penalty. But yeah, I see your point. It is the TO responsibility to do their best to make sure the shooter does not start in a faulted position, whether the shooter "does not want to be talked to before I shoot, from loading table to unloading table" or "I don't want ANY coaching" is irrelevant. Both the TO and spotter should have said something since the timer had not started yet. The shooter should not have gotten a re-shoot. As to the argument, I would have told the shooter to go see the match director. Depending on HOW the argument took place ( tone, confrontational, insulting, attempting to intimidate) the shooter should have been given a Match DQ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Singin' Sue 71615 Posted June 9, 2021 Share Posted June 9, 2021 3 hours ago, Chantry said: It is the TO responsibility to do their best to make sure the shooter does not start in a faulted position, whether the shooter "does not want to be talked to before I shoot, from loading table to unloading table" or "I don't want ANY coaching" is irrelevant. Both the TO and spotter should have said something since the timer had not started yet. The shooter should not have gotten a re-shoot. As to the argument, I would have told the shooter to go see the match director. Depending on HOW of the argument took place ( tone, confrontational, insulting, attempting to intimidate) the shooter should have been given a Match DQ. It is unfortunate that we seem to have THIS type of person in our sport. The one who will ALWAYS push the rules, be unpleasant, argue the stage description, argue every call the Spotters make, will use everything they can to blame a prop or TO for mistakes...grumble, grumble, grumble. Agree 'should have'...can understand 'why TO didn't' (if this was a "I want no coaching" shooter) Agree a RESHOOT was NOT in order... And in a persistant argument, maybe a SOG should have been added? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L Posted June 9, 2021 Share Posted June 9, 2021 6 minutes ago, Singin' Sue 71615 said: It is unfortunate that we seem to have THIS type of person in our sport. The one who will ALWAYS push the rules, be unpleasant, argue the stage description, argue every call the Spotters make, will use everything they can to blame a prop or TO for mistakes...grumble, grumble, grumble. Agree 'should have'...can understand 'why TO didn't' (if this was a "I want no coaching" shooter) Agree a RESHOOT was NOT in order... And in a persistent argument, maybe a SOG should have been added? Contrary to what (it seems) many believe, the SOG penalty is NOT assessed for that reason. The penalty for "Belligerent attitude" is a MATCH DQ. REF: SHB p.23 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Singin' Sue 71615 Posted June 9, 2021 Share Posted June 9, 2021 1 hour ago, PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L said: Contrary to what (it seems) many believe, the SOG penalty is NOT assessed for that reason. The penalty for "Belligerent attitude" is a MATCH DQ. REF: SHB p.23 Thank you for that clarification. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shooting Bull Posted June 9, 2021 Share Posted June 9, 2021 4 hours ago, PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L said: Contrary to what (it seems) many believe, the SOG penalty is NOT assessed for that reason. The penalty for "Belligerent attitude" is a MATCH DQ. REF: SHB p.23 That's a whole other dead horse that needs more beating. Need to change the name of SOG to something else for this very reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L Posted June 9, 2021 Share Posted June 9, 2021 28 minutes ago, Shooting Bull said: That's a whole other dead horse that needs more beating. Need to change the name of SOG to something else for this very reason. Quote - Willfully shooting a stage other than the way it was intended in order to gain a competitive advantage (Spirit of the Game). - Shooting ammunition that does not meet the power factor or minimum velocity. The penalty is applied for each stage a competitor is checked and their ammunition is found to not meet the power factor or minimum velocity (Spirit of the Game). SHB p.23 How about eliminating the 30-second SOG penalty altogether and list those violations under the "Unsportsmanlike conduct" MDQ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Singin' Sue 71615 Posted June 9, 2021 Share Posted June 9, 2021 1 hour ago, PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L said: SHB p.23 How about eliminating the 30-second SOG penalty altogether and list those violations under the "Unsportsmanlike conduct" MDQ? It might get someone's attention!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shooting Bull Posted June 9, 2021 Share Posted June 9, 2021 1 hour ago, PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L said: SHB p.23 How about eliminating the 30-second SOG penalty altogether and list those violations under the "Unsportsmanlike conduct" MDQ? Sounds like a darn good solution. When people hear "Spirit of the Game" violation they (Including me) always think of unsportsmanlike conduct. Having the rules define them two separate ways causes a great deal of confusion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom, SASS #54973 Posted June 9, 2021 Share Posted June 9, 2021 1 hour ago, PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L said: SHB p.23 How about eliminating the 30-second SOG penalty altogether and list those violations under the "Unsportsmanlike conduct" MDQ? Not for the Ammo...some folks just don't know...and are not trying to be "Unsportsmanlike"...except I do know of a BP shooter that does know...but I won't go there. Phantom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L Posted June 9, 2021 Share Posted June 9, 2021 1 hour ago, Phantom, SASS #54973 said: Not for the Ammo...some folks just don't know...and are not trying to be "Unsportsmanlike"...except I do know of a BP shooter that does know...but I won't go there. Phantom Use the same criteria as for shooting a stage..."willfully" & "to gain a competitive advantage". Difficulty would be determining INTENT, same as for assessing a SOG under current rule. Blackpowder loads are covered in a separate section with the progressive P/SDQ/MDQ penalties attached. (except when shooting BP in a "smokeless" category...then the PF/MinVel standards apply) SHB p.25 Quote Failure of the shooter’s rounds to produce the same level of smoke as the standard rounds will result in a penalty for not adhering to the category requirements. The first offence will be assessed as a procedural penalty, the second offence in the same match a Stage DQ, and the third offence in the same match a Match DQ. SHB p.26 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom, SASS #54973 Posted June 9, 2021 Share Posted June 9, 2021 25 minutes ago, PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L said: Use the same criteria as for shooting a stage..."willfully" & "to gain a competitive advantage". Difficulty would be determining INTENT, same as for assessing a SOG under current rule. Blackpowder loads are covered in a separate section with the progressive P/SDQ/MDQ penalties attached. (except when shooting BP in a "smokeless" category...then the PF/MinVel standards apply) SHB p.25 SHB p.26 Well ya got me on that...and I'm a hardliner when it comes to not judging intent. The loads that don't reach the minimums usually work themselves out when it's a new reloader. Maximums are a different story. Side note: Have you experienced any calls made for using ammo that exceeds the maximums? Usually people just cringe when the shots are made...and you get some back slappin' going on about how "Manly" the person is. Phantom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L Posted June 9, 2021 Share Posted June 9, 2021 2 minutes ago, Phantom, SASS #54973 said: Well ya got me on that...and I'm a hardliner when it comes to not judging intent. The loads that don't reach the minimums usually work themselves out when it's a new reloader. Maximums are a different story. Side note: Have you experienced any calls made for using ammo that exceeds the maximums? Usually people just cringe when the shots are made...and you get some back slappin' going on about how "Manly" the person is. Phantom Only once (20+ years ago). Shooter's .44 Rem Mag revolver loads were finally chrono'd after numerous concerns were expressed and found to be "just a hair" under max. (this was at a local club match). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.