Knocking Over a Barrel

[DKorn]

This weekend I almost knocked over a barrel on a stage. Since it didn't actually fall, nothing came of it and I finished the stage. It happens about 1 minute into this video:

 

 

If it had fallen, what are the relevant rules? In this case, unless it landed in the shooting area, it wouldn't have changed where any targets were available from and therefore wouldn't really affect my stage time in any meaningful way. Still, I'm not sure exactly how the rules address this situation. 

[IronicTwitch]

My thought is it was good as shot. If it had fallen I don't see it would have given you a competitive advantage. If it fell into the shooting box/area and you or the RO thought it interfered too much you could have suggested this rule:

 

8.6.4 In the event that inadvertent contact from the Range Officer or another external influence has interfered with the competitor during a course of fire, the Range Officer may offer the competitor a reshoot of the course of fire. The competitor must accept or decline the offer prior to seeing either the time or the score from the initial attempt.

Edited April 25, 2017 by IronicTwitch

[bret]

if you intenionally knock over a barrel so you can shoot a target, what if any is the procedural?

 

8.6.4 doesn't apply.

 

 

[race1911]

Defininitely at least a procedural under Rule 4.5.1  .....I would be tempted to issue a DQ for unsportsmanlike conduct Rule 10.6.1

Edited April 25, 2017 by race1911

[rowdyb]

a stack of barrels isn't a good plan for an object to brace to slow yourself down. and almost doing something isn't doing it.

 

looking at the vid if you'd knocked them down by accident coming into that shooting position then REF and reshoot.

 

now if you knocked them down trying to make it look like an accident, because they were able to be knocked down that's a different story.

 

there's a big difference between "almost doing" something and attempting to do something but being unsuccessful.

Edited April 25, 2017 by rowdyb

[pjb45]

REF. NO DQ.  How do you determine if it is intentional or not?  Such a squirrelly judgement call on intention.

 

 

[DKorn]

Here's my thoughts, based on what everyone is saying:

 

Barrel does not actually fall over - score as shot

 

Barrel falls due to shooter, but does not affect where shots are taken and also does not interfere with shooter - score as shot? Or 1 PE under 4.5.1?

 

Barrel falls due to wind, etc - REF, reshoot

 

Barrel falls due to shooter and allows shots from location previously not available - 1 PE per shot from that location or 1 PE under 4.5.1?

 

Barrel falls due to shooter and interferes with  shooter - ?

[Fireant]

How about score it as shot and take a big stick to the setup crew for not having the barrels set back farther?  Either anchor the barrels or use a wall.  Stage setup 101.  

[Kraj]

2 hours ago, DKorn said:

Here's my thoughts, based on what everyone is saying:

 

Barrel does not actually fall over - score as shot

 

Barrel falls due to shooter, but does not affect where shots are taken and also does not interfere with shooter - score as shot? Or 1 PE under 4.5.1?

 

Barrel falls due to wind, etc - REF, reshoot

 

Barrel falls due to shooter and allows shots from location previously not available - 1 PE per shot from that location or 1 PE under 4.5.1?

 

Barrel falls due to shooter and interferes with  shooter - ?

4.5.1 The competitor must not interfere with the range surface, natural foliage, constructions, props or other range equipment (including targets, target stands and target activators) at any time. Violations may incur one procedural penalty per occurrence at the discretion of the Range Officer.
4.5.1.1 Exception - a competitor is allowed to move stone, sand or other loose material at the starting position for the purposes of achieving level and stable footing

 

That doesn't sound like running into a barrel and knocking it over because no one bothered to secure it to me. I've slid in gravel and almost went through mesh walls before.. That's not a procedural 

[teros135]

So far, we haven't solved the problem posed by the OP.  The problem is that a competitor has (accidentally or not) altered the barriers and essentially changed the COF.  If the barrel moved sideways (as it did in the video) or fell off the stack he might now be able to see and shoot from a better position, which somebody else wouldn't be able to do.  The reason it fell/moved is that it wasn't anchored effectively. 

 

We generally wouldn't need to figure out whether he intentionally moved the barrel.  It moved, and it shouldn't.  If we call it a REF and reshoot, that's a fair solution because it applies to everyone and should discourage attempts to play with the vision barrier.  (We did a version of this at a L2 match a while ago.  Kept the gaming down.)

 

Of course, if someone clearly straight-arms the barrel, knocks it over, and shoots targets that had been hidden by the barrel, that might be a different situation because of the obviousness of the action. 

[Fireant]

I guess you could call it a forbidden action, but I hate that rule and will never use it.  The only other thing really is to throw the stage out for bad stage layout.  I know people will cry it's only a local match, but local matches are where you learn the rules hopefully.  People could still shoot it for no score.  No DQ, no procedurals, no anything other than coming up with a better way to set things up.  Yes, I have been outsmarted before when I have setup stages.  I don't get mad, I just take it as a lesson learned and move on.  

[pjb45]

Forbidden Action is generally about Safety. 

[JAFO]

I don't see why that double-stack barrel was even there.  It doesn't really do anything, as you would have to move to be able to see either of the arrays in front of the barrel that the gun was staged on.

 

There's really no reason to even consider a forbidden action.  If it falls by accident, it's REF and a re-shoot (hopefully with some reinforcement of that stack prior to continuing).  If the competitor obviously ran up to it and pushed it over, it could be considered unsportsmanlike conduct, but like I said, there doesn't appear to be any benefit to it on that stage.

[aztecdriver]

First post in a while, so yay that I can get back into it...

 

Why call a barrel falling anything but REF and reshoot? Think about it - if the competitor thinks it's gaming and every time it falls he has to reshoot - he'll eventually stop knocking it over to get an actual score on the stage - or run out of ammo for the stage. 

[IHAVEGAS]

Sort of fits with this existing thread.

 

I chose a tight shot between barrels at a recent match rather than moving for a more open shot. It was a legitimate option that the stage designer said he anticipated. 

 

The first shot clipped a barrel and it moved toward the target which made a tough shot a lot tougher and I ended up alpha mike. 

 

Is this a reshoot for range equipment failure or just a 'hey dummy you shouldn't have shot the barrel' ?

[JohnStewart]

Getting back to the original question, my first inclination would be to determine if the contact and any subsequent movement (either slight barrel movement, or barrel falling over) would qualify for REF (4.6). 

 

The first sentence of 4.6.1 clarifies "Range equipment must present the challenge fairly and equitably to all competitors". 

 

I would evaluate if the barrel movement presented any change to the challenge?  We don't have a view of the targets to the left from behind the barrel in the video, but DKorn tells us that if would not change the challenge (unless it fell into the shooting area).  Therefore, I think that the barrel movement would not incur any penalty and I would score as shot. 

 

IF the barrel fell into the shooting area, I would call that REF which requires a re-shoot.

[mjmagee67]

Maybe that's why my local clubs stake the barrels down, using rebar stakes and sheetrock screws. Then they use a couple old target sticks to screw the two barrels together. It's pretty poor stage construction if you ask me. 

[Nik Habicht]

Great course construction doesn't easily allow props to move -- this can be challenging, especially if it's a windy range.

 

Good course construction easily allows ROs to notice if props have moved.

 

I probably would have called it REF if the barrel moved after being clipped by a bullet -- especially if the intent had been to "leave the option."  (How do we know intent as stage staff?  Simple -- you discuss as you walk through the stages with the staff, designer, MD and RM discussing the issues, before the RM nails down the final decisions, and updates the WSB and Diagram if needed.

 

At a level 1 -- that might not happen that formally, though ideally you have several experienced staff members/competitors walking the stages to offer feedback.

 

At a Level 2 or above that should really happen.  Anything you can anticipate and nail down in advance will make the match run smoother, even if it's just deciding that faulting here will one penalty per occurrence, but faulting there will incur one per shot fired....

[IHAVEGAS]

2 hours ago, Nik Habicht said:

(How do we know intent as stage staff?

 

Why would we care?

 

Not being smart aleck, just seems like once the match starts then it is what it is. 

[Nik Habicht]

On 9/4/2017 at 3:06 PM, IHAVEGAS said:

 

Why would we care?

 

Not being smart aleck, just seems like once the match starts then it is what it is. 

Once shooting starts, yep.  Beforehand though -- when you're building and prepping the stage for competition, it can be helpful to ask the designer questions: Did you mean to leave that as an option from here?  If so, we need to relocate that steel to avoid a shoot through.....

 

....or one of a hundred other possible considerations....

 

The better your planning, the smoother the match goes for competitors and staff alike.  I think that's something we can all get behind...