Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

Obligation to Discuss REF with RO During Stage?


MikeRush

Recommended Posts

I had a blast at A2 this last weekend- it was a great match! I did have an interesting situation that I would like to get sorted out, so I can avoid a repeat in the future. I'm going try to leave irrelevant specifics out as I don't really think it is necessary to the question.

A certain stage had a pair of swingers that would remain visible at rest. I engaged the targets and activated the swingers without incident. I shot the left swinger twice. As I transitioned over to the right target, I saw some strange happenings going on with the left target. The sticks broke and it flew off. I paused while observing (pause is very visible in footage from match) and was not instructed to stop, so, I did what I have always been told to do carried on, and engaged the right swinger then proceeded with unload show clear.

Upon approaching the targets it became apparent to RO that the left swinger had broken off, and was not visible at rest. I was asked if I wanted a reshoot, which I accepted- which I thought was strange, as my understanding has been that if there is an REF, such as a target which should be visible at rest not being visible at rest, you must reshoot.

Rangemaster was called, situation was discussed between RM and RO, without me, and I was informed that because there were two hits on the scoring surface of the deceased target I would not be granted a reshoot. (side note: my shots were not through target sticks- the sticks had previously been shot up and taped) I was told targets were scored as is and I got what I got so I signed the paper.

After everything was signed, RO said they appreciated how I handled the situation but I would have been granted a reshoot if I had let them know about it during the stage, such as "I can't see it" or "the target disappeared". I responded that I was not aware of any rule that would mandate that and that it wasn't my responsibility to be discussing equipment malfunctions on the clock. If I had tried to talk to her about it during the stage, and was not granted the reshoot I would have been worse off than just continuing.

I always have been told you keep shooting unless RO stops you (i.e. popper doesn't go down, you keep shooting then call for calibration after or swinger doesn't activate you finish shooting the stage unless they stop you). In this case, a target dictated by the WSB as visible at rest was not visible at rest.

What should I have done?

I'm solidly middle of the pack in A, so no trophies were harmed in the denial of this reshoot, but still, as my level of participation increases so will the stakes and I'd like to know and understand what I can do differently next time. I think my understanding of the rules is correct. I've never had the need before. Wind blew over steel on the stage prior, and I was stopped, and required to reshoot the stage. I thought that was how it worked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you shoot a target stick and it breaks and you still have to engage the target again but it has moved due to the broken stick, is that REF or not?

My opinion is yes. The sticks are, for all intents and purposes, not there. Invisible. The target should be floating in mid air. Any action or inaction by anyone (the shooter or not) should not disrupt the presentation of the target. If there is any sort of disruption in the target presentation before or during engagement, to me, the range equipment (sticks) have failed.

However, you did the right thing by continuing the course of fire. On the clock is not the time to get into a rules discussion with an RO. You should work on your reshoot negotiation skills.

PS, the rules and ability to complete a COF that is the same as the guy before you and the guy after you is for everyone including middle of the pack A shooters. Fair is fair.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure, and not sure if that changes anything. In this case my hits were away from the sticks, but sticks had been wrapped in black tape to repair previous damage. RO made a comment that they probably should have been replaced a while ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By rule, REF is an automatic reshoot. No choice. You did nothing wrong to cause this.

I think what he's saying is that the RM's opinion was that the E didn't F until after he engaged the target. I find that hard to prove and "because there were two hits on the target" is the worst of all ways to prove it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree reshoot. The holes in the target are irrelevant to your performance if the broken target start flying around blocking vision or being disruptive. Honestly, at a local match I may give the shooter a choice to keep things moving, but at a major match that should be a reshoot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's with all this "offering" reshoots? Why even have a rule book if we are not going to read it?

Oh FFS, I was waiting for you to come up with that ... Again, someone go report me to USPSA, PLEASE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's a mandatory reshoot for REF. The RM has theoretical cover in the fact that he can claim the presence of hits on the fallen target indicate the competitor had an equitable chance at the COF, but the failure of the equipment also theoretically cost you competitive equity because it was a pretty major distraction. The rules do not say that the targets cannot have been engaged in order to assess REF.

I understand why an RM might not want to do a reshoot, but there's really very little reason to justify denying true competitive equity by not doing one in this case.

And the RO should not have asked you if you wanted a reshoot, you only have an option if the RO interferes with you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We do have a rulebook...

The rules I would look to:

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.

4.6.1 Range equipment must present the challenge fairly and equitably to all competitors. Range equipment failure includes, the displacement of paper targets, the premature activation of metal or moving targets, the failure to reset moving targets or steel targets, the malfunction of mechanically or electrically operated equipment, and the failure of props such as openings, ports, and barriers.

Both of these rules can be applied to the described situation. Technically, if I had to make a call, I would use 4.6.1. In any event, the RO was not correct in telling you to talk to her on the clock. I also do not think the RM needed to be called. The competitor had two different rules that should have afforded a reshoot. IF the target lathe had failed after the competitor was past the target and it had no influence on him, then I can see an argument for no reshoot. That may have been the thinking of the RM if he did not get a complete set of facts on which to rule.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks to all for feedback.

It sounds like my understanding of the situation was correct but I failed to follow through in my interaction with range staff after the stage. This is good to know. I have never had to disagree with an RO at a major before.

Is being able to cite the rules the best way to solve the disagreement? I am reading up on the appeals process, but it seems like this should not have even got to the RM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't sign the scoresheet, but politely tell the CRO you would like to check the rules before you sign your sheet. Don't get upset, don't call for the RM. 90% of wrong calls can be fixed with the competitor and the CRO taking a look at the rulebook. Only if you do not agree with the CRO and have a rule to back you up is it time to call the RM.

With Practiscore, that can get tricky if the scorekeeper "accepts" your score and moves on to the next shooter. But if you did not sign, or press enter on the scoring device, YOU have not accepted the score.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't sign the scoresheet, but politely tell the CRO you would like to check the rules before you sign your sheet. Don't get upset, don't call for the RM. 90% of wrong calls can be fixed with the competitor and the CRO taking a look at the rulebook. Only if you do not agree with the CRO and have a rule to back you up is it time to call the RM.

With Practiscore, that can get tricky if the scorekeeper "accepts" your score and moves on to the next shooter. But if you did not sign, or press enter on the scoring device, YOU have not accepted the score.

+1. Very good advice (I want to say advise so bad so I piss off Sarge :) ). Be polite, verify the rules, try to work things out at the stage, then go from there if needed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I actually would say that it is not wholly inappropriate to 'offer' a reshoot in such an instance. I think it falls under 8.6.4, somewhat similar to a banner coming loose and flopping around, potentially distracting the shooter or obstructing a target.

As spanky pointed out, it sounds like the equipment failure was after the target had been engaged, so that external influence may or may not have affected the shooter. It would be normal and reasonable for the shooter to think that his shots had broken the stick, and therefore want to re-engage the swinger, which is no longer available. If he made that claim and had noticeably paused during the stage looking at the swinger, I don't really see how you could really deny it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IF the target lathe had failed after the competitor was past the target and it had no influence on him, then I can see an argument for no reshoot. That may have been the thinking of the RM if he did not get a complete set of facts on which to rule.

What if he had completed the COF but wanted to slide back over to make sure his hits were there? If the target is not visible like it is supposed to be, that's REF.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's with all this "offering" reshoots? Why even have a rule book if we are not going to read it?

Oh FFS, I was waiting for you to come up with that ... Again, someone go report me to USPSA, PLEASE.

What's with all this "offering" reshoots? Why even have a rule book if we are not going to read it?

Oh FFS, I was waiting for you to come up with that ... Again, someone go report me to USPSA, PLEASE.

I didn't even read your post vlad. I would probably do the same as you at a local. BUT, still, if the shooter wanted to zoom back over to make sure he hit it and it was not visible that would be a reshoot in my mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't even read your post vlad. I would probably do the same as you at a local. BUT, still, if the shooter wanted to zoom back over to make sure he hit it and it was not visible that would be a reshoot in my mind.

Sorry, I may have overreacted, I had a bizarre morning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't even read your post vlad. I would probably do the same as you at a local. BUT, still, if the shooter wanted to zoom back over to make sure he hit it and it was not visible that would be a reshoot in my mind.

Sorry, I may have overreacted, I had a bizarre morning.

It's not a big deal. Lifes to short to argue with somebody from New jersey! :sight::roflol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IF the target lathe had failed after the competitor was past the target and it had no influence on him, then I can see an argument for no reshoot. That may have been the thinking of the RM if he did not get a complete set of facts on which to rule.

What if he had completed the COF but wanted to slide back over to make sure his hits were there? If the target is not visible like it is supposed to be, that's REF.

Exactly. The target was not visible to shoot at. it was not the same COF as the previous shooter, therefore its an REF. Mandatory reshoot. If the target is laying on the ground ( face up/face down doesn't matter ), it's an REF. As a shooter the COF is mine from Start signal to IFUSC, how i shoot at the targets is my business, when i shoot at them, how many times i shoot at them ( even in Virginia count! ), so saying there were two holes and the shooter engaged it already is bogus. I would have asked them for the rule that states i'm only allowed to shoot at it twice ( again, even in Virginia count you can shoot at it all day long, you're just going to get a lot of penalties for it!! ).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IF the target lathe had failed after the competitor was past the target and it had no influence on him, then I can see an argument for no reshoot. That may have been the thinking of the RM if he did not get a complete set of facts on which to rule.

What if he had completed the COF but wanted to slide back over to make sure his hits were there? If the target is not visible like it is supposed to be, that's REF.

Different set of circumstances. We can play what ifs all day long. Fact is, there were two rules that could be used to either "offer" or require a re-shoot, which I quoted above. I did not say an argument for no re-shoot should prevail, just that I could potentially see the argument and the RM may, or may not have been given all the information. Any RO who observed that the competitor even noticed the sticks had failed prior to his completion of the course of fire, should have understood the potential impact and offered a re-shoot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We do have a rulebook...

The rules I would look to:

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.

4.6.1 Range equipment must present the challenge fairly and equitably to all competitors. Range equipment failure includes, the displacement of paper targets, the premature activation of metal or moving targets, the failure to reset moving targets or steel targets, the malfunction of mechanically or electrically operated equipment, and the failure of props such as openings, ports, and barriers.

Both of these rules can be applied to the described situation. Technically, if I had to make a call, I would use 4.6.1. In any event, the RO was not correct in telling you to talk to her on the clock. I also do not think the RM needed to be called. The competitor had two different rules that should have afforded a reshoot. IF the target lathe had failed after the competitor was past the target and it had no influence on him, then I can see an argument for no reshoot. That may have been the thinking of the RM if he did not get a complete set of facts on which to rule.

8.6.4 is subjective. The RO may offer a reshoot - which assumes the RO determines if the external influence qualifies for a reshoot. From the original post, the shooter paused and was then instructed to continue. To me, the fact that he was instructed to continue (by the RO?) after a pause, is enough to offer the reshoot after a quick discussion with the shooter and before the time is announced. As a timer RO focused on the gun, I probably would not have seen the swinger self-destruct and would rely on the scoring RO to call the REF if they saw it and thought it applied.

4.6.1 not sure I agree that it applies here since the shooter engaged the target before it failed which in my opinion meets the fair & equitable standard.

At a match, I call it as I see it (right or wrong) and the the shooter has the right to appeal to the RM - that's why they are there. At a major match I don't have time for a rules discussion as the squad times are tight and delays turn into bottlenecks which nobody likes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We do have a rulebook...

The rules I would look to:

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.

4.6.1 Range equipment must present the challenge fairly and equitably to all competitors. Range equipment failure includes, the displacement of paper targets, the premature activation of metal or moving targets, the failure to reset moving targets or steel targets, the malfunction of mechanically or electrically operated equipment, and the failure of props such as openings, ports, and barriers.

Both of these rules can be applied to the described situation. Technically, if I had to make a call, I would use 4.6.1. In any event, the RO was not correct in telling you to talk to her on the clock. I also do not think the RM needed to be called. The competitor had two different rules that should have afforded a reshoot. IF the target lathe had failed after the competitor was past the target and it had no influence on him, then I can see an argument for no reshoot. That may have been the thinking of the RM if he did not get a complete set of facts on which to rule.

8.6.4 is subjective. The RO may offer a reshoot - which assumes the RO determines if the external influence qualifies for a reshoot. From the original post, the shooter paused and was then instructed to continue. To me, the fact that he was instructed to continue (by the RO?) after a pause, is enough to offer the reshoot after a quick discussion with the shooter and before the time is announced. As a timer RO focused on the gun, I probably would not have seen the swinger self-destruct and would rely on the scoring RO to call the REF if they saw it and thought it applied.

4.6.1 not sure I agree that it applies here since the shooter engaged the target before it failed which in my opinion meets the fair & equitable standard.

At a match, I call it as I see it and the the shooter has the right to appeal to the RM - that's why they are there. At a major match I don't have time for a rules discussion as the squad times are very tight and delays turn into bottlenecks which nobody likes.

Um, a rules discussion is your job, your obligation as an RO. If you don't know the rules, sure, that is what the RM is there for.

Remember this?

Range Officer's Creed

As a USPSA Range Officer, I shall conduct all competitions with the safety of the competitors, spectators and fellow Range Officials first and foremost in my thoughts and actions.

I shall always be courteous while maintaining firm control over my range and areas of responsibility.

I will always strive to be totally fair and impartial in my judgments.

Safety shall always be my primary goal, with efficiency and speed of the competition as secondary factors.

It is a privilege and an honor to serve as a Range Officer and I shall act accordingly.

It is my duty to assist all competitors in their attempts to accomplish their goals and not to hinder them by undue harassment and authoritarian behavior.

I shall put aside personal prejudices and act as an impartial judge at all times.

I shall keep my opinions to myself and shall not be critical of any individual beyond the field of contest.

I will thoroughly familiarize myself with all current regulations, match rules and attendant subjects.

I will be firm and fair in all judgmental calls made during the course of a stage, and be prepared to state in a clear and concise manner my reasons for such calls to the particular competitor or any Range Official.

During the course of a stage, my attention shall be clearly focused on the particular competitor I am assigned to observe, and I shall not permit my attention to be misdirected or lax.

Prior to and during a stage, I shall never consume any alcoholic beverage or narcotic. I understand that if I violate this rule, I may be suspended or barred from serving as a Range Official in the future.

I shall confer only with my fellow Range Officers and Match Officials concerning the behavior of any competitor and any decisions to be rendered.

I shall exercise due consideration for the personal emotions of any competitor, and shall act in a manner so as not to embarrass or disturb the competitor any more than is absolutely necessary.

I shall strive to never give even the appearance of wrongdoing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We do have a rulebook...

The rules I would look to:

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.

4.6.1 Range equipment must present the challenge fairly and equitably to all competitors. Range equipment failure includes, the displacement of paper targets, the premature activation of metal or moving targets, the failure to reset moving targets or steel targets, the malfunction of mechanically or electrically operated equipment, and the failure of props such as openings, ports, and barriers.

Both of these rules can be applied to the described situation. Technically, if I had to make a call, I would use 4.6.1. In any event, the RO was not correct in telling you to talk to her on the clock. I also do not think the RM needed to be called. The competitor had two different rules that should have afforded a reshoot. IF the target lathe had failed after the competitor was past the target and it had no influence on him, then I can see an argument for no reshoot. That may have been the thinking of the RM if he did not get a complete set of facts on which to rule.

8.6.4 is subjective. The RO may offer a reshoot - which assumes the RO determines if the external influence qualifies for a reshoot. From the original post, the shooter paused and was then instructed to continue. To me, the fact that he was instructed to continue (by the RO?) after a pause, is enough to offer the reshoot after a quick discussion with the shooter and before the time is announced. As a timer RO focused on the gun, I probably would not have seen the swinger self-destruct and would rely on the scoring RO to call the REF if they saw it and thought it applied.

4.6.1 not sure I agree that it applies here since the shooter engaged the target before it failed which in my opinion meets the fair & equitable standard.

At a match, I call it as I see it and the the shooter has the right to appeal to the RM - that's why they are there. At a major match I don't have time for a rules discussion as the squad times are very tight and delays turn into bottlenecks which nobody likes.

Um, a rules discussion is your job, your obligation as an RO. If you don't know the rules, sure, that is what the RM is there for.

Remember this?

Range Officer's Creed

<snip>

Nowhere in your lengthy creed post does it say a rule discussion is part of my job. I make the call fairly and impartially based on my interpretation of the rules and explain that to the shooter. If you disagree, you are welcome to take it up with the RM, it's nothing personal...but we are not going to hold up shooters and have a rules 'discussion' while I am running a squad. That's my RM's job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...