Recent DNROI Letter (Front Line)

[frgood]

I believe DNROI has officially addresses many of the most recent 'debate's here.

 

http://www.multibriefs.com/briefs/uspsa/alarming-trend.pdf

[PatJones]

I suppose that if major matches aren't following a portion of the rule book, that might be a red flag that that part of the rule book might need review.

[Steve RA]

Or, possibly, some functions at Major Matches need review to comply with published rules.

[MikeBurgess]

Just out of curiosity other than berating the shooter for doing it what is the penalty for breaking 8.3.1.1 and taking a couple steps after being given Make Ready? 

[jester121]

There is none. Tongue lashing shall suffice.

 

(Except for the true zealots out there, who might go for a DQ under the "failing to comply with the reasonable directions of a Match Official" part of 10.6.1.)

[IL-SIG]

I find two things interesting in that note.

 

1) Not necessarily banning competitors from entering the course of fire to video fellow shooters during the course of fire.  This is a safety issue.  Most times, if not all, the only people who should be within the fault lines during a course of fire are the shooter and the ROs.  Any other competitors who are videoing can cause a safety issue.  In addition, it's one more distraction an RO may have to deal with.  Further, videoing shooters inside the fault lines during a course of fire is not a right or an entitlement.  It's the ROs primary responsibility to run the shooter in a safe manner.  If the RO believes that keeping others out of the the course while someone is shooting is absolutely a reasonable approach to maintaining a safe course of fire.  

 

2). Arbitration - the rule book is clear that the arbitration committee "may" interview witnesses.  If those who have the power to change the rules within our sport believe this should be required or a "must" do, then change the rule book accordingly.  Telling people that the rules say one thing, but that you should do another is not consistent with the way we approach our rules.  I don't disagree that this would be a best practice; however, under the current rules, if an arb-committee elects to interview some or none of the witnesses, the rules state that is within their prerogative. 

 

Just my $.02.  

[nuidad]

18 minutes ago, IL-SIG said:

1) Not necessarily banning competitors from entering the course of fire to video fellow shooters during the course of fire.  This is a safety issue.  Most times, if not all, the only people who should be within the fault lines during a course of fire are the shooter and the ROs.  Any other competitors who are videoing can cause a safety issue.  In addition, it's one more distraction an RO may have to deal with.  Further, videoing shooters inside the fault lines during a course of fire is not a right or an entitlement.  It's the ROs primary responsibility to run the shooter in a safe manner.  If the RO believes that keeping others out of the the course while someone is shooting is absolutely a reasonable approach to maintaining a safe course of fire.    

Not trying to hijack this thread but to expand on the "competitors on the COF" issue, scoring and resetting behind an active shooter seems to be OK.  I have witnessed situations on several occasions (one where I was shooting) where people were subjected to increased risk...especially when the COF did not lend itself to "active" scoring but the RO allowed it anyway (per 9.6.2).  The real issue isn't the confusion, the elimination of the scorer from his true function, the squabbles, and the re-shoots...it's the disregard of safety for expediency.

[frgood]

^^^

[nuidad]

51 minutes ago, IL-SIG said:

I find two things interesting in that note.

 

1) Not necessarily banning competitors from entering the course of fire to video fellow shooters during the course of fire.  This is a safety issue.    

One word...Drones.

[motosapiens]

9 hours ago, nuidad said:

One word...Drones.

as a CRO and competitor, I think drones are a terrible idea. Distracting for both shooter and RO, and a potential safety issue if anything goes wrong with the drone, or the person controlling it.

 

I don't see any safety issue at all with video inside the fault lines on the overwhelming majority of stages. most people at our club and at area and national matches do it on every stage. I've yet to see a potential safety issue develop.

[alma]

10 hours ago, IL-SIG said:

I find two things interesting in that note.

 

1) Not necessarily banning competitors from entering the course of fire to video fellow shooters during the course of fire.  This is a safety issue.  Most times, if not all, the only people who should be within the fault lines during a course of fire are the shooter and the ROs.  Any other competitors who are videoing can cause a safety issue.  In addition, it's one more distraction an RO may have to deal with.  Further, videoing shooters inside the fault lines during a course of fire is not a right or an entitlement.  It's the ROs primary responsibility to run the shooter in a safe manner.  If the RO believes that keeping others out of the the course while someone is shooting is absolutely a reasonable approach to maintaining a safe course of fire.  

 

I got chewed out for this at a recent major match which was also the source of the "premature patching gets an automatic procedural" blanket rule. 

There was a large field course that had about 40 yards of course of fire, and I had the audacity to start walking down on the side of the fault lines (not inside) while the range officer was still in the process of UASC. 

The RO at the back of the course yelled at me to stop since the course wasn't clear, to which I looked at him funny and questioned how much danger I was in since the shooter was literally 35 yards down range. 

[frgood]

One might argue that placing the responsibility for safety on the range on a couple ROs eliminates the need for individuals to determine the safety of the range.

[teros135]

6 minutes ago, frgood said:

One might argue that placing the responsibility for safety on the range on a couple ROs eliminates the need for individuals to determine the safety of the range.

 

^^ Nicely said

[Edge40]

6 hours ago, alma said:

 

I got chewed out for this at a recent major match which was also the source of the "premature patching gets an automatic procedural" blanket rule. 

There was a large field course that had about 40 yards of course of fire, and I had the audacity to start walking down on the side of the fault lines (not inside) while the range officer was still in the process of UASC. 

The RO at the back of the course yelled at me to stop since the course wasn't clear, to which I looked at him funny and questioned how much danger I was in since the shooter was literally 35 yards down range. 

I was in the same position.  Got scolded for doing the same thing.  The RO's on that stage were a little intense if you ask me. I didn't think much of the blanket procedural for pre pasting either.  I mean really its an accident 99.9 percent of the time or more.  You know when something fishy is going on.

[davidb72]

I gave out one procedural at the Mid-Atlantic Sectional for pre-pasting. That was the ONLY instance of pre-pasting on my stage for the entire weekend.

It sounds like no on liked it but it sure was effective.

[MemphisMechanic]

10 minutes ago, davidb72 said:

I gave out one procedural at the Mid-Atlantic Sectional for pre-pasting. That was the ONLY instance of pre-pasting on my stage for the entire weekend.

It sounds like no on liked it but it sure was effective.

 

"Liked" it?

 

It's not even possible to support that based on the rule book that you're supposed to operating out of. Liking it or not has nothing to do with it.

 

(And I'd be all for penalizing people who "accidentally" deliberately try to get their buddies a reshoot.)

 

Edited July 9, 2017 by MemphisMechanic

[davidb72]

10 minutes ago, MemphisMechanic said:

 

Liked it? It's not even possible to support that based on the rule book that you're supposed to operating out of.

 

It was in the written stage briefing that was read to every squad.

To your point regarding "people who "accidentally" deliberately try to get their buddies a reshoot" - how can I ever be sure of that?

 

[alma]

15 minutes ago, davidb72 said:

I gave out one procedural at the Mid-Atlantic Sectional for pre-pasting. That was the ONLY instance of pre-pasting on my stage for the entire weekend.

It sounds like no on liked it but it sure was effective.

I'm sure that makes the guy from my squad who got the procedural feel much better. We did have another prepaste on my squad but thankfully the CRO had mercy. That really was the right call too since we thought the ROs had scored and called to paste everything up. 

[davidb72]

6 minutes ago, alma said:

I'm sure that makes the guy from my squad who got the procedural feel much better. We did have another prepaste on my squad but thankfully the CRO had mercy. That really was the right call too since we thought the ROs had scored and called to paste everything up. 

I hope so - it wasn't done that way to hurt anyone's feelings, just to try and run an efficient match.

[alma]

Just now, davidb72 said:

I hope so - it wasn't done that way to hurt anyone's feelings, just to try and run an efficient match.

Understood. Thanks again for working the match. 

[Schutzenmeister]

I'm not aware of any provision in the rules whereby one can issue procedural penalties for this.  I am, however, aware of 3.2.5.  Please explain how the WSB can supercede the rules ...

 

I will note that a competitor who deliberately prematurely pastes someone's target in order to force a reshoot can (and, IMHO should) be DQd under 10.6.1.

[teros135]

47 minutes ago, Schutzenmeister said:

I'm not aware of any provision in the rules whereby one can issue procedural penalties for this.  I am, however, aware of 3.2.5.  Please explain how the WSB can supercede the rules ...

 

I will note that a competitor who deliberately prematurely pastes someone's target in order to force a reshoot can (and, IMHO should) be DQd under 10.6.1.

 

You could also consider 8.7.4,  interference with the scoring process.  Penalty is a procedural or consideration of 10.6, depending on circumstances.  

 

But then again, pre-pasting is probably more often a mistake than deliberate.  The RO's dilemma is how to tell the difference. 

[Brooke]

I am not here to stir up manure, but I find it amazing that every damn time a set of clarifications or common sense advice (based on the rules or safety) is released some set of boo birds fly off the edge of humanity.

 

Clubs seem to make up crap rules out of thin air. That is completely ridiculous in my view. This sport will die if it gets as stupid as 3 gun. I apologize but I fail to understand the desire to bitch. Do I like everything in this Down Range? No. I hate the ruling that videographers be allowed inside the COF. But that is the current thinking, so until a majority of shooters agree with me I live with it. The powers that be do their best to satisfy the majority while living within the rules. 

Edited July 9, 2017 by Brooke

[Schutzenmeister]

13 hours ago, teros135 said:

 

You could also consider 8.7.4,  interference with the scoring process.  Penalty is a procedural or consideration of 10.6, depending on circumstances.  

 

But then again, pre-pasting is probably more often a mistake than deliberate.  The RO's dilemma is how to tell the difference. 

 

Perhaps ... But I think it is stretching it to put it into the WSB.  By rule, the RM must be called and make a determination as to the penalty (if any) to be applied.  And yes, I have seen deliberate attempts at such.  Do not ask me for specifics as I will not provide them ... The individual was caught and it was dealt with.

[alma]

25 minutes ago, Schutzenmeister said:

 

Perhaps ... But I think it is stretching it to put it into the WSB.  By rule, the RM must be called and make a determination as to the penalty (if any) to be applied.  And yes, I have seen deliberate attempts at such.  Do not ask me for specifics as I will not provide them ... The individual was caught and it was dealt with.

For starters you would think that if it wasn't cheating then the prepasting would happen on a stage that the shooter tanked. That on it's own isn't proof of shinannigans but could be an indicator.