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

Competitor Dress


little_kahuna

Recommended Posts

To me (and I speak for no one else), it's a potential safety issue.

Even if the range surface is the equivalent of a putting green, there will be a lot a spent grass on the ground. What if one is standing open-end up and is stepped on during a run. I'm not keen on the possibility of it causing a fall, loss of gun control..... use your imagination.

If something like that were to happen, resulting in a DQ or perhaps an injury, I would think the RM might feel some remorse since he is the final judge (see Rule 7.1.6) [emphasis on the words range safety].

Most sports have safety equipment rules. We have rules which require you to wear safety equipment (eyes and ears). The wearing of adequate footwear (adequate for the conditions) is not an unlikely consideration.

The RM has the authority to require it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of dress & slight drift here. I shot a major match where I was told I can't use a digital camo pattern holster. Fair enough.....I used my standard Blade tech. No big deal.........Then I see a guy shooting wearing a camo pattern kilt! My squad mates just laughed at me.........it was a nice match though.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me (and I speak for no one else), it's a potential safety issue.

Even if the range surface is the equivalent of a putting green, there will be a lot a spent grass on the ground. What if one is standing open-end up and is stepped on during a run. I'm not keen on the possibility of it causing a fall, loss of gun control..... use your imagination.

If something like that were to happen, resulting in a DQ or perhaps an injury, I would think the RM might feel some remorse since he is the final judge (see Rule 7.1.6) [emphasis on the words range safety].

So...basically, under the guise of "range safety"...the RM has unlimited authority? :rolleyes:

Most sports have safety equipment rules. We have rules which require you to wear safety equipment (eyes and ears). The wearing of adequate footwear (adequate for the conditions) is not an unlikely consideration.

The RM has the authority to require it.

How about...if it's important enough to be required for safety, we spell it out like we do for eyes and ears ???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only restriction I've ever encountered on footwear was imposed by the host range. A certain competitor who is known as "The Bare-Foot Boy" was/is required to wear some sort of shoe when working as an RO, but was allowed to shoot the stages barefoot.

Despite the somewhat imaginative rationale George proposed, I don't see anything in the rulebook that allows dictating footwear. I second the idea that if it's that important it needs to be clearly defined in the rulebook. Otherwise, imposing such restrictions seems extreme.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about...if it's important enough to be required for safety, we spell it out like we do for eyes and ears ???

'Cause you have faith in our ability to proactively identify ALL potential safety issues, and are comfortable with removing some decision making flexibility on the part of the RM?

I think that eyes and ears come up at every match for someone --- I'm always warning either a competitor or a spectator......

Footwear has never come up for me --- I'm pretty comfortable requiring it though, either in my role as RM, or in my role as club member with fiduciary responsibility to the other ~2,000 members of my range.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would have no problem with slippahs or barefeet. And no rules against it but when I look at the bottom of my cleats they have copper jackets, etc., from splatter embedded in them. :surprise:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Despite the somewhat imaginative rationale George proposed, I don't see anything in the rulebook that allows dictating footwear. I second the idea that if it's that important it needs to be clearly defined in the rulebook. Otherwise, imposing such restrictions seems extreme.

And I guess that's where I'm coming from. I think it deserves to be included - because of all the potential injury issues, such as spent brass and pieces of jacket material, etc. Not only might it result in injury, it would also affect the match when the injury has to be dealt with. Just because it is not in the rulebook at this time does not mean the RM is restricted from using his judgment. We have a number of issues where judgment is required and when it comes to safety we have always given them priority.

I'm a firm believer in adhering to the rulebook and not making up rules on the fly. This is not something which imposes scoring penalties on the shooter. It's a preventive issue. If the range conditions are such that a safety problem is possible/likely, I don't think it's correct to take a hard "it's not in the book" approach. We have a responsibility as ROs, CROs and MD or RM to deal with these things thoughtfully.

BTW, I don't think you will see Chris T. shooting a match in flip-flops. I suspect that he knows he would not be able to perform at his best.

Thankfully, barefooted shooters are a rare sight. Most shooters wear adequate footwear. Those very few who do not, well...... :surprise:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me (and I speak for no one else), it's a potential safety issue.

Even if the range surface is the equivalent of a putting green, there will be a lot a spent grass on the ground. What if one is standing open-end up and is stepped on during a run. I'm not keen on the possibility of it causing a fall, loss of gun control..... use your imagination.

If something like that were to happen, resulting in a DQ or perhaps an injury, I would think the RM might feel some remorse since he is the final judge (see Rule 7.1.6) [emphasis on the words range safety].

Most sports have safety equipment rules. We have rules which require you to wear safety equipment (eyes and ears). The wearing of adequate footwear (adequate for the conditions) is not an unlikely consideration.

The RM has the authority to require it.

Hey George, is that spent grass called a "roach"?

Gary

Edited by Gary Stevens
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me (and I speak for no one else), it's a potential safety issue.

Even if the range surface is the equivalent of a putting green, there will be a lot a spent grass on the ground. What if one is standing open-end up and is stepped on during a run. I'm not keen on the possibility of it causing a fall, loss of gun control..... use your imagination.

If something like that were to happen, resulting in a DQ or perhaps an injury, I would think the RM might feel some remorse since he is the final judge (see Rule 7.1.6) [emphasis on the words range safety].

Most sports have safety equipment rules. We have rules which require you to wear safety equipment (eyes and ears). The wearing of adequate footwear (adequate for the conditions) is not an unlikely consideration.

The RM has the authority to require it.

Hey George, is that spent grass called a "roach"?

Gary

George I caught the slip as well and was amazed this crowd let you get by with it as long as they did before Gary pointed it out. :) Charles

Link to comment
Share on other sites

true enough, but could the RM go with a loose enforcement of 5.3.1?

I don't see how as it covers garments and footwear is not in the garment category.

Edit Oops Troy already answered.

Edited by LPatterson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...