Amendments to CPSA Booklets 5 & 7 (Rules/Regs. General/Technical)

[Wildfowler12]

I'm kinda with you on that, and also handing cards to the ref while he's scoring. I've tried the polite thing of standing back waiting my turn with cards in hand only to see another group barge past and hand their cards into the ref. I now stand behind the ref with cards in hand and block anyone trying to put cards in until the ref has finished scoring that group, and only then will i hand my squads cards to the ref ( in the right order)

I had that happen to me today. A guy was waiting patiently for me to finish scoring a squad, and another group arrived and slotted their cards under my clipboard. After the first squad finished the first shooter in the second squad took to the stand, so I called the guy who had been waiting over, took his card, and told him he could shoot first.

 

There's was a few grumbles from the guys behind me, and one of them muttered something about their cards being in first. I told them that was only because they had no manners! It's a shame because 90% of people are really friendly and are just out to have a good time in good company. I enjoy reffing for these people, but there's certainly some that tarnish the image of others.

 

PETE/JOHN: If you see this, what was the winning score today?

[Frenchieboy]

I had that happen to me today. A guy was waiting patiently for me to finish scoring a squad, and another group arrived and slotted their cards under my clipboard. After the first squad finished the first shooter in the second squad took to the stand, so I called the guy who had been waiting over, took his card, and told him he could shoot first.

 

There's was a few grumbles from the guys behind me, and one of them muttered something about their cards being in first. I told them that was only because they had no manners! It's a shame because 90% of people are really friendly and are just out to have a good time in good company. I enjoy reffing for these people, but there's certainly some that tarnish the image of others.

 

PETE/JOHN: If you see this, what was the winning score today?

Sorry mate, i didn't see the winning score as I needed to get back home before the final scores were tallied up.

The only problem I had as such was when the button refused to work in the middle of one chap shooting his birds. I asked him to break his gun and wait till I could sort the problem out and he gave me the impression that he was not happy having to wait even though the malfunction was not my fault and beyond my control - It turned out that the problem arose because one of his mates had accidentally leaned on the card reader and knocked the card out of place so it wasn't being read.

Not to worry though, there's always one so they say! Having said that it is only right and fair to add that the biggest majority of the shooters there today were a great bunch of lads and lasses, very polite, grateful for the referees doing their job as best they could and willing to have a bit of a laugh and a joke after they had shot!

Regards

Pete

Edited May 3, 2013 by Frenchieboy

[Mr Potter]

I had that happen to me today. A guy was waiting patiently for me to finish scoring a squad, and another group arrived and slotted their cards under my clipboard. After the first squad finished the first shooter in the second squad took to the stand, so I called the guy who had been waiting over, took his card, and told him he could shoot first.

 

There's was a few grumbles from the guys behind me, and one of them muttered something about their cards being in first. I told them that was only because they had no manners! It's a shame because 90% of people are really friendly and are just out to have a good time in good company. I enjoy reffing for these people, but there's certainly some that tarnish the image of others.

 

PETE/JOHN: If you see this, what was the winning score today?

Wildfowler12,

 

Winning score was 86 by a Lincs Police team member (I think his name was S. Smith?). The runners up where Joe Emmott, Dave Harley & Tim Webster all on 83. Was a very tough shoot, there were many of the police team shooters in the 40s and 50s showing that it had not been set for it's target audience. Some targets very difficult to see against the foliage and a lot of edge on, distant dropping targets, not a good shoot. Didn't spot you today Wildfowler12, which stand were you reffing?

Our little group nearly fell foul of over officious refereeing. We arrived at a stand which had a lot of shooter milling about on it, we watched a couple of them shoot and in the blink of an eye they were all gone and it was our turn. Our first guy up is quite elderly (75 I think) and had disappeared for a comfort break in some shrubbery! Ref asked were he was, not referring to him by name, we called out his name and he quickly reappeared and went to get his gun. The ref got a bit agitated and said if he's not on the stand within a minute he'd forfeit. I asked him what he meant by forfeit and he said he would not be allowed to shoot, oh and if he took more than ten seconds to shoot when (if?) he got to the cage he'd forfeit the pair. I pointed out it wasn't a registered shoot and he replied he'd been instructed to stick strictly to registered rules. Now as far as I can recall he, the ref, did not call the shooter by name and he certainly didn't call his name three times.

My impression was, that not only had the shoot been set un-necessarily stiff but, certainly on that stand, the refereeing was un-necessarily officious. Those CPSA rules were primarily put in place to ensure no hold ups during major championships and that old fashioned skill of employing common sense should be used at these sort of events.

 

Mr Potter

[Wildfowler12]

Winning score was 86 by a Lincs Police team member (I think his name was S. Smith?). The runners up where Joe Emmott, Dave Harley & Tim Webster all on 83. Was a very tough shoot,

 

Thanks for the info! I was on stand 9 but I had to leave shortly after lunch to go to A+E. I had an op on Wednesday and managed to open the wound whilst I was reffing!!

 

I agree, some of the stands where difficult considered it wasn't a registered comp. Although it looks like there were still a few good scores

[Frenchieboy]

Wildfowler12,

 

Winning score was 86 by a Lincs Police team member (I think his name was S. Smith?). The runners up where Joe Emmott, Dave Harley & Tim Webster all on 83. Was a very tough shoot, there were many of the police team shooters in the 40s and 50s showing that it had not been set for it's target audience. Some targets very difficult to see against the foliage and a lot of edge on, distant dropping targets, not a good shoot. Didn't spot you today Wildfowler12, which stand were you reffing?

Our little group nearly fell foul of over officious refereeing. We arrived at a stand which had a lot of shooter milling about on it, we watched a couple of them shoot and in the blink of an eye they were all gone and it was our turn. Our first guy up is quite elderly (75 I think) and had disappeared for a comfort break in some shrubbery! Ref asked were he was, not referring to him by name, we called out his name and he quickly reappeared and went to get his gun. The ref got a bit agitated and said if he's not on the stand within a minute he'd forfeit. I asked him what he meant by forfeit and he said he would not be allowed to shoot, oh and if he took more than ten seconds to shoot when (if?) he got to the cage he'd forfeit the pair. I pointed out it wasn't a registered shoot and he replied he'd been instructed to stick strictly to registered rules. Now as far as I can recall he, the ref, did not call the shooter by name and he certainly didn't call his name three times.

My impression was, that not only had the shoot been set un-necessarily stiff but, certainly on that stand, the refereeing was un-necessarily officious. Those CPSA rules were primarily put in place to ensure no hold ups during major championships and that old fashioned skill of employing common sense should be used at these sort of events.

 

Mr Potter

I don't know which stand this was on nor do I know which referee it was so I am not going to either condone nor condemn this sort of (AS you have put it) "over officious refereeing" so I am going to have to choose my words carefully here! What I will say straight out is that it does highlight what referees can be up against and that there can be situations where we can be "damned if we do yet we are still be damned if we don't"! Please allow me to explain:

We are there to work according to the rules and to make sure that the rules aren't being broken and that the shoot runs smoothly. The "rule book" says that that when we call a shooter to the stand we should also call out the name of the next shooter to follow him/her. When it is the turn of the next shooter to enter the stand we then call his name. If he has not come forward after 10 seconds (Aprox) we will call his name a second time. If again he has not come forward 10 seconds after the second call we have to call his name a third time. If he has still not come forward 10 seconds after the third call (30 seconds in all) we should mark his card down as "absent"! This rule is basically put in place to keep the shoot running smoothly. Ok, so if we do that (According to the rules) we are wrong in the eyes of some of the shooters but what happens if we don't do that and there is a bit of a hold up and other (Less patient) shooters complain - We are then wrong in the eyes of the shooters that are waiting for not enforcing the rules as we are surposed to do!? You see what i mean, we are damned if we do and we are damned if we dont!

Having said that the way that I see it is that as long as there is not a dozen of shooters waiting (Maybe from different groups) then it is up to the referee to show a little discression and try to act in a reasonable way! Had I been the referee in question involved in that "incident" I would almost certainly have just moved the card belonging to the shooter who had needed to "relieve himself" further down through the cards from that group. This would still have helped the shoot to run without any delays and kept the shooter in question happy. As for mentioning the "10 second rule" I personally don't think there would have been any need to ever mention that until the shooter was in the stand and had borken that 10 second rule.

A little discression and common sense can be used to accomodate most situations - As long as it doesn't involve a situation where it is an obvious safety issue and causing a potential risk to others!

I had several "incidents" where some (Minor) rules were being broken but as these few incidents were not beaches of the rules where safety or blatantly obvious cheating was involved I chose to handle them in my own way and with a little "discression"! I waited till the shooter had finished his stand and quietly and discretely asked him if I could "have a quick quiet word with him". I then quietly and politely explained what he had done wrong and warned him that some other refs would quite likely "pull him up if they saw the same thing happening again and act according to the rule book" - This worked well and went down fine with the other shooters in the group and didn't show me up to be a "little hitler"!

Some times the shooters need to cut the referees a bit of slack, after all they are only doing their job, but on the other hand the referees need to show a bit of discression towards the shooters and use a little common sense in order for good relationships between the referees and the shooters to be maintained - But we will always be faced with the potential problem of "We can be damned if we do and still be damned if we don't!

 

p.s My earlier comment about watching my old FEO like a hawk had he been there was meant in jest. If he had been there (Which he wasn't) I would still have refereed his stand fairly and would not have gone out of my way to find fault with him!

[timps]

We are there to work according to the rules and to make sure that the rules aren't being broken and that the shoot runs smoothly. The "rule book" says that that when we call a shooter to the stand we should also call out the name of the next shooter to follow him/her. When it is the turn of the next shooter to enter the stand we then call his name. If he has not come forward after 10 seconds (Aprox) we will call his name a second time. If again he has not come forward 10 seconds after the second call we have to call his name a third time. If he has still not come forward 10 seconds after the third call (30 seconds in all) we should mark his card down as "absent"!

Not exactly correct, according to the rules you call his name out, if they do not come then you call it out a further 3 times equally spaced within one minute . So that's 4 calls in total (loudly) not 3 and 3 of them equally spaced over a minute, but it gives me a minute from the first of these further 3 calls to get in the cage .

 

DULY NOTIFIED

 

7.11 A competitor is Duly Notified to compete when their name is called out by a Referee, Scorer or other person authorised to do so. If a competitor is absent after being called, the Referee shall call the name on the card loudly three times equally spaced within one minute. If the competitor is still not present, they will be Declared Absent and their card will be marked accordingly with a two target loss

 

If a ref tried to mark my card absent without strictly adhering to the above rule then there would be no way I would be accepting it and a total of 3 calls in 30 seconds doesn't adhere to that rule at all .

 

To my mind there certain rules that are cast in stone and certain others that are not, the above rule is badly written so you could argue the toss over it.

 

You have to remember most competitors are not going to take a referees course so it doesn't mater what the course instructor says but they do read the rule book so will go off what is written in that. 1 call then a further three times equally spaced giving me a minute is how I read it but you could take a different view. The trouble is do it quicker than a minute with me and I am going to argue on the minute, the equal spacing, loudly and only calling my name 3 times in total.

 

A ref sticking rigidly to a rule when the ref has also got to do something in an exact order then the ref better make sure they are not at fault as well. It should never be a case of them and us but that cuts both ways, if neither the ref and the shooter are adhering to the exact letter of the rule book then that's where the trouble starts if the shooter feels it's a case of do as I say not as I do.

Edited May 4, 2013 by timps

[Frenchieboy]

You are of course right there Timps, I got it wrong and the calls should be 20 seconds apart making one minute in total.

As i said though, there should be a bit of common sense exercised by referee anyhow. I would not want any situation where I was thought of as a "little hitler" as I believe that often a quiet and discrete word is better than causing arguments and ill feelings.

[webber]

Pete

I don't have time to read all this right now, I'm off to Hereford; but its 1 minute, not 30 seconds.

 

webber

[webber]

If this post has inspired anyone to want to find out more about refereeing, please contact me via PM.

 

webber

[Son Of Potter]

Or alternatively you can visit https://www.cpsa.co.uk/courses for a full list of available courses, you'll get an official qualification with a certificate and a shiny badge :-)

[Ian E]

Quick question as a referee you would mark a card with a "/" "k" or "0" for a kill ?

[Wildfowler12]

/ for a kill, 0 for a loss.

[Chris Bb]

I'm informed by a friend who's recently qualified as a CPSA instructor that "kill" is regarded as politically incorrect and will score negative points if used at exam time, it's now called a "hit".

 

Similarly they're not "birds", they're "targets".

 

Thus the card should be marked "/".

 

 

Madness!

 

Just to wind him up we make a point of calling "Kill".

[skabo1]

...... just make sure they are clean, not ripped or torn, and not military spec! Just had a thought, speedos(?) - what about growing a dodgy moustache as well!

If the speedos are too tight you might end up with a dodgy moustache anyway!