1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

ATA Rules Question

Discussion in 'Uncategorized Threads' started by Norris, Apr 5, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Norris

    Norris TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    20
    Situation: Four-man squad. Post 2 empty. On the third 25, shooter who should have started on post 3 starts on post 2. After everyone shoots first five, they realize that he started on wrong post. The shooter who started on wrong post broke first five. What is the rule??

    We had he shooter shoot the first five over from the correct post. Was this correct??

    Thanks,

    Norris
     
  2. Beancounter

    Beancounter TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    482
    The rules do not specifically cover this case, but I don't think they have to. There is no do over, the rules say you just have to shoot each post. The problem will come when the scoresheet comes in to be recorded. It will take explaining for the cashier to understand that number 3 shooter started on post 2.
     
  3. Neil Winston

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,848
    Section VII, A, & "Inadvertently skipped posts" talks about cases where someone might have missed a whole post - moved from 4 to one, for example, and then the missed post - 5 in this case - must be made up.

    But this was not such a case, the way I read it. If he had just kept on, he would have fired five from each post. So I don't think anything was gained by making him shoot over. But if shoot management made the decision to make him shoot over, reading VII, A, 7 that way, then they are right, because someone decides and shoot management decides.

    I'll tell you what wouldn't have been legal. He couldn't start on two by mistake and then move to four because that's where he "should have been."

    So I think the re-shoot was an error. Let's think back to a three-shooter squad and posts two and three are open. Joe thinks he's on two, but really he was squadded on post three. But he does the whole event as shooter two. Does he have to do the whole thing over? Of course not.

    What happened here is more like Joe in miniature, not like what VII, A. & tries to address. But remember, once he moved to field four and shot his first shot, it was all over anyway.

    Neil
     
  4. Jim101

    Jim101 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,942
    Location:
    Knob Noster, Mo
    As long as the names match the scores and nobody shot out of turn it shouldn't be a problem. May take a bit of explanation when the sheet is turned in.





    Jim
     
  5. OhioBob

    OhioBob TS Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    136
    See Page 13 ...Section VI.....D....2 The referee/scorer shall NOT throw a target unless all contestants are in the correct positions. (It had to be somebody's fault)

    He needed to shoot that required post for sure, but was not deemed to be out of turn. The following rule states that the rest of the squad must remain behind the trapline while he makes up that post. It does not state how the score from the first 5 targets he shot are to be handled. Remember, the rule states he is "NOT" out of turn.

    See Page 28.....Section VII....A...7 Inadvertently skipped posts.

    Another case where the rules don't seem to be clear on how to proceed with the scoring.

    Bob T.
     
  6. OhioBob

    OhioBob TS Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    136
    Neil beat me to it again, I'm just too slow at typing.

    A little rules trivia....Under what possible circumstances are targets shot at and hit scored "no target" and targets shot at and missed scored "lost" ?

    Bob T.
     
  7. Neil Winston

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,848
    ...when they are shot from the wrong yardage (within an event), Bob?

    Neil
     
  8. OhioBob

    OhioBob TS Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    136
    I thought you would know that one Neil...I was curious if others would catch it as well.

    This actually came up at our club one time when attempting to comply with the yardage difference between adjacent posts scenario.

    You have to be careful and NOT volunteer to shoot one yard back from your handicap yardage.
     
  9. Norris

    Norris TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    20
    Thank you for your response. The first five targets were not counted. However, he broke the next five targets from the correct starting post. I really didn't understand why he could not have continued shooting since he was not out of turn.

    Thanks again,

    Norris
     
  10. phirel

    phirel TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,556
    The shooter did not shoot out of turn, but he did shoot the posts out of order. There are two ways to interpret the rule, and I would not have a problem with either interpretation.

    I recall a similar situation on a 4 person squad (one was me), when one shooter on the second field shot three birds from the wrong post. To eliminate any possible complaint, we had the person shoot the three birds over from the correct post. We then got mixed up and each of us shot 6 birds from the post we were on. I had some difficulty convincing the squad and the scorer that the 6 scores stand and we only shot 4 birds from the next post. The confusion from the first problem spread to everyone on the squad.

    Pat Ireland
     
  11. lumper

    lumper TS Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2007
    Messages:
    3,586
    Interpret the rule?

    Once again I thought you follow rules and interpret guidelines but then again it is the ATA Rule/Guidebook they were following.

    A course of fire is 25 birds shot from 5 different posts. What would happen if when the event is published the course of fire would be you shoot, skip a post, shoot, skip a post and so on until all 5 posts are shot ... basicly shoot in this order ... 1,3,5,2,4 ... all 5 posts have been shot and all 25 birds have been scored. What does the rule/guidebook say about a course of fire like that?
     
  12. 870

    870 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,390
    Lumper:

    You keep posting similar thoughts as above: "Interpret the rule? Once again I thought you follow rules and interpret guidelines but then again it is the ATA Rule/Guidebook they were following."

    I guess your world is very uncomplicated, but it's not the real world. It is certainly not unusual for an organization to issue interpretations of its rules. You can't write rules that explicitly mention every possible situation. Just what set of rules do you feel never require interpretation? Think about laws, the same thing could be said - "you follow laws..." We all know how that goes!
     
  13. lumper

    lumper TS Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2007
    Messages:
    3,586
    Has anyone ever hear the term ... Rules are made to be interpreted? ... no I think the saying goes more along the lines of ... Rules are made to be broken.

    Ask yourself this one question ... if you went to Shoot "A" and they interpret the rules to say that everyone must say "BIRD" in a very loud and distinct manner when calling for the target and you go shoot "B" and they interpret the rules to say that everyone must say "TARGET" in a very loud and distinct manner when calling for the target and then at shoot "C" and they interpret the rules to say that everyone must say "ATA" in a very loud and distinct manner ... well there is no uniformity as to what happens from shoot to shoot and no shooter knows exactly what is supposed to be said. Yes it is a stupid example of an interpretation of a rule on calling for a bird/target but rules are not up for interpretation but guidelines are.

    Yes the above is a very stupid but interpretation is just like when you assume and we all know the saying about when you assume something.
     
  14. OhioBob

    OhioBob TS Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    136
    Lumper...to answer your scenario above....if the posts were "inadvertently skipped" then the score would stand as recorded...the shooter did not shoot "out of turn".

    It is hard to imagine this scenario being "inadvertent"....but possible I suppose.

    If upon arrival at his last post, # 4 in your example, he finds that a shooter already occupies that post in regular fashion, then he must "wait" until the squad has finished the sub-event and then proceed to shoot the skipped post while the balance of the squad remains behind the firing line.

    This scenario could only happen with either a 1 or 2 man squad....or a combination of shooters that really can't travel between posts very well.

    Bob T
     
  15. lumper

    lumper TS Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2007
    Messages:
    3,586
    Bob ... it could happen at any shoot here would be the order of fire for the shooters on a 5 man squad.

    Shooter #1 ... 1,3,5,2,4
    Shooter #2 ... 2,4,1,3,5
    Shhoter #3 ... 3,5,2,4,1
    Shooter #4 ... 4,1,3,5,2
    Shooter #5 ... 5,2,4,1,3

    Note that there is no overlapping or anyone waiting for any post. Ya just leapfrog a post each time you shoot and by the end of 25 all shooters on the squad, whether it is a 1 man or 5 man squad has shoot all 5 posts.

    BTW ... I think it would be great if a course of fire like that would be created for the next big major even of the ATA. I wonder how many minds would get screwed up not going in exact order like they have done time and time again. It would be interesting to see who would fall to the mind game it would create in there shooting.
     
  16. OhioBob

    OhioBob TS Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    136
    As I said above...... "or a combination of shooters that really can't travel between posts very well"

    Bob T.
     
  17. jevoliva

    jevoliva Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    889
    I have followed lumper's comments for a little while now...

    Since a rule is not to be interpreted, then what are your thoughts on a law, the U.S. Constitution, or the Ten Commandments. Are they not to be interpreted also?
     
  18. jevoliva

    jevoliva Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    889
    I have followed lumper's comments for a little while now...

    Since a rule is not to be interpreted, then what are your thoughts on a law, the U.S. Constitution, or the Ten Commandments. Are they not to be interpreted also?
     
  19. lumper

    lumper TS Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2007
    Messages:
    3,586
    If a wife were caught with another woman having an lesbinatic affair it could interpreted under the commandment of the bible as committing adultery even though the bible says nothing about female/female relationships and the husband could shoot the wife dead because he interpreted that as being legal since the bible could supersede our laws because it says on our money "In God We Trust" and he interprets that to mean that we trust god to judge us instead of our fellow man and since the constitution allows him to purchase a gun to shoot his adulterous wife with money that says "In God We Trust" on it he interprets this all as being ok to do and to justify that he has done no wrong.

    In reality though he has sinned against god, murdered his wife and totally used the constitutions right to bear arms to justify what he did and with the right lawyer I bet he could beat the charges in our current court of law.

    Given the chance for interpretation anything can try to be justified because there is no control over the interpreter but when there are set rules, laws, commandments or constitutions to follow there is no choice in the matter and everyone knows exactly what it what.

    What does the ATA book say on it ... Rule Book or Interpretation Book?
     
  20. jevoliva

    jevoliva Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    889
    Then I would argue, if there is NO interpretation to laws, why is there a need for the judiciary system? Do they not, on a daily basis, interpret LAWS?

    If so, then rules are open for interpretation...

    Even the USGA PUBLISHES rules interpretations! I guess they are wrong, also.

    Also, a Google search for MLB rules interpretation gives 222,000 hits. I guess MLB has it wrong also...

    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBox&rlz=1I7GGIC&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=mlb+rules+interpretation&spell=1
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.