TargetTalk

I agree everyone is free to express their views, there's no need to apologize to me. Your comment to I beleive Paul's posting, is what I'm talking about. You indicated that you were unware of what he posted or misunderstood but yet you previously felt it was ok to attack a childs accomplishment.

I also stated "join the crowd of adults foaming at the mouth accussing a child of taking drugs and using improper equipment" which you have seemed to have choosen to do, so read and get your facts straight the above statement doesn't say that "you said she took drugs".

Look at your statements prior (you seemed to have calmed down a little lately) that this decision would ruin Gary Anderson and this girls future, thats a little over the top.

Personally I really dont' care if they keep the record or take it away I can see how it could go either way. I don't have acces to all the info nor do you, thats what I'm taking issue with more than anything else.

My point about the ISSF is if they can make mistakes at that level you might just need to be a little more tolerant at the lower volunteer level. The worldis not perfect nor are any of those in it, myself included.

In all honesty how much enjoyment do you think she is getting out of this. Having to be attacked by adults who really don't know what went on. I suspect she not enjoying it very much, and its probably sucked most of the fun out of shooting for her (at least for a little while).

Remember it is a sport and it should be fun, this isn't life and death. Unfortunately adults get involved in kids sports and suck the fun out of it.

Richard,

You have some very valid points. What say we put this to rest instead of beating each other up? This is an issue that is of concern to many, myself included, but it probably is not going to be solved in this forum. I will compose letters to the powers to be and see what the response is, that way we can move on to other things here.

PMessina,

Here is my interpretation. I am not aware of any rulebook that specifically covers the procedure to follow if something gets by equipment control, i.e. a piece of equipment is approved and it then (by some mechanism, other than an official protest) comes to the attention of officials that something is out of spec. Any competitor, of course, can protest the conditions that another competitor is allowed to fire under, particularly if they feel that the rules were not fairly or properly applied.

But other than (1) authorized official random on-line checks, (2) the sometimes post competition checks of the winners equipment or (3)checks done if officials believe that there have been unauthorized post-equipment control changes to a piece of equipment, there is no "official" way to re-check equipment. Once approved, if you don't change anything, the equipment remains approved, unless there is somekind of protest, except ISSF rule 7.4.1.1. does allow: "All equipment and apparel is subject to follow-up checks after competitions. The Jury has the right to examine a shooter's equipment and apparel at any time"., but in practice the Jury would only investigate "obvious" violations of the rules, not check every dimension or weight.

One example that I recall involved some deception on the part of a competitor. A pistol shooter was being checked to assure that the grip did not extend past the wrist and during the check did not push their hand fully in the grip, and was passed. Later, on the line an official saw that the grip clearly extended too far and the shooter was required to modify the grip and to be rechecked.

PaulB,

Thanks a bunch. I am seeing now how this situation potentially got to where it is at. It may seem also that the equipment control station was only checking bare minimum specs such as weight and trigger weight and probably would have never noticed the rail until coach said something.

Richard brought up a very good point about how things even get missed in ISSF World Cups. I suppose that I should cut some slack to the lower level jury members.

I still have a question though as far as when a national committee concurs that a piece of equipment was out of specs, how do they justify keeping the score? That completely baffles me. I will probably never know. Hopefully though this situation does not lead to more of the same thing. We'll see. Thanks again for your input.

The coach didn't report it. It was caught by random equipment check on the firing line after the match

PaulB wrote:PMessina,
...But other than (1) authorized official random on-line checks, (2) the sometimes post competition checks of the winners equipment or (3)checks done if officials believe that there have been unauthorized post-equipment control changes to a piece of equipment, there is no "official" way to re-check equipment. Once approved, if you don't change anything, the equipment remains approved, unless there is somekind of protest, except ISSF rule 7.4.1.1. does allow: "All equipment and apparel is subject to follow-up checks after competitions. The Jury has the right to examine a shooter's equipment and apparel at any time"., but in practice the Jury would only investigate "obvious" violations of the rules, not check every dimension or weight...

6.4.2.4

Forgive me if I'm wrong but this match is not an ISSF event is it not, so ISSF rules do not apply ? It looks however like the full process was followed and a jury ultimately convened to decide the outcome. Now you can argue the outcome may or may not have been the right one but as I see it the outcome cannot be changed - it is final. What you can do is register your protest officially and seek some reassurance that such a decision would not happen again under similar circumstances. That may mean that a rule change or wording change is required but at least you can make your voice heard officially.

Rob.