Proposed Rule Changes to FITASC Sporting

[File] Letter to Hugh Smith from F.I.T.A.S.C

28th August 2007

Good people,

Please take some time out of your valuable itinerary's and respond to me if you have any immediate objections or suggestions as to the above letter from F.I.T.A.S.C.

I received the letter on Saturday (25th) and want to crack on and reply soonest.

I will be in attendance at Peter Simpson's shoot this coming week end should you feel the need to discuss on a one to one basis.

My view in the main is to support this paper. My reservations are with the chapter 1.2 'Sporting stands' and categorizations of the degree of difficulty. There is potential to dilute our discipline by almost aligning it with a 'hooped' discipline; and the ability or lack of it, of some of the Technical Commission' to understand a 'Good' target from a bad one is debatable.

There is, in my humble opinion, also room for decent one shot targets but this proposal looks set to remove them.

Regards,

Hugh Smith
01935 81 8734

Please see below full comments and suggested ammendments to the Rules Document (attached) from Hugh Smith:

29th August 2007

I have given this proposed amendment to the FITASC Sporting Rules the widest dissemination within and out side of the UK, listed are my considerations on the subject.

1. 1.0 Definition of Sporting, I fully agree with this inclusion.

2. Chapter 1.2 Sporting Stands, I feel that if this is included it will confuse the members as to what they are to expect when the course is checked prior to a major event.

There are too many personal views as to what is an easy target, medium target or difficult target, we all have differing views and skill levels, this is what makes competing in each others countries so enjoyable.

As regards the inclusion that two (2) shots must be able to be achieved on every target, in my humble opinion there is a place for one (1) shot targets, provided, they are sensible and there is time to mount and shoot a good single barrel, otherwise we will further remove the flexibility of the area/terrain in which we set out the championship courses.

We could end up on flat field sites that are un-inspiring. If you insist on including it then you must make it mandatory , for if you leave it as a recommendation it will be ignored.

3. Chapter 11 Referee, I agree all these inclusions with minor amendments to: 11.4 'For any reason other' (to be in bold) and include to 11.5, 'on the day of the competition' this will prevent late protests being presented after the day of the occurrence for example one or two days after the dispute occurred.

4. 12.1 Penalties I agree all of these new inclusions, however, with the additional references to be included to 12.4: Include in the references: 11.3 and 11.4 in addition to 12.5

[ top ]