NBRSA 1000 Yard Nationals

[lynn]

All,

To clarify what may have transpired and help set the record straight I will weigh in on the matter. In the pits we have Gary Childs who oversees the pits, scores targets and referees the targets in case of a crossfire, shooting off target etc. Then there is Jim O’Connell who is the official scorer and is the one who keeps track of all the scores and targets and posts the information for all to see. Jim O’Connell is straight by the book for rules, procedures and running the match by all of the rules.

Before the match started it was brought up by Gary and Jim that rain was on the way and was predicted to rain and have high winds before the match ended. It was suggested by Gary and Jim that the attendance was low and the match be a two day, two relay match instead of a three day, three relay match. The record targets would be fired on Friday and Saturday with a fun shoot on Sunday. If this would have happened Sunday would have been a mute point and we would not have this problem the idea was shot down by our officers of the NBRSA that were present.

On Sunday when the targets became unmanageable in the pits and the people in the pits could no longer keep the targets on the backers due to wind and rain soaked targets the call on the radio was made to let Craig StClair know what was going on. At the same time Gary and Jim were going thru the rule book and found no reference to a vote being taken on whether or not the match could be voted upon to continue. The only reference they did find was under tournament rules, rule 12 on page 26 and it reads as follows and historically has been adhered to in all of the different disciplines in Benchrest,

“12. UNFINISHED AGGREGATES. In the event any aggregate is not finished on the scheduled day, the aggregate will continue the next morning, where it was left off.”

Gary Childs called on the radio that they could not vote on the matter the match had to continue on Monday. His pleas were silenced and not listened to. Gary then confronted Don Neilson before the trophy and prize’s were handed out and reiterated that the match must continue as per the rules, again it fell on silent ears and Gary was told that a vote was taken and the match is over.

It may be argued that the tournament section only applies to short range but to the best of my knowledge and speaking with others all matches have been continued and completed whether or not they are short range or long range and previous precedence has been set that the match will continue. Being a National event with standings and hall of fame points on the line it would seem that every effort would have been made by the officers of the NBRSA to ensure that the match ended properly.

With respect to all shooters and the ones who voted to end the match and go home there are no hard feelings passed on if I was in the bottom 2/3 I would have not wanted to stay, pay for another night in the hotel and shoot again I probably would have voted to go home as well. And it is great shooting with everybody that attended the 1000 yard nationals.

John Crawford

 

[Kenny474]

It does seem like a cop-out by some to take a vote to stop an event, and in turn cost some HoF points and essentially waste the money and time invested by many to travel great distance to attend the match.

I think someone was a little upset that they weren't going to win or were having a bad day, so they took their proverbial ball and went home.

All I know is I would be PISSED if I had gone to the lengths some did to attend, only to have a vote taken and have everyone sent home with prizes awarded, and to some who may not have received them had competition continued, and all HoF points annulled for the match.

I think whoever was in charge and allowed rules to be broken, which in turn cost some dearly, should be removed from whatever position they hold in the organization, as they have proven without a doubt that they do not have the ethics needed to be in charge or have say in anything such as this event. The choice to allow a vote will likely have great effect on membership and attendance at many matches to come. I know I would never attend a match in which the same people were in charge. Who wants to invest that kind of time, money and effort to have it all be wasted because someone isn't winning and doesn't want to follow the rules, and in turn basically throw away much that was gained by some of the shooters in attendance? No way would I ever want to deal with that kind of "fly by night" rule breaking BS.

 

[Kenny474]

Stopping the match was like stopping the Super Bowl in the third quater, telling the team in the lead they won, but will not be credited for it or be receiving any Super Bowl rings or be referred to as "Champions".

I agree about being an official and a competitor as well. How can you make fair calls when you are involved in competing as well? What's to say your calls are not biased to be in your favor?

So the competitor/official is not shooting well and the weather sucks, so he just says screw it, I'm letting the shooters vote and basically decide the outcome of the match? Which in turn can cost some who are doing very well a championship (or whatever it's called) and also hard to earn Hall of Fame points as well?

 

[oldroper]

Let see you had a Regional Director Lou Murdica plus other like match director and one man calls off the match.


"I and 6 other shooters voted to shoot on monday but I think with all the wind and rain on sunday alot of the shooters just wanted to get indoors and warm up a little bit so we got trounced on the vote.

Lynn "




Taking a vote may of been wrong and the match maybe should of been held on Monday. Seems to me alot of shooters didn't want to shoot Monday.

Now who stopped the match.

 

[Dgd6mm]

Why have rules if your not going to follw them?

 

[6BRonwheels]

Congratulations Lynn, you are still the best in the nation at 1000 yards in the NBRSA. It is too bad that people let their egos get in the way, but it happens.
I have never been a member of the NBRSA and never will be, it is too much of a "good-ole-boy" organization in my opinion.

 

[edlongrange]

POINT OF CLARIFICATION:

From what I read from Lynn in this thread and other threads on this forum (and the ones on Benchrest Central) , it appeared to me that he had resigned from the NBRSA. I spoke with Lynn earlier this PM and was advised (paraphrased), "No! The NBRSA President told me (via telephone) that he had had enough of my complaints and I was out, and that he would refund my membership fee." Lynn subsequently received an e-mail from NBRSA HQ (Pat) stating he she had credited his credit card for the membership fee "per his request". He responded by e-mail to her that he had made no such request.

For those that are interested, NBRSA By-Laws (Article I, Section 1), state,

"Continued membership shall be contingent upon the timely
annual payment of dues and assessments (if any), continued
qualification under these By-laws, and continued good standing in
accordance with the judgment of the Board of Directors."

So the Board of Directors is the "judging party", not the President or other Association officer, and they have taken no such action.

Bottom line, LYNN IS STILL AN NBRSA MEMBER in good standing until the Board of Directors says otherwise.

 

[rcw3]

Why do people feel these threads are the appropriate place to "vent" their personal issues?

If you don't like what's going on in the NBRSA, why don't you show up at the scheduled NBRSA meetings and take care of things in an official way?

Somehow I feel people would rather be lazy and sit back on their computer keyboards and bitch about things on forums than get up off their butt, get to work, and do something productive!

Give it a rest - Bring something positive to the table!

Robert

 

[edlongrange]

Robert:

There were 30 shooters impacted by the action taken at the match. The problem needs to be communicated and addressed, a matter of rules and equity. Per the association's by-laws there are suppose to be two annual meetings - a Members meeting and Board of Directors meeting (see pgs 88 and 98, respectively, in the hard copy). There is nothing in the "rule book and by-laws" that speaks to "taking care of things in an official way". Forums are for communication of issues, this forum is the Competition Forum. Problems at a match are clearly within the scope of this forum.

While it may be preferred to be "positive" (your word, not mine), work needs to done here and getting the word out is part of that work. In my view, fixing problems IS a positive thing. More will follow - "officially" as possible under the circumstances.

Anyway, thanks for your input.

 

[rcw3]

The reality is if you want or need changes in the NBRSA, there are a lot of ways for a member, director or officer to effectuate it, but you have to be willing to get off your butt and do some work. The By-Laws are chock full of methods by which a motivated member, director or officer, can get things done in the organization. I serve and have served on boards of a number of such organizations and what seems typical is people will sit back and complain publicly or on the internet about this and that to no end, but they won't bother to ever ask to be on a meeting agenda or show up at one single meeting to go over and discuss an issue of importance. It's o.k. for those who run the organization to volunteer their time and money to run the organization as best they can so the complainers can use and take advantage of it (while they complain about how poorly the organization is run), but the complainers typically won't lift a finger to help or do anything about it except complain.

So if you want to solve a problem - then work to solve it - that's positive - be a part of the solution, not the problem.

When I see "venting" and complaining about such things like the "good ole boy" organization, personal attacks and innuendos of improper conduct, it seems to me that's a part of the problem, not part of the solution.

Either you believe in the organization and work to make it better or you don't.

Robert

 

[FBecigneul]

I wasn't there and I don't shoot long range; I have enough trouble at 100-200 but I am a member of IBS and NBRSA and so I think I can let my opinion be heard. The rules of both organizations were and continue to be made for a reason. Without rules you have anarchy and without strict adherence to those rules you follow that same route. If I understand all that took place, a number of rules were broken by those running the match and by those who made decisions. Ultimately, the conduct of a match is in the hands of the match director. I don't know who that was in California but that is where the first finger is pointed. The next problem was in "those in positions of authority" taking charge. They might advise but they can't take over a match. It would appear that those whose "ruled" have no rule book or chose not to follow the rule book. It does not cast a good image of the organization or of those who had any say in the conduct of the NBRSA 1000 yard Nationals. I don't care to shoot unregistered matches for the very reason they had trouble at the National. There are no rules to follow in an unregistered match. The match director has total say over what is legal and what the score is. Weight limits mean nothing. Scope power means nothing. The scoring rules mean nothing.
Lynn, I know your pain. Come to think of it, I know you can be a pain but in this case you are right. I'm sometimes portrayed as hard headed and out spoken because of my adherence to rules but at least there is no anarchy in our cases. Don't give up the fight for the points and then tell them where to shove...I better not go any further.
Given all I've heard about all of the candidates running for election today, I don't see where any of what has been said on this forum or BC Forum can be construed as mud slinging and every member of NBRSA or IBS has a right to "vent".. If you aren't a member or if you don't vote, well, you gave up that right.

 

[canuck]

I wasn't there and I don't shoot long range; I have enough trouble at 100-200 but I am a member of IBS and NBRSA and so I think I can let my opinion be heard. The rules of both organizations were and continue to be made for a reason. Without rules you have anarchy and without strict adherence to those rules you follow that same route. If I understand all that took place, a number of rules were broken by those running the match and by those who made decisions. Ultimately, the conduct of a match is in the hands of the match director. I don't know who that was in California but that is where the first finger is pointed. The next problem was in "those in positions of authority" taking charge. They might advise but they can't take over a match. It would appear that those whose "ruled" have no rule book or chose not to follow the rule book. It does not cast a good image of the organization or of those who had any say in the conduct of the NBRSA 1000 yard Nationals. I don't care to shoot unregistered matches for the very reason they had trouble at the National. There are no rules to follow in an unregistered match. The match director has total say over what is legal and what the score is. Weight limits mean nothing. Scope power means nothing. The scoring rules mean nothing.
Lynn, I know your pain. Come to think of it, I know you can be a pain but in this case you are right. I'm sometimes portrayed as hard headed and out spoken because of my adherence to rules but at least there is no anarchy in our cases. Don't give up the fight for the points and then tell them where to shove...I better not go any further.
Given all I've heard about all of the candidates running for election today, I don't see where any of what has been said on this forum or BC Forum can be construed as mud slinging and every member of NBRSA or IBS has a right to "vent".. If you aren't a member or if you don't vote, well, you gave up that right.

I removed my posts because I am not a member but after reading what happened I would never join.It simply isn't a credible organization in my books.

 

[edlongrange]

rcw3:

Possibly you missed the last line of my last post, "More will follow - "officially" as possible under the circumstances."

Your statement, "The (NBRSA) By-Laws are chock full of methods by which a motivated member, director or officer, can get things done in the organization." does not fit the situation. Such a statement is "go forward" and "fix", what NBRSA refers to as "remedial". It does NOT deal with the facts on the ground. It does not deal with what needs to be done about what actually happened, i.e., it does not deal with the disciplinary action that needs to be taken.

Knowledgeable people have provided (or will be providing) written record of the FACTS for appropriate, official deliberation.

Again, more will follow!

 

[Forum Boss]

Lynn has asked me to delete his membership to this Forum.

I've explained to him that a membership closure will delete all his posts and all threads he started, including this one.

If there's anything you need to copy or comment on... grab it now before the thread disappears. This is 100% Lynn's decision. FWIW, I asked him to reconsider, without success.