Thread: BFTA & Kneelers
View Single Post
Old 23rd November 2013, 11:40 PM
skires skires is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 950


No one is calling you a cheat. I removed the pic as I thought it was unfair as no other pics were shown in the thread. The pics are there for all to see. Pete reposted the pic.

It was just the first HFT pic that I came to that showed someone using a big bag that was scrunched up at one end. The thread is a BFTA thread but there were HFT posts suggesting that it is enforced more in HFT ... and it may well be but there are similarities with the use of certain positions/bags.

There are lots of other pics. Look at the pics of the shoot outs at other shoots. Clearly people with the bags under the buttocks. Shooters may not be aware of the rules or not aware that the bags are scrunched up under their buttocks.

This business of bags and kneelers spreads across both sports in my opinion. HFT has looked hard at kneelers in recent years and has made a number of changes. Initially no bag was allowed ... then under knee ... then under shin etc. No excessive contact between calf and thigh etc.

This thread is about BFTA so the FT guys are obviously not happy about people using large bags that are scrunched up in one place or another. A lot of shooters probably shoot FT and HFT.

My point was that if bags are allowed under the shin/ankle and people are using these more flexible and larger bags then it will always cause issues with other shooters, who don't use that technique/bag, suggesting that there may be support in other areas ... inner/outer thighs/buttocks etc. Hence this thread.

The pics clearly show different people using different bags. There are pics of people using the older style smaller bags under the knee, with the shin across the middle of the bag, and there is clearly a large gap between the bag and the buttock. The larger, more flexible bag, scrunched up with the shin at one end often looks suspicious. People can say that it's within the rules, and it may well be in some cases, and Sparky confirmed that yours is fine, but it will often be mm's between a bag touching or not touching the buttock area etc so will be ( or look ) controversial. That was the point I was trying to make. I initially used the word probably but deleted that along with the pic ... but again Pete quoted that. I later used the term 'may' ... Quote " ( I posted the photo to show how bags can be scrunched up to give extra height in areas of the bag that 'may' be suspected as giving support in areas that they shouldn't. I'll go back and edit that post to remove the pic... ). "

It's this grey area that probably causes most problems. Shooters may well be shooting within the literal wording of the laws but where it's causing controversy ( I'm talking generally ) then maybe it's best to try and make it more black and white ... which I think is what the BFTA are trying to do.

I've clearly offended you personally and I regret that as I have great regard for the North West shooters. I had no idea who you were or where you came from. It was just the first pic that I came across. As I said, I removed the pic within an hour but it was reposted. I'll apologise to you here publicly and I'll send you a pm. The point was not to cause personal offence but just to show how the large bags/scrunching can cause people to at least think there is a problem. In some cases there is a problem and it may be possible that those shooters don't even realise it. Hopefully you can accept the apology as I really don't want to cause offence especially to the North West lads.

I'll stick to this BFTA issue ... I still think that if the bags are going to be used at all then it will still cause controversy. If nothing else then this is an example of that.

Last edited by skires; 24th November 2013 at 09:53 AM.
Reply With Quote