I think the problem would be that you'd end up with a class for those that cant take kneelers, and a class for those that can't take standers, and a class that can't take both. Or are we saying that there should be just two classes? And then how do you decide who goes in what? If someone is taking the ****, and if they can't be stopped now, how would they be stopped then, and if not, why should all those that have to do it that way be in the same boat as them?
The perception is that someone is cheating, and that it isn't wanted in the sport (rightly)... but i'm not sure allowing them to shoot in another class casts a very good light on those who legitimately have no option... it's a bit like saying they can shoot with the cheats, and it's ok cos the cheats cant shoot with us.
I have actually had one shooter, quietly approach me, post shoot, and ask if the disabled kneeling position was for him, as he was in a lot of pain kneeling. He's in his later years, what am i to say "nah, take the pain...?" or "yeh, but you have to shoot with them lot now.."?
My thinking is look to the cheats, rather than those that have no option, and probably don't feel too great about even having to do it that way, let alone wearing the smear that they're getting away with something of advantage out of no option, or are considered to be out right cheating.
Someone cheating is not the same problem, and mixing the two is missing the point and muddying the water.
I don't know if there is anything in the BFTA that's stopping it, but unless people get up there to find out, i'm not sure if anyone knows. I don't remember any discussion beyond clarification, but I do remember there were murmourings before about cheating, which is why i think the work was done. Beyond that, i can't remember. I might have dozed off, or started a conversation about the chrono so i could get some kip in.
Like i've said, the kneeling position is so tight in FT, it aint far off a bad sitting position... if i ever get the time, I could try and do some traces to show that. I wont deny i've sat there and think "that looks too easy", but then when i get my kneelers right, i've thought, "this is in the rules, but it's too easy, it feels like cheating".
But the standing is an issue perhaps. But then again, not doing anything that strains an injury for 24 hours before a shoot, taking probably 20 strong prescription pain killers, and not possibly being able to walk upright for 48 hours afterwards, or without a limp for a week if it's too cold, or you don't get someone to hand your gun to you or take it off you, can't be that easy either. Especially if it stops you shooting the next weekend. But a smile on a face does seem to make that fade into the background to some degree.
I just cant see a way in between inclusion or exclusion. Both routes have problems depending on your point of view and opinion. Work on the cheats is the only way i can see out of it, but then you are left with the elephant in the room... would a disabled shooter ever be able to stand amongst their abled peers and think there are no reservations about them winning a title?
I think you end up losing kneelers and standers... then there's no advantage, disadvantage, everyone on an equal footing. Probably a bit dull.
But being on and off committees, discussions like this really have limited momentum, sap a lot of time and energy, and fall down the priority list when people tire, unless there's a solution that not only solves the personal held opinion, but the opposing one. Or, you do it the other way, and one person dictates, and those that don't like go off, and possibly do something themselves.
Sometimes i think life can be a little short for these sorts of things on a sunday