View Single Post
Old 19th May 2012, 01:55 PM
DaveRobinson's Avatar
DaveRobinson DaveRobinson is offline
NEFTA Chairman
Join Date: May 2010
Member of: Anston
Location: Killamarsh
Posts: 1,054

Originally Posted by RobF View Post
Agreed Dave. There was a document I presented at the BFTA meeting I last which showed that whatever way you jump, there will always be a problem.

What is needed is to look at the fundamental issues and the pros and cons, and the make the decision on that rather than emotion.

The are only 4 fundamental routes. (try and find another route). They are all opposed, and all have problems. However the threats to the sport may be deemed strong enough to overide them. (which I think it what is happening now)

The options are:

1) stay as it is

Obvious what the problems are

2) sitting class, or start a new class leaving the existing class as a side class and a new class where alternative positions are not allowed.
Not inclusive. Causes problems for regional and national teams, plus showdowns and may require mirror competitions for champs etc. Doesn't allow competitor to compete on an equal level across all levels of the sport.

3) get rid of alternative positions altogether
Advised to be open to legal challenge. May be a route around that, but could take considerable work. Can of worms. Some will not be able to shoot as they do.

4) change the field of play so it doesn't matter
Not what many want. It isn't deemed to be the sport

As you see, rights and wrongs on all routes.

My personal take is to go for number 3. I'd be open to allowing disabled shooters if there could be a way found for them to demonstrate that their ability was restricted, that there was a way to separate injury be it short term or long term, and that their proposed position offered themselves no advantage. I think that's what a lot of people are asking, but I don't think it's possible, which is why I haven't put it in as an option.
I think the way forwards is what ever the majority want as such it is a serious matter that affects the the shooters who actually shoot national titles then it should be their votes that count. Sadly the current voting system means that its the reps that vote on our behalves of the regions which is formulated from what the clubs in that region want so why should a club that has 50 members non of which shoot FT nationally have a vote on the matter?? If the majority were to say go for any of the options above for example no 3 and part of the risk is that it may attract legal action then so be it its what the majority will have asked for. Deal with that head on if in the very unlikely event that a case could be brought against an association. In times gone by the voting system was correct for the needs but as the sport has evolved and clubs are now hosting plinkers and hft shooters then the system perhaps needs review technology in the past would not have easily allowed national independent voting but now a days the technology is there to do it.
Reply With Quote