Originally Posted by IvanM
For clarification on my suggestion on the kneelers v standers numbers: as there is no rule dictating the number of standers to kneelers, there is no need for a rule change.
There is a rule that says it should roughly equal, 2 v 2 or 4 v 2. depending on main shot targets in use, i think.
Originally Posted by Scribe
That statement is a little disingenuous. I have been in this sport right from the start, and was Chairman when compulsory standers and kneelers were brought in. Right from the start it was ALWAYS compulsory when a shooter could not take a shot from a compulsory position, they had to used the next harder one up the scale! So kneelers were taken standing, and that still remains the case. As there were a few cases where some shooters could not stand, but could kneel, the BFTA adopted a policy where they could kneel, but not rest the stock on the knee etc. It was then brought up that there were some who could not kneel or stand and this was then decided to look at what others, such as the NSRA etc did in this case. This is why the 'dispensation' arose.
The whole subject was discussed in detail at the BFTA AGM and it was pointed out that shooters, Marshalls and others seemed not to be aware, or using the original basic rule that if you cannot kneel, you must then stand! The meeting instructed the REgions to ensure that this was re-inforced! So it is not a 'new' rule. It is making sure the old, and still existing, rule is enforced.
As Alan has pointed out, many, myself included mistakingly took the alternative positions to be the "new" positions, when they were not. just alternatives. as i said, expect more chief marshalls to intruct shooters who can not kneel to take them standing this year.