PRS Talk PRS Safety Culture

[ForgeValley]

Change is always accepted best when it comes from the bottom up. And fortunately, who do you think has the most skin in the game if something tragic happens? It isn't the PRS. It behooves us from shooter to RO to MD to range owner to make sure we have a clear set of safety standards, and follow them.

 

[shoobe01]

Everything davere just said. A lot to good RO/SOing, and things like absolutely standard range commands, and procedures really help everyone. Agree entirely that there need to be ROs/SOs observing the shooters. You can get away with lawn-chair mentality for static firing point, but for action shooting, you better have an SO following the shooter, and close enough they can physically stop dangerous things like turning the muzzle a dangerous direction.


Per some above posts, I don't at aall get local range rules over-riding match organizing body rules. E.g. if a range rules require the bolt be open or removed when not firing, then chamber flags are just additional safety rules. The bolt is inherently open to allow the chamber flag. This is true for almost all safety rules; you just add them on to each other.

The only one I can think of that can be an issue is when a range and a match have directly conflicting safe directions (up/down). Then you talk to the range about why, and often they are open to your match rules... if you have rules and officers to strictly enforce it.

 

[AIAW]

All you need right here. Forget the data armband, forget the 15 bags, forget all of that.

 

[ForgeValley]

All you need right here. Forget the data armband, forget the 15 bags, forget all of that.

View attachment 7047856

Too soon mate. ?

 

[AIAW]

Too soon mate. ?

I hear you, but if it's that shocking then it truly and poignantly gets my message across. Let's not start with the censorship of the inevitable if the concerns raised in this thread are truly as heavy as they are preached.

Fancy advertisement and cash means nothing if someone gets killed.

 

[ForgeValley]

No, I get it. Just tongue in cheek. Better now than when you need them for real.

 

[AIAW]

No, I get it. Just tongue in cheek. Better now than when you need them for real.

Yep! I wasn't harping on you by the way

 

[Inline6]

Change is always accepted best when it comes from the bottom up. And fortunately, who do you think has the most skin in the game if something tragic happens? It isn't the PRS. It behooves us from shooter to RO to MD to range owner to make sure we have a clear set of safety standards, and follow them.

Actually you are wrong in this statement. It must come from the TOP. Working the industry that I do safety is a big deal of have worked for many companies. The companies that have ownership involvement have the best safety culture because it's not just lip service they believe in it.

PRS heads have to take the wheel and make it happen. Everyone on here can give the best ideas but if the ownership doesn't make an effort to change it will not. If you don't believe me look how most PRS matches are ran and look how Rifle Only is ran.

Has to start from the top!

YMMV

 

[ForgeValley]

Yes, leadership can come from the top and of course leadership has to be involved. That's not what I said. I said acceptance and implementation of change, including safety initiatives, best comes from the people involved in the behavior, not the 'suits' in the office.

 

[xNF_9]

I’d have to disagree and this is my opinion on this matter. It has to come from the top down.

Look at any range with lax RO’s vs the ones with super strict RO’s. The ones that have super strict guidelines will do much better in terms of safety. There is always someone who is willing to test the waters and if it slides then the next Joe Schmoe thinks they can do it too and it’s a slippery slope down the hill from there.

Individuals shooters will not be able to make the change as they don’t make the decisions in the match. The RO/MD have the say. If the RO/MD aren’t hard asses about safety then it won’t change the culture unless everyone boycotts it but you know that won’t happen. As previously mentioned there are many super good matches, one that keeps coming up is Rifles Only, and there are some bad matches.

I honestly don’t know the fix but in terms of the PRS they need to take a stand, and it seems they have, about the rules they just need to make sure they are enforced. If they aren’t enforced by a RO/MD and just pushed off to the side then they should suspend or remove the ability to host a sanctioned PRS match for an amount of time or indefinitely for subsequent events. I’m not saying this would be a penalty to them as many would host a PRS style match without the logo.

The above is just an idea but the accountability needs to be there and not wait until there is something catastrophic that happens. Then everyone begins to point fingers.

 

[davere]

Just for reference, I got ahold of an early draft of the IPSC rules - they're four typewritten pages long. And roughly analogous to what we see with PRS and NRL rules today, honestly. Man, they've changed a bunch - especially over the first 15 years...

 

[shoobe01]

Just for reference, I got ahold of an early draft of the IPSC rules - they're four typewritten pages long. And roughly analogous to what we see with PRS and NRL rules today, honestly. Man, they've changed a bunch - especially over the first 15 years...

BUT... best practices are known now.

Try something else that's so nascent there's not even a national organizer yet: Run-n-Guns. They are quite safety conscious, and have pretty consistent, pretty strict rules about open chambers, flags, racks with muzzle up at each station, etc. etc. Because we know what safe gunhandling in a dynamic environment looks like we don't need to wade through 20 years of experience on our own to learn it.

 

[davere]

BUT... best practices are known now.

Yeah, I agree - someone had just asked up the thread how IPSC was back in the Wild West days, so I looked into it, and dug up the original (or close to original) rule set from a couple of friends.

My earlier posts are maybe TL;DR, but they're point out some things that precision rifle, in general, could glean from sports that have already covered that ground.

 

[shoobe01]

Sorry davere, should have quoted what I was responding to I guess, but it was more that I was reading into responses some tendency to say that your point is invalid because PRS is new, will get better. History you shared: good stuff. Very relevant.

 

[Mormegil87]

Change needs to come from both the top (series level) and from the bottom (shooters, ROs and MDs).

A series can put out all of the rules they want but until they start holding shooters accountable, i.e. docking points, and yes they can do it after the fact they just don't want to be the bad guy, nothing will change.

Until the series starts holding MDs accountable for the lack of safety at their matches, nothing will change.

Until MDs aren't afraid to tell their buddies they messed up and hold them accountable, nothing will change. Same goes for MDs who are too afraid to tell "top shooters" they messed up, because it might lead to bad press. (See my above post on why this is a terrible thought process to have)

Until MDs stand behind the decisions of their ROs nothing will change.

Until the series and on a smaller scale MDsfigure out a way to incentivize being a RO. There will be little change.

And last but far from least, until WE as shooters start holding ourselves and our peers to a much higher standard than the current one. Nothing will change.

This idea that change has to come from top or bottom is naive. Change, especially cultural change must be systemic. Especially considering that the safety problem is systemic.

 

[Downtown]

What I find frustrating, and other posters have alluded to this also, is that USPSA figured this out long ago. What are the differences in the game between PRS and USPSA that makes this so difficult?

 

[Mormegil87]

@Downtown we get complacent because they are bolt guns.

 

[Rob01]

Someone needs to make a belt holster for rifles. LOL And USPSA isn't perfect. Been flagged many times by holstered pistols with people bending over. They need a squat only rule.

 

[bschneiderheinze]

Pic from a shoot yesterday in MO all rifles had to be staged down range between the two poles. The poles were at every stage.

 

[lash]

That’s a good and simple fix as long as you have the room to do it.

 

[davere]

Yeah, a grounding area can be just that simple.

 

[Mormegil87]

Sorry @lash but if an MD doesn't have enough room to provide a place to safely stage rifles they shouldn't be holding a match at that facility.

 

[lash]

There are more ways than one to provide a safe location to stage rifles. That’s just a simple and effective method that can be used if you have that much line space.

 

[Slo cat]

Pic from a shoot yesterday in MO all rifles had to be staged down range between the two poles. The poles were at every stage.View attachment 7048467

A good start. But, did every rifle have a chamber flag (ECI)?

 

[davere]

You can also do rifle racks (NCPPRC uses this method - and the shooting I did up there had excellent safety), and other ways to keep rifles pointing in a safe direction.

 

[Inline6]

Change needs to come from both the top (series level) and from the bottom (shooters, ROs and MDs).

A series can put out all of the rules they want but until they start holding shooters accountable, i.e. docking points, and yes they can do it after the fact they just don't want to be the bad guy, nothing will change.

Until the series starts holding MDs accountable for the lack of safety at their matches, nothing will change.

Until MDs aren't afraid to tell their buddies they messed up and hold them accountable, nothing will change. Same goes for MDs who are too afraid to tell "top shooters" they messed up, because it might lead to bad press. (See my above post on why this is a terrible thought process to have)

Until MDs stand behind the decisions of their ROs nothing will change.

Until the series and on a smaller scale MDsfigure out a way to incentivize being a RO. There will be little change.

And last but far from least, until WE as shooters start holding ourselves and our peers to a much higher standard than the current one. Nothing will change.

This idea that change has to come from top or bottom is naive. Change, especially cultural change must be systemic. Especially considering that the safety problem is systemic.

I beg to differ have seen it with my own two eyes. If the top (leaders) do not hold you accountable NO ONE WILL CHANGE! It's more simple than everyone thinks. Fuck up and you can't host a PRS match simple fix. Will the top do it no, how do I know again I have seen it with my own two eyes.

It come from the leadership, period! If it was from the bottom down we would not be having this conversation. I know way to many people in this sport that have corrected people and guess what we are still having the same rules broken.

When I first started it was not a run and gun mentality. It was precision rifle match, small targets a long ways away.... we have gotten far away from that. Hints why we are where we are.

I can't honestly fix this, until rules are standardized and people actually held accountable for their actions it will never change.

 

[Mormegil87]

Must have missed the part where I mentioned change coming from the TOP as well as bottom? Change in my opinion cannot happen until everyone gets on board from the series making and enforcing rules, to the MDs implementing and enforcing those rules at their matches to US as the competitors holding ourselves and each other to those rules. Until ALL of those things and those that I mentioned above, hardly anything, if anything at all will change and those few changes will be superficial at best.

 

[Inline6]

Must have missed the part where I mentioned change coming from the TOP as well as bottom? Change in my opinion cannot happen until everyone gets on board from the series making and enforcing rules, to the MDs implementing and enforcing those rules at their matches to US as the competitors holding ourselves and each other to those rules. Until ALL of those things and those that I mentioned above, hardly anything, if anything at all will change and those few changes will be superficial at best.

No sir I read what you said. The bottom is not in play.

Everyone that shoots a match is in the same boat. You are spending 1k plus to shoot a match. When the bottom misses out and they are out of 1k+ shit will change.

Slap on the wrist means nothing hit them in the wallet you bet one of two things will happen. They will get on board or the will drop out.

 

[Mormegil87]

So who do you think is going to report the violations to the leadership? It's the guys at the bottom and if those guys at the bottom don't buy into the change that the leadership is trying to implement, NOTHING will get reported and NOTHING will change on a systemic level.

I'm employed in leadership and follower roles in several non shooting but paramilitary type organizations. Trust me when I say that without buy in from the rank and file, leadership can implement directives until they're blue in the face and they won't get the results they want.

 

[Inline6]

What do you think has been happening this whole time? The shooter have been complaining and nothing has happened. All the flagging that takes place is a joke. People think because they have a chamber flag in it's safe.

I will do my best one more time.

When you shoot a match at Rifles Only or a class for that matter you are told the ground rules. You break the rules you go home no debating, no refund... they don't play.

Now let's flip to the PRS, I have personal watched Shannon dry fire with people down range. It is a practice that I can't do but like him I have seen many of the top competitors do. Why take a risk who allowed this to be an acceptable practice?

I'm not in your shoes but sounds like we are both still responsible for others safety. The companies that the leadership believes in safety, it was simple. You were held personally responsible for others. It was your job, if you could not run a job safely you were fired. So when someone messed up you handled it right then. You had several rules that had no forgiveness you broke them you lost your job. I would much rather send someone home without a job then knock on a door to tell their loved ones they are dead.

The companies that would just talk safety but that's all they did. Well more people would get hurt because the supervisor was not held to that higher standard. Have seen the same type of thing, one of their buddies breaking a rule that was one that had no forgiveness and nothing would happen. They were not held to that standard especially if they were known for making the company money.

I would venture to say most of here have shot an animal. We are using rifles shooting some of the same rounds we hunt with. We all know the damage it does, yet because we are at a match it's okay to break some of the 5 safety rules?

I do think, I know we are lucky that no one has been killed at one of these matches. I can say that without a doubt because I have seen the close calls.

I guess I did not address your buy in from the "lower rank". It's simply don't comply go home you are not shooting the match. When you loose money people get on board. Again it has to be across the board doesn't matter if you are the top shooter in the world. You fuck up you go home.

 

[Mormegil87]

I agree with what you're saying up to a point but here's an example or two:

Examples
Shooter A flags a guy as he's carrying his rifle from stage to stage.

Shooter B is the only guy that sees it. Shooter B is best friends with Shooter A and wants to make sure he doesn't miss out on the prize table and doesn't want to ride 10 hours home in Shooter As truck while he's all pissed off.

Shooter B doesn't report Shooter A to the ROs or the MD. Nothing happens despite all of the rules and the "emphasis" on safety because Shooter B didn't buy in to the program enough to embrace the change.

Example 2:
Shooter C NDs off a barricade. Nothing super obvious but he knows and the spotter suspects an ND. The spotter suspects an ND because Shooter C is a top shooter and rarely misses by 3 feet. Shooter C is also a match sponsor. Shooter C doesn't DQ himself and the spotter says nothing because well he doesn't want the sponsor/shooter C to yank their sponsorship in the future.

There's a hundred different scenarios. If nothing gets reported up the chain by the rank and file. Nothing happens despite all of the rules and emphasis on the rules. Hell the PRS and NRL has paragraph upon paragraph of safety rules, yet here we are discussing safety.

We're both trying to get the same place. Just have different ideas on how to get there a d accomplish the same goal. I agree with you, leadership needs to come down on safety violations. But how do they come down on a competitor if it's not reported by the rank and file?

Edit: The only way the PRS/NRL could truly enforce change is to hire, train and send ROs to their matches. The reason it works at Rifles Only or other major clubs is the ROs buy into Jacob's or other club director's program. Up north here where MDs have to beg and plead for ROs, they may get some ROs that don't know the program or worse don't care.

 

[Holliday]

Manufacturer/sponsors need to consider changes as well.

Here are two product examples(there are plenty others) which promote unsafe handling of firearms:

I took on one of the makers of that toe guard on twitter about that product’s safety implications. I was a RO at SH cup 2013 and had a shooter listening to instructions with his muzzle on his boot. I asked him nicley “please dont do that you are sweeping yourself and that could be a DQ.” He looked at me like I was nuts and said “Really”??? . I said more directly “Yes really, don’t do that” and he complied. Soon after I discovered the toe guard and let the company know just what I thought of it. Thier response was polit but laissez-faire .

I’m curios though. I owned one of the scope covers. Why do you think this encourages unsafe gun handling? Or is this just a product of bad training to begin with. I can see a discussion about whether this is a “cased rifle” or not but I don't see the product itself in the same league as the toe guard.

 

[morganlamprecht]

because people suit case carry their rifle by the handle flagging everyone and everything

it would be fine without the handle...muzzle needs to be up or down...not horizontal pointing at everything

 

[davere]

In the end, match staff (ROs, MDs, etc) can't DQ a shooter on the word of another shooter (which is what @RoterJager is basically getting at - that, and that the ROs themselves need to recognize their responsibility and buy in to the culture). @Inline6 is also right that match management needs to give a shit and actually DQ people for safety violations.

Cultural shift won't happen overnight.

I'm going to start promoting the dick punching of assholes at matches until the MDs catch on and do their job... LOL

 

[mercracing]

In the end, match staff (ROs, MDs, etc) can't DQ a shooter on the word of another shooter (which is what @RoterJager is basically getting at - that, and that the ROs themselves need to recognize their responsibility and buy in to the culture). @Inline6 is also right that match management needs to give a shit and actually DQ people for safety violations.

Cultural shift won't happen overnight.

I'm going to start promoting the dick punching of assholes at matches until the MDs catch on and do their job... LOL

They absolutly can DQ someone based on someone’s word. The RO and MD are not looking everywhere at once. It’s up to the shooters to help police themselves. If you see me flag half my squad I would certainly hope your telling someone. If that happened, I deserve the DQ. Doesn’t matter that the RO didn’t see it and you did, I still committed the foul.

 

[morganlamprecht]

They absolutly can DQ someone based on someone’s word. The RO and MD are not looking everywhere at once. It’s up to the shooters to help police themselves. If you see me flag half my squad I would certainly hope your telling someone. If that happened, I deserve the DQ. Doesn’t matter that the RO didn’t see it and you did, I still committed the foul.

the issue is the slippery slope that presents...you could have shooter A who dislikes shooter B, or maybe theyre neck and neck in the points...its not always a super obvious infraction

if the right people are given a chance to gain an advantage....they will...people aint all good/virtuous, except on the internet of course

 

[davere]

They absolutly can DQ someone based on someone’s word.

You don't at all see an issue with that? It doesn't take much thought to see why a DQ based on hearsay is a bad idea.

Shooters A and B are top shooters in contention for a match - heck, let's just say the national title. Shooter C is Shooter A's buddy and wants A to win. Maybe A even coerced C into helping. Shooter C reports to the MD that Shooter B flagged some shooters with his rifle, or committed some other DQ'able offense. Shooter A is now national champion, and Shooter B went home because Shooter C is an asshole.

That's one of the many things that caused the IPSC/USPSA rulebook to grow from 4 pages to the full book that it is today. It only seems far fetched if you don't understand that there will be dicks in every crowd, especially once money and prestige are on the line.

(I was just typing this out, and looks like @morganlamprecht was conveying the same thought)

 

[mercracing]

It is indeed a slippery slope. Are there people who would try and take advantage of it, yes. I’m trying to give them the benefit of the doubt.

 

[Mormegil87]

This is why I say you need complete systemic change. So it doesn't become one shooters word against another. It needs to be top to bottom and bottom to top change. It needs to be a true cultural change.

Yes I agree with @mercracing that shooters can be DQd based off what another shooter sees but there also needs to be a check and a balance to that so that the situation @davere mentions doesn't occur.

Do we really expect an MD, the PRS or NRL staff to DQ someone on the word of one shooter? Much less two to three weeks after the fact?

 

[mercracing]

In a perfect world we wouldn’t have safety issues. In a less perfect world there would be impartial ROs, spotters, and scorers. In most matches there are not enough extra people to have an impartial RO, spotter, and scorer. That means shooters in the squad step up. It’s just as easy to be dishonest and have a spotter not call impacts or a scorer not mark a hit or two.
Again, 99.999% of people who do this are honest, that’s why I would believe the shooter who calls someone out.

 

[morganlamprecht]

It is indeed a slippery slope. Are there people who would try and take advantage of it, yes. I’m trying to give them the benefit of the doubt.

from my short 32 yrs on this earth....people have lost the benefit of the doubt a long time ago lol

 

[Dthomas3523]

I took on one of the makers of that toe guard on twitter about that product’s safety implications. I was a RO at SH cup 2013 and had a shooter listening to instructions with his muzzle on his boot. I asked him nicley “please dont do that you are sweeping yourself and that could be a DQ.” He looked at me like I was nuts and said “Really”??? . I said more directly “Yes really, don’t do that” and he complied. Soon after I discovered the toe guard and let the company know just what I thought of it. Thier response was polit but laissez-faire .

I’m curios though. I owned one of the scope covers. Why do you think this encourages unsafe gun handling? Or is this just a product of bad training to begin with. I can see a discussion about whether this is a “cased rifle” or not but I don't see the product itself in the same league as the toe guard.

As stated above, it’s impossible to carry your rifle with the handle in “suitcase” carry without flagging ever person, rock, tree, ground squirrel, the guy free recoiling the barricade at 400yds.......

I definitely wouldn’t consider it a cases weapon, as it’s just a dust cover with a handle.

Take the handle off and it’s a great product for protecting your equipment during a match.

 

[Fig]

I've probably got fifteen chamber flags in my bag, and always use one, just because it's a lot easier to see from a distance and it provides me with piece of mind that rifle has been made safe. I run slick actions and the bolt can easily slide forward into partial battery...

I have to sort of LOL at being sheepish to correcting veteran/famous/team shooters from doing something stupid. I've spent my life around guns, and I am not immune to a mistake. Believing anyone else is makes you a retard.

I totally agree with the flagging and there being a set space to stage rifles downrange. It seems like guns staged helterskelter is the norm, and it shouldn't be.

 

[Dthomas3523]

This is why I say you need complete systemic change. So it doesn't become one shooters word against another. It needs to be top to bottom and bottom to top change. It needs to be a true cultural change.

Yes I agree with @mercracing that shooters can be DQd based off what another shooter sees but there also needs to be a check and a balance to that so that the situation @davere mentions doesn't occur.

Do we really expect an MD, the PRS or NRL staff to DQ someone on the word of one shooter? Much less two to three weeks after the fact?

I think NRL has a decent start to a good process.

At the end of the match there is a time (hour I think?) for any complaints or disputes. They will then look at the whole picture and talk to people if they need to. Whatever the determination, that’s it, done and final.

No waiting until Monday morning to post pics that didn’t get shown to MD in that hour dispute period.

Also, I’m sure most any sensible MD will listen to both the RO, shooter involved, and witness shooters before making a DQ final.

In a match a few weeks back, there was a card stage and half the field was proned on the line. There was a ton of people talking and the guy on the end thought he heard the command to fire and he did.

Normally, at that facility, that’s a match DQ. But the MD took into account all the commotion and other shooters told them it was very low and very easy for someone to have thought they heard a command at the far end of the line. No match DQ.

So, I think the current systems work. But you have to say something when you see it. Not just take a bunch of pics and then start complaining Wednesday morning (not talking about the OP here).

 

[earthquake]

As far as I know, I'm pretty sure RO's in the precision rifle matches I've shot and RO'd, that there is no qualification required. I've seen some that it was evident they'd never spent a minute doing what they were now required to do. "Hey Billy, what are you doing today?"....."Sobering up, why?"......"Cool, grab your binos, you're an RO now!"....."A what?!?"

I've been doing this for going on 5 years now and have seen everything the OP said, and worse. A few things come to mind worth mentioning is shooters collecting brass in front of the firing line while the stage directly next to them still has live-fire occurring.

Worse is MD's setting a CoF whereby the shooting lane is only 15° off from being pointed back at the parking lot, 600-yds away.

The ABSOLUTE worst was a different MD setting a CoF whereby other squads going from their stage to their cars, crossed the path of another stage, while shooter #1 was in prone, looking through his scope, waiting for the go buzzer and wondered why the fuck people were walking across his field of view! That shit got put right, quick and I don't think I've ever seen that MD run another match there.

I think the national level sanctioning bodies do need to drop the hammer and tighten shit up before it's too late.

As for RO's, I know it's hard to get as many as necessary, but it's only going to get worse with more leagues, more matches, and matches trying see how many shooters they can accommodate (squeeze in). At first it was 200, then 300, now 400+! What's next, a 500+ shooter match? Needing 60+ RO's? Doesn't seem logical and makes it very hard to manage safety I'd think? My $0.02

 

[Dthomas3523]

As far as I know, I'm pretty sure RO's in the precision rifle matches I've shot and RO'd, that there is no qualification required. I've seen some that it was evident they'd never spent a minute doing what they were now required to do. "Hey Billy, what are you doing today?"....."Sobering up, why?"......"Cool, grab your binos, you're an RO now!"....."A what?!?"

I've been doing this for going on 5 years now and have seen everything the OP said, and worse. A few things come to mind worth mentioning is shooters collecting brass in front of the firing line while the stage directly next to them still has live-fire occurring.

Worse is MD's setting a CoF whereby the shooting lane is only 15° off from being pointed back at the parking lot, 600-yds away.

The ABSOLUTE worst was a different MD setting a CoF whereby other squads going from their stage to their cars, crossed the path of another stage, while shooter #1 was in prone, looking through his scope, waiting for the go buzzer and wondered why the fuck people were walking across his field of view! That shit got put right, quick and I don't think I've ever seen that MD run another match there.

I think the national level sanctioning bodies do need to drop the hammer and tighten shit up before it's too late.

As for RO's, I know it's hard to get as many as necessary, but it's only going to get worse with more leagues, more matches, and matches trying see how many shooters they can accommodate (squeeze in). At first it was 200, then 300, now 400+! What's next, a 500+ shooter match? Needing 60+ RO's? Doesn't seem logical and makes it very hard to manage safety I'd think? My $0.02

Unfortunately, as of right now “dropping the hammer” equates to:

PRS/NRL: we aren’t going to recognize your match

Match Director: that’s fine, I’m still going to run my match and get 90 shooters

 

[Mormegil87]

@mercracing I'll post the gyst of our most recent text exchange in hopes of clarification for others.

If a match can't provide an RO, Spotter, Scorer or at least an RO and Spotter/Scorer then a match shouldn't be a sanctioned or affiliated match. Hard stop, end of story.

That's where the top down part comes in. That's where PRS and NRL come in and say, to have a PRS/NRL sanctioned event, regional qualifier etc, you will have the following in place:

1) Follow all posted governing body safety regs.

2). Have a designated RO, Spotter and Scorer for each stage.
2.1) If only two people can be designated, the Spotter will act as scorer and the scores will be confirmed by the Spotter/Scorer, Shooter and RO before moving on.

So on and so forth.

You can still hold your own independent match but you will not attach the PRS or NRL name to your match and you will receive no assistance from the PRS or NRL. Essentially if you want to hold an "outlaw" match go ahead. But it will be exactly that, "outlaw"
That's where the top down mentality needs to come into play.

 

[Mormegil87]

Unfortunately, as of right now “dropping the hammer” equates to:

PRS/NRL: we aren’t going to recognize your match

Match Director: that’s fine, I’m still going to run my match and get 90 shooters

There's nothing you're going to do or implement that will stop that.

 

[earthquake]

Replying to DThomas: I see what you mean. I don't know how to combat that. It's almost a gamble going into an unknown match with an unknown MD. Will it be safe, not safe?

Replying to Roger: I know a certain match that seems to always have trouble filling RO slots and has had one single RO running glass/spotting, scoring and safety in the past. Maybe these events need to require a squad member to help? What's the legal ramifications there if someone gets hurt? That or start cancelling matches.

 

[Mormegil87]

@earthquake the two day market it saturated. There's three matches within 10 hour of my location that are currently open and not filled, unless they filled in the last day or so.

Two years ago that did not happen.

So if matches are having a hard time finding shooters to fill them, I can imagine it's tough to find ROs.

Now as far as as the regional/club matches I really think that's based on region and match/shooter proximity more than current market supply and demand.