That's what I think. If you think the queen cares who wins a queens prize you are dreaming.
When you log into the forum it seems like every month there is another's queens happening. It should be an annual thing so it holds some prestige, and moved from state to state each year.
In the absence of much detail or supporting evidence.....
This does not seem to be a uniting move nor does it seem to pass the test of furthering the sport. Unity above all should be our objective, not an appeasement of hypothetical UK sentiment.
In the absence of any evidence of threatened withdrawal of the right to use the "Queen's" this seems a little light on logic.
1st Prize: continue as is without dividing the camp. 2nd Prize: in the very unlikely event of a dispute over whether the title is limited only to Target Rifle, drop the title, stay united.
My gut tells me that more is afoot and that an external pretext is a cover for internal politics...we are our own worst enemies when it comes to divisive internal politics and power games. Leadership, strategy and unity is what we need.
Aubrey wrote: My gut tells me that more is afoot and that an external pretext is a cover for internal politics...we are our own worst enemies when it comes to divisive internal politics and power games. Leadership, strategy and unity is what we need.
That sums up all shooting organisations over here, they all only care about their own little bit. No such thing as unity.
Aubrey wrote:...1st Prize: continue as is without dividing the camp. 2nd Prize: in the very unlikely event of a dispute over whether the title is limited only to Target Rifle, drop the title, stay united...
Yes. that would be the decent way to handle it Aubrey.
Hi All, If the prize changes from queens I would prefer a non government/political title as most aussies hold them in fairly low esteem. Maybe the Ernie Dingo????Paul Hogan??? etc (Ned Kelly could give a bad image) or at least someone likeable. Possibly call for suggestions??? If there's a change I'm sure not everyone will be happy.
We don't rise to the level of our expectations, we fall to the level of our training. Archilochos 680-645 BC
In the ACT Queens, Queens Prize has only been associated with TR (at least the last 2 years). All F Class disciplines are referred to as State Championships/Champions (I believe thats how it is actually printed on Entry forms, Awards, Badges and Medals in F Class). Not sure how other states currently do it!
If the original Queens was based on target rifle as it was then (100+ odd years ago)...and if that logic is being applied to exclude F class because of the difference in equipment, stye of shooting etc...then equally current TR would not be eligible - TR does not shoot Bisley style, our rifles are not semi modified service rifles, we use diopter lenses, we custom load our ammo etc etc etc. A modern TR rifle is very different from the originals!
This pretext of what was "originally" a Queens classification does not really stand up to any logical or rational scrutiny.
Having said that - I love the tradition of a Queens being the pinnacle of friendly and ethical competition with all categories of approved equipment (TR, F Class, Optical, Service, Field etc).
I strongly believe we should preserve the tradition for all shooters, not just one discipline.
Aubrey wrote: I love the tradition of a Queens being the pinnacle of friendly and ethical competition with all categories of approved equipment (TR, F Class, Optical, Service, Field etc).
I strongly believe we should preserve the tradition for all shooters, not just one discipline.
Well said Aubrey. The sleeping dogs were lying quite peacefully - I don't understand why the NRAA would suddenly do this.
Interesting to note that the ACT have removed the wording" Queens Prize ", being replaced by " Championship " but for some reason retain the " Crown " ( which is associated with royalty ) I can remember some years ago where a directive was issued that local PM badges were not to show the crown as this was reserved for " Queens " competition.
"Are you going to the Queens?" vs "Are you going to the Governor General's?". Sorry it just wouldn't stack up. And I think its mainly the tradition more than anything. I believe the QRA had their first Queens Prize event more than 130 years ago. Its not a matter of being staunch monarchists, in the same way as you don't need to be Christian to celebrate Christmas. It has become part of the culture. How would we feel about changing the name of Christmas to Governor General's Holiday?
higginsdj wrote:In the ACT Queens, Queens Prize has only been associated with TR (at least the last 2 years). All F Class disciplines are referred to as State Championships/Champions (I believe thats how it is actually printed on Entry forms, Awards, Badges and Medals in F Class). Not sure how other states currently do it!
Cheers
David
David,
Apart from WA, which someone else may be able to advise on, all S & Ts have awarded F-Class badges marked with the word Queens at some stage.
My records only go back to 2007, but that's 7 years and I rather think that " Queens " badges were awarded to FC for some years before that -- probably back as far as 1999. So, the question remains, " why the sudden move to remove FC from the " Queens " list. I don't believe the explanation given is plausible.
Still think it's a prime opportunity for FC to up the status to top rung though.
Seddo wrote:Does this mean we will start running FC State titles in its own right? ie no TR events?
Why not and have matches to suit. Ranges longer than 1,000, Bisley style matches, teams coached and non coached the list is endless. TR was built on military requirements and morphed into current TR. Todays shooting is different with different gear, different attitude and requirement. Laying the foundation to take FC forward for 100yrs is not a bad idea.
Some matches could be at other ranges during the year. Spreads the load or takes advantage of long ranges.
Menu
Newest members