OzFclass

Can anyone make sense of this for me, or has anyone seen the rule applied like this before?
In brief, shooting at the NRAA Kings 15 shots at 600m. Mid string I fired, my scorer called 5, my target showed an X. 2 shots on my target.
I claimed the X, figured I had an optional and carried on shooting, thinking the score was being adjusted in this manner. I shoot a five, say cut that and , unfortunately, shoot another 5 before finishing with Xs & 6s. My scorer calls "all out" and I discover I had been given the 5 (not the X) and no optional getting an 87.7. Because I had been pulled up before shooting what should have been my last round I approached the CRO, explained what had happened and was put on another target to shoot an optional + 3. I shot 5, 6, X,6 and lodged my protest.
It's worth noting it was pouring with rain and there was a 4-7 second delay on the Hextas. The time difference between the 5 and X was less than 2 seconds.
The result of my protest is below, where the committee decide to split the baby by giving me the X from the 2 shots but not allowing the optional.
Has any one seen this before or can anyone explain the application of rule 4.5.1.15.
It truely baffels me.

Tim, I think that you have missed the rules that state your responsibility, 4.1.3.12 and 4.1.3.13. You must sort it out before you fire your next shot, and get the scorer/range officer to state that you have an optional before you fire the next shot. Once the shot is fired you have no room for protest.
RMc

Similar situation happened when I was scoring at the same meeting
Had to stop the shooter as we had a cross fire from another target
Called the RO, he selected the shot, pressed the D? disclaim button and we continued on
No optional as the time elapsed didnt go past three minutes Rule 4.4.6

RMc wrote:Tim, I think that you have missed the rules that state your responsibility, 4.1.3.12 and 4.1.3.13. You must sort it out before you fire your next shot, and get the scorer/range officer to state that you have an optional before you fire the next shot. Once the shot is fired you have no room for protest.
RMc

OK, i see what you're saying, this doesn't appear to be what the match commitee were considering but to run through,

4.1.3.12 The competitor must after firing each shot, pay attention to the score called
out by the scorer and ensure that the scorer has called out the correct score
for each shot. This is especially important if the competitor is firing quickly
or an electronic target monitor is being used.

I did. My scorer called 5, by the time I looked at the target (not very long on hearing the 5 I can assure you) the X was there. From this point rule 4.5.1.8 is in play. I claimed the X as my scorer is calling the RO/ET

4.1.3.13 Objection must be taken to a shot which has been signalled before the next
shot is fired, otherwise the value marked shall be deemed to have been
accepted and no subsequent objection, protest or discussion in respect
thereof will be allowed

Although not aware of this rule at the time does me claiming the X not achieve compliance?
The issue I have with this rule is the wording of 4.5.1.8

4.5.1.8 In the event of a marker finding two hits on his target, he will signal the higher
value and spot both hits and the competitor on whose target the hits are
made shall be entitled to claim the hit of the higher value and shall be entitled
to an optional shot from the first sighter to the last shot of the completed
stage [i.e. if two hits on first sighter, have an optional sighter, then a second
sighter. If it is the second sighter, then an optional first business. When
using electronic targets, in the event of two shots being recorded in rapid
succession (i.e. an extra shot from another target) and it is not possible to
determine which shot should be attributed to the shooter on the target, the
provision of this rule as detailed above shall apply.

This rule is an absolute. There is no requirement for the shooter to claim, contest or object to anything.
Two shots on target (or in quick succession on ET) provides an "entitlement" to the shooter.
SHALL be entitled to claim the highr value and SHALL be entitled to an optional.

For me, the only question that needs to be answered is whether the 2 shots were in rapid enough succession. <2 seconds. I'd say yes and it appears that the board did too. This also means 4.1.3.13 is moot because I was awarded the X as opposed to the 5.

Can anyone explain how 4.5.1.15.3 can be used to deprive a shooter of an optional? Particularly when it states Rule 4.5.1.8 SHALL apply.

Don't take me wrong on this. The 1 point made little difference to me on this occasion. In future, however, it could make a lot of difference to someone.
My point here is that 4.5.1.8 has been a rule for a long time. It is, imo, an absolute entitlement in the event of 2 shots on target. On a manual there is no option but to implement 4.5.1.8. On ET however it appears there may be confusion/difficulties with the rules.
I'm just after opinions before writing to the NRAA to suggest that the ONLY consideration that needs to be made in future is the time between shots. No other rule removes the application of 4.5.1.8 or the entitlement therein.



Applying

Tim, I do not think anyone would deny you having the highest value, except if your scorer/check scorer claimed that they saw the X before you fired, it did not happen here. With the Optional, a decision must be made and communicated before you proceed as both the rules are absolute, once you have shot then the RO probably will not even consider making a decision. As good practice you should always ask if the next shot is an optional, if you do not like the answer then argue your case before continuing. Remember that your scorers are not lawyers and will/should wait for the RO to make a decision.
I do not see any difference between implementing this rule between manual or ET, except on ETs most people want everything to happen fast. Getting the RO involved can take time, which is why we have the 3 minute rule, but a decision must be communicated also.

RMc

Yeah point taken.
In this instance the conditions didn't help. I wasn't reel keen to be there any longer than absolutely necessary .
Communication, both ways needed to be clearer. I took it for granted that I had the options but should have confirmed with my scorer.
Lesson learned and hopefully others reading this will take that away as well.