You can now bring your videographer

[CleverNickname]

I wonder if a better solution would be to be to only allow video evidence at L2/L3 matches from match cameras, instead of some dude's cell phone. Put a GoPro or equivalent on the head of whichever RO is currently running the timer and another camera high up on a tripod so it can see as much of the stage as possible. If you're really ambitious, put cameras on the head of every RO on the stage.

Advantages:
1) Every competitor gets as close to the same video evidence as possible for their run.
2) Since the cameras would be standardized, equipment to review video evidence could be standardized too. If a call needs to be made with video, pop out the memory card and put it in the MD's known-good video-evidence review tablet. No issues with trying to view the video on some tiny cell phone screen.

Disadvantages:
1) Yet another device the match director has to provide and ensure that it's functional and charged (in addition to scoring tablets, timers and radios).
2) Some shooters will still take their own video for social media or their own personal post-match performance review, and if that video isn't allowable as evidence they'll be mad.

For L1 matches then I think cell phone video or whatever would be fine.

[DMF13]

Budget option: https://www.amazon.com/RunCam-4K-Xvi..._dp&th=1&psc=1

Mid-range option: https://www.amazon.com/DJI-Action-Du...9FY7NT4W&psc=1

Premium option: https://www.amazon.com/Insta360-GO-H...XRm&psc=1&th=1

I'm a cheapskate, so I have an older version of that budget option.

For me, I would only consider asking for a video review if I was certain is was an unjustified DQ, or if I felt an RO was unjustly hammering people, which are both extremely rare occurrences in my experience. I'm not going to be contesting every single call, and hopefully most other shooters will be reasonable about this.

[ECK]

I can think of several examples over the years where video evidence (after the fact) proved helpful. Here’s three that come to mind:

Exhibit A: Level 2 match a couple years ago, a Team Captain of a fairly well known custom 2011 manufacturer got DQ’d for breaking the 180. He swore up and down by all that he holds holy there was no way he broke the 180 and had video evidence to prove it. I get called to confirm the DQ and based on testimony of the CRO and RO who both had the correct angle to see it happen, I confirmed the DQ. Said shooter tried the same line on me that he had video evidence, etc. and was pretty pushy about it. But back in 2022 video evidence was not allowed per the rulebook so I didn’t look at the video. A few minutes later, shooter comes up to me to apologize for his behavior and to tell me that his video did show that he broke the 180.

Exhibit B: Another Level 2 match this one in 2024, I’m sitting on my ATV about 20’ back with people between me and the shooter so I didn’t have the best view. Stage was one of those with two different shooting areas. It looked to me like the shooter didn’t quite make it all the way into the second shooting area before he started firing shots. After the CRO and RO are done scoring I ask them how close he was to foot faulting. I got the deer in the headlight look from both CRO & RO (sigh). Shooter tells me after he approves the tablet that he thinks it was pretty close and was going to check his video. He tells me later that his video shows he foot faulted big time. But he got away with it since I wasn’t 100% sure and neither CRO/RO were paying enough attention to see it.

Exhibit C: Nats in 2017 or 2019. Competitor goes to war on a cluster of six poppers arrayed in a bowling pin triangle. Runs out of ammo before he downs all the poppers and opts to take the Miss on steel rather than the extra time of the reload. RO gives him a FTSA penalty in addition to the Miss. CRO backs him up. Shooter is pretty hot saying he fired 11 rnds at the array of 6 poppers and had video to show that he “engaged” all the poppers but only knocked over 5 of the 6. I didn’t look at the video but this IMO was a bad call by the stage staff. The following Monday, the video shows up on Youtube so I watched it, and confirmed my suspicion that this was a bad call.

Several regions in IPSC have been using video evidence for a while and anecdotal reports from IROA range masters is that it does not cause too many problems or delays. Some of the IROA RMs have stated that most times the shooter’s “video evidence” is non-conclusive, so the original call was not affected. But they also mentioned a few instances where it has helped them to confirm or overturn a call, which supports my three examples up above.

One thing I’m curious to see if it will happen is when viewing the supplied video evidence, the RM or Arb committee sees another procedural or DQ’able offense that was wasn’t originally called… so I guess for those lobbying for use of video evidence, remember it can cut both ways!

[ECK]

Actually, what works better than video evidence is several squad members telling the shooter: “dude, you XYZ’d, we all saw it”. That shuts down any further discussion way faster than any GoPro footage I can think of.

[DMF13]

One thing I’m curious to see if it will happen is when viewing the supplied video evidence, the RM or Arb committee sees another procedural or DQ’able offense that was wasn’t originally called… so I guess for those lobbying for use of video evidence, remember it can cut both ways!

Why would it be treated that way? As Andy Erickson and Jeff King pointed out in the "Not Another Shooting Show" Podcast that's not done in other sports. In other sports they review the video of the questioned portion, and don't go looking for other issues.

[ECK]

Why would it be treated that way? As Andy Erickson and Jeff King pointed out in the "Not Another Shooting Show" Podcast that's not done in other sports. In other sports they review the video of the questioned portion, and don't go looking for other issues.

No doubt as we go into 2025 there’ll be things that need to be clarified or refined as we get more into use of video to confirm or overturn a call. But for argument’s sake, let’s say the other violation occurred either a couple seconds before or after the questioned portion. What then?

BTW, I just watched the Brantley Merrian video from what I think was the GA State match this fall where he got DQ’d for breaking the 180. IMO, even without seeing the multiple camera views, the hatcam video alone would make me question the RO’s call.

[GJM]

I can think of several examples over the years where video evidence (after the fact) proved helpful. Here’s three that come to mind:

Exhibit A: Level 2 match a couple years ago, a Team Captain of a fairly well known custom 2011 manufacturer got DQ’d for breaking the 180. He swore up and down by all that he holds holy there was no way he broke the 180 and had video evidence to prove it. I get called to confirm the DQ and based on testimony of the CRO and RO who both had the correct angle to see it happen, I confirmed the DQ. Said shooter tried the same line on me that he had video evidence, etc. and was pretty pushy about it. But back in 2022 video evidence was not allowed per the rulebook so I didn’t look at the video. A few minutes later, shooter comes up to me to apologize for his behavior and to tell me that his video did show that he broke the 180.

Exhibit B: Another Level 2 match this one in 2024, I’m sitting on my ATV about 20’ back with people between me and the shooter so I didn’t have the best view. Stage was one of those with two different shooting areas. It looked to me like the shooter didn’t quite make it all the way into the second shooting area before he started firing shots. After the CRO and RO are done scoring I ask them how close he was to foot faulting. I got the deer in the headlight look from both CRO & RO (sigh). Shooter tells me after he approves the tablet that he thinks it was pretty close and was going to check his video. He tells me later that his video shows he foot faulted big time. But he got away with it since I wasn’t 100% sure and neither CRO/RO were paying enough attention to see it.

Exhibit C: Nats in 2017 or 2019. Competitor goes to war on a cluster of six poppers arrayed in a bowling pin triangle. Runs out of ammo before he downs all the poppers and opts to take the Miss on steel rather than the extra time of the reload. RO gives him a FTSA penalty in addition to the Miss. CRO backs him up. Shooter is pretty hot saying he fired 11 rnds at the array of 6 poppers and had video to show that he “engaged” all the poppers but only knocked over 5 of the 6. I didn’t look at the video but this IMO was a bad call by the stage staff. The following Monday, the video shows up on Youtube so I watched it, and confirmed my suspicion that this was a bad call.

Several regions in IPSC have been using video evidence for a while and anecdotal reports from IROA range masters is that it does not cause too many problems or delays. Some of the IROA RMs have stated that most times the shooter’s “video evidence” is non-conclusive, so the original call was not affected. But they also mentioned a few instances where it has helped them to confirm or overturn a call, which supports my three examples up above.

One thing I’m curious to see if it will happen is when viewing the supplied video evidence, the RM or Arb committee sees another procedural or DQ’able offense that was wasn’t originally called… so I guess for those lobbying for use of video evidence, remember it can cut both ways!

I think the words "big time" were your words not his!

Obviously a stage design problem, as that fault line was put in the wrong place!

[ECK]

I think the words "big time" were your words not his!

Obviously a stage design problem, as that fault line was put in the wrong place!

What I saw was you planted your front foot inside the shooting area but I never saw your upper body lean forward like it would have when your rear foot (which was still touching ground outside the fault line) came off the ground.

But you’re right, we shoulda pushed that fault line back a little. What do you figure you needed, about 8-10”? LOL