Banner advertisements by

reasoned response

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by FK on May 11, 2011 at 12:37:53:

In Reply to: Judges and Drinking posted by Steph on May 09, 2011 at 15:27:13:

thanks Pat. i appriciate the heads up. it is hard to read all this stuff. But, i must say after reading that thread i am still a bit confused. i am sure that most if not all of us don't mind folling the rules IF we know what they are. there is apparently something called a judges CD which says no drinking during judging; Reps manual which says no drinking during the judging period; something from Rep 7.46 which says a judge can be removed for being intoxicated or under the influence during judging and a code of conduct which says no drinking before or during judging. So, given the four (4) sources of rules, these guys violated #4 and not #s 1-3 but can't be removed as there was no allegation they were intoxicated or under the influence while judging. i didn't see anything that gave the Rep the authority to remove them prior to even starting to judge unless that is written somewhere other than the four sources mentioned above that would allow it.

anyway, i can imagine a really uncomfortable situation. a guy is standing there drinking a beer and my guess is surprised (there are other words)by a person wanting (demanding) to know if they are drinking a beer. neither party is real happy about the situation. the person asking the question is apparently under the impression that drinking a beer prior to judging is a rule violation. the person drinking the beer apparently doesn't believe he has done anything wrong. nobody has any sort of rule book to figure out who is right. but for whatever reason the guy drinking the beer gets the boot. both parties less than overjoyed with eachother.

now, from my perspective i think it might have been handled a bit better by both parties. maybe the cook should have talked to the rep first and told them there was a judge in the beer drinking tent drinking something. at least there is some very stong circumstantial evidence it was beer. my guess is that the judge would have admitted that if asked in a different way. then there could have been a rational discussion of what he was accused of doing wrong and a reasonable attempt to figure out if, in fact, he had done something wrong.

well none of that happened. everybody got all POed at eachother and here we are. the one mob, cooks, all say "you go girl" and the others, myself included, wanting to know what really is the rule and can we do something to make sure this doesn't happen again.

maybe someday there can be one set of real rules that everybody can read and understand. good luck. im still trying to find some of that pork collar, surgically attach it to my pork butt and get a real good score. also, is pork in a pork box in the shape of a "9" sculpting? can't tell who did it, why does it matter?

you know it is really a violation of equal protection. if a cook can get drunk cooking it why can't a judge be drunk eating it. a lot of happy drunks may give a lot of good scores.

Follow Ups:

The BBQ Forum Home Page

Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; MSIE 9.0; Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; Trident/5.0)

[ BBQ Search ]