I'm not suggesting you do question a judges decision as I'm all for a quite life and judges are only trying to do their job with inadequately worded rule books, but in a previous iteration of my sporting life I served as a senior international judge for the ISSF and appeared as an expert witness at the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Lausanne. The case concerned the colours on a competitor's national flag on his jacket which another competitor's country had said were not correct. As an Olympic sport, like archery, the case eventually ended up at the court. The CAS is legal based so it hinged on the legal definition of the colour, the decision of the court was that unless the colour is legally defined in the rules of the sport by either frequency range or Pantone colours, then colour based rules were unenforceable as the actual colour became a matter of opinion, not rule. For instance in rule 307 'blue' is not defined, so a pair of Levi's, which are actually sold as 'Indigo' are not covered. Same applies with 'Olive Drab', no precise definition of what this constitutes is given, so when does it become simply 'Green' or 'Sage' and is thus not covered in the rules. At major multi-sport international competitions the Judges are firmly told that they are not there to interpret the rules but to enforce the 'letter' of the rules, interpretation being the function of the appeals panels and eventually the Court . A number of international sporting organisations did change their rules after this decision.