Pulling a Mickelson

[ru4por]

I wonder if anyone has run across a situation like seen at the US Open this weekend in the golf world.

For those not much into the PGA, Phil Mickelson missed a putt, which was going to roll away a considerable distance, into a collection area off the green. He jogged to the rolling ball and hit it back at the hole. Missed a couple more times and collected a two stroke penalty for the infraction of hitting a moving ball. Incredulously, instead of claiming frustration and a temporary loss of composure, he stated he did it to save strokes. He felt it would have taken more than the two stroke penalty to get up and down.

I wonder if anyone has seen this kind of blatant rules breaking to the benefit of the player, in our game. I am not really asking about times where the correct interpretation of rules benefit the player, but actually breaking them has. Or....even if you might see any of our rules that might be beneficial to simply violate....if so inclined.

 

[Stable]

I've never seen anyone touch a disc that was in motion during a tournament. I can relate to blowing up around the green at events though. It's my specialty.

 

[Dire Wolfy]

wanna break your fingers? try this.

 

[DiscJunkie]

If I saw that in a DG tourney, I would think about pressing for a DQ due to blatant misconduct. Not sure I would, but that took some nerve.

However, thankfully, in DG we can just let it roll and play it from the previous lie.
One of the best rule changes in years.

 

[brutalbrutus]

I got so mad at a disc rolling away from the basket for the third time in a row that I tried to kick it...






...it was too fast for me.:\

 

[Dire Wolfy]

wanna break your fingers? try this.

I completely misread, during putting if it rolls away oh well.

 

[Cgkdisc]

Mickelson didn't really break a rule, he knowingly penalized himself following that rule. If he hit the ball without anyone seeing it and didn't count the penalty, that would be worthy of immediate DQ if discovered later. With regard to disc golf, our interference rules where someone might stop their rolling disc are similar to ball golf. Our new Abandoned Throw rule is equivalent to their "Unplayable Lie" rule where Mickelson could have elected to go back to play from his previous lie with a stroke penalty had he not hit the rolling ball and let it settle into nasty fescue.

We've had situations in the past where a player or even a spotter will be asked to stop a disc from rolling into the OB water to save it from being lost temporarily or permanently. The player would be assessed a one shot penalty as if they had gone OB. However, in the 2018 rule book that option was removed. Now, you get penalized one shot for inadvertently touching your disc in motion and 2 shots if you intentionally do what Mickelson did. So you have to decide whether it's worth it to get a 2-shot penalty to save your disc from being lost in deep, murky water versus a 1-shot OB or Abandoned Throw penalty.

 

[ru4por]

Mickelson didn't really break a rule, he knowingly penalized himself following that rule. If he hit the ball without anyone seeing it and didn't count the penalty, that would be worthy of immediate DQ if discovered later. With regard to disc golf, our interference rules where someone might stop their rolling disc are similar to ball golf. Our new Abandoned Throw rule is equivalent to their "Unplayable Lie" rule where Mickelson could have elected to go back to play from his previous lie with a stroke penalty had he not hit the rolling ball and let it settle into nasty fescue.

We've had situations in the past where a player or even a spotter will be asked to stop a disc from rolling into the OB water to save it from being lost temporarily or permanently. The player would be assessed a one shot penalty as if they had gone OB. However, in the 2018 rule book that option was removed. Now, you get penalized one shot for inadvertently touching your disc in motion and 2 shots if you intentionally do what Mickelson did. So you have to decide whether it's worth it to get a 2-shot penalty to save your disc from being lost in deep, murky water versus a 1-shot OB or Abandoned Throw penalty.

Interestingly, this is what Mickelson should have done. If it really was a calculated stroke saving measure on his half. I am not sold that he just did not lose it.

 

[wolfmandragon]

Mickelson didn't really break a rule, he knowingly penalized himself following that rule. If he hit the ball without anyone seeing it and didn't count the penalty, that would be worthy of immediate DQ if discovered later. With regard to disc golf, our interference rules where someone might stop their rolling disc are similar to ball golf. Our new Abandoned Throw rule is equivalent to their "Unplayable Lie" rule where Mickelson could have elected to go back to play from his previous lie with a stroke penalty had he not hit the rolling ball and let it settle into nasty fescue.

We've had situations in the past where a player or even a spotter will be asked to stop a disc from rolling into the OB water to save it from being lost temporarily or permanently. The player would be assessed a one shot penalty as if they had gone OB. However, in the 2018 rule book that option was removed. Now, you get penalized one shot for inadvertently touching your disc in motion and 2 shots if you intentionally do what Mickelson did. So you have to decide whether it's worth it to get a 2-shot penalty to save your disc from being lost in deep, murky water versus a 1-shot OB or Abandoned Throw penalty.

The gentleman I played a round with tonight, said, based on the interviews that he watched, that Mickelson did this also to expose some rules clashes that the golf handbook has in it. He was already loosing anyway. I reckon that there is a firestorm going on about which rule that he broke, as there is also a rule about redirecting the ball path.

So...we may see some rule changes next year in Golf....now if we can get a few more Ricky and Paige footfaults this year.....

 

[beereakfast]

Phil got by on a tecnicality that he knew of. Still amazes me, but that was a crazy hard course. From the point of the foul, he still added 5 strokes. Even chipping from the rough, he likely could have done better. And i do think he should have been dq'd.
Know the rules!

 

[ru4por]

The gentleman I played a round with tonight, said, based on the interviews that he watched, that Mickelson did this also to expose some rules clashes that the golf handbook has in it. He was already loosing anyway. I reckon that there is a firestorm going on about which rule that he broke, as there is also a rule about redirecting the ball path.

So...we may see some rule changes next year in Golf....now if we can get a few more Ricky and Paige footfaults this year.....

He did say that in interviews, but I think that is nonsense. Is he advocating that golf change the oft [sarcasm] violated "moving ball rule" to a four stroke penalty? That any player intentionally breaking rule to benefit his score should be DQ'ed? What is his protest?

Anyway, the real question was, are there rules in our game that could be broken to benefit score?

 

[ru4por]

Phil got by on a tecnicality that he knew of. Still amazes me, but that was a crazy hard course. From the point of the foul, he still added 5 strokes. Even chipping from the rough, he likely could have done better. And i do think he should have been dq'd.
Know the rules!

Wasn't really a technicality. Pulling your disc a meter from the OB line, closer to the basket is a rules technicality that benefits the player. Phil broke a rule...intentionally.

 

[biscoe]

Apparently the same thing occurred in disc golf at Am Worlds last year. I don't know any more details but was talking to one of the Marshals yesterday and that is what he said. This was evidently the motive behind some of the change in interference rules for 2018.

 

[chosenmatrix]

From almost everybody I have listened to, it looks and sounds like his "using the rule to his advantage" is something Phil came up with after the fact to justify his antics. It would take an unreasonable amount of foresight to plan to do something like that ahead of time. He would never be able to plan to be on that spot of the green in order to expose the rule.

A much more likely scenario is that he was frustrated, already out of contention, saw that his ball was going to run all the way off the green (again), and instinctively just stopped it.

This scenario also addresses the original question. I have seen someone do this in play (both on video, and in real life). The video is a guy putting to a basket on the top of a hill. It is incredibly windy. The disc flies back at him after he putts, and he sort of makes an effort to get out of the way, but after the 3rd or 4th time, he is blatantly just stopping the disc from blowing/rolling/sailing, all the way back down the hill.

In real life, I watched a guy putt up a very steep hill with a creek below it (steep bank). He putted, it hit a branch and was rolling back at him. He stopped it (he says it was reactionary, but who knows). I recommended the penalty be added, but the group said things along the lines of "well it was a tough lie" and "it would have gone OB in the water".

 

[_MTL_]

This scenario should never happen in disc golf because in disc golf we always have the option of going to last lie with a one shot penalty and we players can replace a lie once it's come to rest if it moves.

Off the top of my head I can't see a scenario where one of these two things wouldn't be the best option for a player especially when stopping the disc is a two throw penalty.

 

[JC17393]

This scenario should never happen in disc golf because in disc golf we always have the option of going to last lie with a one shot penalty and we players can replace a lie once it's come to rest if it moves.

Off the top of my head I can't see a scenario where one of these two things wouldn't be the best option for a player especially when stopping the disc is a two throw penalty.

Ball golfers have that option as well (replaying with penalty), yet it happened anyway. I think chosenmatrix is right, it was a spur of the moment action done in anger and frustration rather than with forethought of the rules. There's no way that he did it because he thought it was the best option for himself.

I can see the same thing happening in disc golf. It probably has countless times. I know I've seen it in casual rounds where players do all kinds of things out of frustration that would incur penalties in a tournament (stopping rolling discs, throwing second putts, etc) which are shrugged off as "it's casual, no big deal". I'm sure people who do that with any kind of regularity in casual spots will occasionally slip up and do it in a tournament setting. With no consideration of how it impacts their score and certainly no forethought of "saving strokes" by intentionally breaking rules to take a penalty.

Besides, expecting that intentional interference to "save throws" wouldn't happen in disc golf because the rules provide a "better" option assumes that players know the rules. I think we've had more than enough examples to show that most players don't have a nearly comprehensive enough understanding of the book to know that, let alone to exploit it.

 

[biscoe]

I find it interesting that if Phil had simply stopped the ball rather than making a stroke at it he would have been dq'ed.

 

[Lazerface]

I think what happened at one of the big AM tournaments (discussed in a podcast I listened to a while back) was similar, but not the same as this. There was a Par 4 or 5 where players found it advantageous to pitch OB directly off the tee and proceed to the drop zone for an easy up and down - or something like that. I can't remember the details in regard to what made the attempt at a drive in the fairway so dangerous, but the rules guy said nobody was breaking any rule, just taking advantage of poor hole design.

So not really comparable, but hey...

 

[PMantle]

And i do think he should have been dq'd.
Know the rules!

This has to be based upon emotion, as there is a specific rule that contemplates this. He did not simply stop or deflect the ball. He very carefully lined up and took a stroke. This is not even close to something calling for a DQ.

 

[_MTL_]

Besides, expecting that intentional interference to "save throws" wouldn't happen in disc golf because the rules provide a "better" option assumes that players know the rules. I think we've had more than enough examples to show that most players don't have a nearly comprehensive enough understanding of the book to know that, let alone to exploit it.

good point.