2018 Waco Annual Charity Open DGPT

[SD86]

Terry Miller's videos of FPO R1 and R2 are up, with some new voices behind the microphones. Check it out!

R1 front: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2qtzObxXMs

R1 back: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExUTDWzCEro

R2 front: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DEm1A5t9_g4

R2 back: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPs4SKxl75A

(Full disclosure: I'm one of the trio commenting on round two.)

Looking forward to hearing your commentary. :thmbup:

 

[Major Tomahawk]

I like Chuck's idea. Put the onus on the whole group to know their craft. This could help prevent bullying by an individual from happening on rules situations.

 

[mosman253]

He wasn't robbed and there's nothing to gain trying to argue that.

Jerm may have incorrectly used a rule that put him on the wrong lie, but he could have been prevented from doing so if any of the players in the group, including Nate, spoke up. He could have been penalized for committing the error. That neither of those things happened is on the group 100%. To me, that nullifies the notion that anyone was "robbed" here.



I think you mean impetus here, but how is this on the PDGA? What can they do to improve player's knowledge of the rules? Absent Chuck's suggestion up-thread of instituting the power to assess post-round penalties for failing to consult the rule book to get rulings correct, the solution is in the players' hands: read the book, understand the rules, and most importantly, CALL OUT VIOLATIONS OR POTENTIAL VIOLATIONS WHEN THEY HAPPEN.

For a solution i think that Video and photo evidence should be permited when available.and rule changes should be much more...translucent, communicated? As in im sure this is not the first time this has been encountered and could have been addressed in your certification. he was Robbed by the impotence of the ruling body to educate certified officials, Including himself.I did mean impetus, but the play on words kind of works. This is Not the first L.O.P incident. This was not the amateurs.this and the no call from john e, and ricky,was bush league.

I got a good chuckle out jerms description of nates putt as a "captain stabbin putt":clap:

 

[philstine]

Okay, Nate disagreed, but when did he say that? Before or after Jerm threw the shot? That's important. If he disagreed but didn't say anything until after the fact, he ****ed up and he can't really complain about it.

I concur with most of what you wrote, but I'm not persuaded that this part is correct. I would be interested in hearing why you believe this to be the case.

As I read 801 Application of the Rules, I don't see anything that forecloses the opportunity for player from questioning the legality of a throw after the throw has been made. Granted, it would be in keeping with The Spirit of the Game and the dictates of courtesy (both common and Rule mandated (812.B.2)) to broach the issue of a potential violation beforehand—assuming one was aware that there was a potential violation at hand. Nevertheless, I see nothing in the Rules that debars questioning or challenging the legality of a throw after the fact.

 

[BrotherDave]

*Touring pros misunderstand different rules every tournament*

But the rules are so simple and easy to understand! They've hardly changed in 20 years! It's not the rule book's fault, it's everyone else's!

 

[joecoin]

I want to know why it's not called a manda.

 

[Turnipseed]

*Touring pros misunderstand different rules every tournament*

But the rules are so simple and easy to understand! They've hardly changed in 20 years! It's not the rule book's fault, it's everyone else's!

Correct. A baboon could understand the rules of disc golf, but lazy players fail to learn them.

This is another example that demonstrates the hilarity of disc golf as a "proffession". Most jobs, even simple, low wage ones, require a lot more learning than that needed to keep the rules of disc golf. Somehow all manner of retards manage to do these jobs. But a bunch of faux-atheletes milling about the woods cannot manage, even provided the teeny-weeny cheat-sheet they can pack along with the rest of their "tools".

 

[PoorPutter]

Can somebody give me the cliffs notes version of the Ricky/Memorial thing everyone is referencing? Or a link to a cliffs notes post? Thanks!

 

[JC17393]

I concur with most of what you wrote, but I'm not persuaded that this part is correct. I would be interested in hearing why you believe this to be the case.

As I read 801 Application of the Rules, I don't see anything that forecloses the opportunity for player from questioning the legality of a throw after the throw has been made. Granted, it would be in keeping with The Spirit of the Game and the dictates of courtesy (both common and Rule mandated (812.B.2)) to broach the issue of a potential violation beforehand—assuming one was aware that there was a potential violation at hand. Nevertheless, I see nothing in the Rules that debars questioning or challenging the legality of a throw after the fact.

I was more talking about the sour grapes talk of Perkins being "robbed" of a victory because Jerm "got away" with something he could/should have been penalized for than a hard and fast rules issue.

From what I've gathered, if Perkins questioned what Jerm was doing, he did it well after the fact. As in, too late to make a stance violation call *promptly* as the rule calls for and obviously too late to prevent Jerm from making the throw from the incorrect lie in the first place.

To me, passively saying something along the lines of "I'm not sure that was right" after it all happens rather than before or while it's happening is too little, too late. He's free to question and challenge what happened all he wants, but there does reach a point where all opportunities to do something about it have passed and it's just idle talk.

 

[JC17393]

For a solution i think that Video and photo evidence should be permited when available.and rule changes should be much more...translucent, communicated? As in im sure this is not the first time this has been encountered and could have been addressed in your certification. he was Robbed by the impotence of the ruling body to educate certified officials, Including himself.I did mean impetus, but the play on words kind of works. This is Not the first L.O.P incident. This was not the amateurs.this and the no call from john e, and ricky,was bush league.

I got a good chuckle out jerms description of nates putt as a "captain stabbin putt":clap:

What rule changes? The rule in this particular instance hasn't changed in 30 years. What should the PDGA be making more clear about a rule that has been in place for so long that it really shouldn't be an unknown to veteran players? Do we need remedial rules classes for everyone at the start of every tournament?

I guess I'm not seeing where this falls on the PDGA's shoulders. Could the rules exam be tougher? Sure. But it still comes down to the players being responsible for themselves. Perkins wasn't robbed by something the PDGA failed to do. He was robbed by what HE failed to do. If he'd known the rules better or if he'd spoken up when the rule in question was brought up and misused, and if he'd pulled out a rule book and looked it up, maybe there's a different outcome. Maybe he wins, maybe he doesn't, but at least there's no question that Koling's actions were 100% by the book.

 

[robdeforge]

Can somebody give me the cliffs notes version of the Ricky/Memorial thing everyone is referencing? Or a link to a cliffs notes post? Thanks!

The Ricky incident:
He foot faulted by a noticeable margin at the memorial. Nikko called it, but John E and KJ were either too far away to second it or didn't see it, and Ricky did not second the call on himself.

Here's a screenshot:
https://i.redd.it/p9hi48mhl8j01.png

 

[BuiltTooLong]

I think the fact that players have the same sponsors and also travel together has a big impact on them enforcing the rules. Do you really want to call a penalty on someone you are going to be crammed in a car/hotel room for the next 3 days with?

As the payouts increase, players may be able to be a bit more independent, and this will hopefully fuel more rivalries. I feel like if that was Ricky or a DD member instead of Jerm, McBeth and others may not have been as lenient/lax on the ruling.

 

[biscoe]

What rule changes? The rule in this particular instance hasn't changed in 30 years. What should the PDGA be making more clear about a rule that has been in place for so long that it really shouldn't be an unknown to veteran players? Do we need remedial rules classes for everyone at the start of every tournament?

I guess I'm not seeing where this falls on the PDGA's shoulders. Could the rules exam be tougher? Sure. But it still comes down to the players being responsible for themselves. Perkins wasn't robbed by something the PDGA failed to do. He was robbed by what HE failed to do. If he'd known the rules better or if he'd spoken up when the rule in question was brought up and misused, and if he'd pulled out a rule book and looked it up, maybe there's a different outcome. Maybe he wins, maybe he doesn't, but at least there's no question that Koling's actions were 100% by the book.

I would advocate for a more extensive rules exam in order to hold a tour card.

 

[Steve West]

I want to know why it's not called a manda.

Because it's male.

 

[robdeforge]

This is from jerms FB page, after somebody (a user in here?) brought it to his attention.

Jerm can't seem to acknowledge that he made a mistake without a) blaming the rules/somebody else for misinforming him and b) asserting it doesn't even matter cause his stance hit both lies.

If this is how one of the top pros of our sport reacts to being informed of a rules mistake, it's no surprise that being the "rules guy" is not fun.

 

[Major Tomahawk]

I want to know why it's not called a manda.

I like mandy!

 

[PoorPutter]

This is from jerms FB page, after somebody (a user in here?) brought it to his attention.

Jerm can't seem to acknowledge that he made a mistake without a) blaming the rules/somebody else for misinforming him and b) asserting it doesn't even matter cause his stance hit both lies.

If this is how one of the top pros of our sport reacts to being informed of a rules mistake, it's no surprise that being the "rules guy" is not fun.

Paul's response:
"Jerm your foot was not in the box! (facepalm emoji) it doesn't matter anyways now but you foot was no where near that box (laughcry emoji x 3) I thought the rule was the played the correct way but now we both know...mandos are dumb (thumbup emoji)"

Jerm posts a screengrab from the video and says:
"No? From this angle it appears to be good. At least close enough to argue! It's by no means egregious."

Paul's response:
"[Jerm] it's the width of the disc, we went over this earlier in the round with someone else. You hit the exact spot you were going for itjust wasn't legal but none of us knew that exact rule. Now we do (thumbup emoji)"

Jerm won't give up:
"I'm not disagreeing with you, [Paul]. I'm saying that, considering the angle to the basket, it appears as if my heel could be argued to be within the imaginary box. Had there not been any mandatory discussion prior to the throw it would have been a somewhat controversial foot fault call, had it been made. That's why I'm not a huge fan of the new 20cm X 30cm box rule. It leaves a level of subjectivity up to the group and will inevitably result in inconsistencies across the field."

Is he afraid someone is going to retroactively take his win away?

 

[Keller]

I don't think either Ricky (from the Memorials) Or Jerm intentionally set out to cheat.
Can we stop amassing with torches and pitchforks here?

These guys are pros, they should know all the rules, but like all of us, sometimes we don't always pay that close attention.

The positive outcome of these instances is (I think) there will be a greater focus on the rules in the future. Video is no longer going to allow random opinions and here say debates to carry much weight. These guys know they're being watched now and I bet we will see more rule books being pulled in tourneys.

And for what it's worth, I have no horse in this race, I don't like Ricky and Jerm annoys me, but I appreciate their skills.

 

[robdeforge]

Can we stop amassing with torches and pitchforks here?

These guys are pros, they should know all the rules, but like all of us, sometimes we don't always pay that close attention.

No torches or pitchforks here. I just think it's lame that big jerm can't seem to own up to not understanding the rules. "I got it wrong BUT..." is a lot less genuine than "I got it wrong."

 

[BuiltTooLong]

I don't think either Ricky (from the Memorials) Or Jerm intentionally set out to cheat.
Can we stop amassing with torches and pitchforks here?

These guys are pros, they should know all the rules, but like all of us, sometimes we don't always pay that close attention.

The positive outcome of these instances is (I think) there will be a greater focus on the rules in the future. Video is no longer going to allow random opinions and here say debates to carry much weight. These guys know they're being watched now and I bet we will see more rule books being pulled in tourneys.

And for what it's worth, I have no horse in this race, I don't like Ricky and Jerm annoys me, but I appreciate their skills.

I am not going to accuse either one of them of cheating, BUT the fact neither one will even admit that they foot-faulted, even after there is clear evidence is disheartening.