In and out of OB, where to throw from

[timothy42b]

I know that I am OB as soon as i cross the vertical plane that marks the edge.

If I exit the vertical plane while still in the air, am I back in bounds?

This weekend I threw across an OB parking lot, curved right clearly outside it in the air, then settled left back into it. We weren't sure if i'd ever been back in bounds and could throw from there, or whether I had to throw from the original entry.

Do I have to touch inbounds to be in bounds? or does the vertical plane apply in both directions, in and out?

Thanks

 

[Armus Patheticus]

does the vertical plane apply in both directions, in and out?

Yes.

 

[cydisc]

If I'm reading your question right, you're asking whether you have to be *touching* the playing surface to be in bounds.

No. As long as your disc is breaking the vertical plane, you are in bounds.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[mojorooks]

I know that I am OB as soon as i cross the vertical plane that marks the edge.

If I exit the vertical plane while still in the air, am I back in bounds?

This weekend I threw across an OB parking lot, curved right clearly outside it in the air, then settled left back into it. We weren't sure if i'd ever been back in bounds and could throw from there, or whether I had to throw from the original entry.

Do I have to touch inbounds to be in bounds? or does the vertical plane apply in both directions, in and out?

Thanks

To reword the original question, the disc flies OB (a), then goes inbounds again before landing back in OB (b). Does the disc need to thrown from point a or b?

Is this what you are asking? I'm not certain on the actual ruling, just trying to clarify.

 

[uncle pennybags]

To reword the original question, the disc flies OB (a), then goes inbounds again before landing back in OB (b). Does the disc need to thrown from point a or b?

Is this what you are asking? I'm not certain on the actual ruling, just trying to clarify.

This would be thrown from the last point inbounds, thus the second time it crosses OB is the new mark.

 

[timothy42b]

This would be thrown from the last point inbounds, thus the second time it crosses OB is the new mark.

Yes, that's exactly what I'm asking.

The disc flies into the OB at point A, exits OB while still in the air at point B, re-enters OB at point C.

I wanted to throw from point C, but some in our group believed the disc had been continuously OB and I should throw from point A. None of us were really sure what the rule was.

 

[_MTL_]

Yes, that's exactly what I'm asking.

The disc flies into the OB at point A, exits OB while still in the air at point B, re-enters OB at point C.

I wanted to throw from point C, but some in our group believed the disc had been continuously OB and I should throw from point A. None of us were really sure what the rule was.

Group decision. Each person should vote on whether it should point A or C.

If the group cannot reach a majority decision, the ruling that is most favorable to the player is the outcome.

 

[Rastnav]

Group decision. Each person should vote on whether it should point A or C.

If the group cannot reach a majority decision, the ruling that is most favorable to the player is the outcome.

That's not the actual question being asked, though.

If everyone in the group agrees that the disc went over the OB line at point A, over the inbounds playing surface at point B, and then back over the OB line at point C, it's not a group decision bout whether the disc should be marked at point A or point C. It should be marked at point C, according to the rules. Being over the playing surface in the air is still a disc that is inbounds. That's not a group decision.

Side note: In a tournament, if everyone in the group agreed on the points of entry and exit, but misunderstood the rules, and the player who threw believed they should play from point C but the group had decided they needed to play from point A, the player could play out from point A and play out a provisional from point C and the ask the TD for a ruling after the round (and would take their score from the provisional disc.

 

[mojorooks]

That's not the actual question being asked, though.

If everyone in the group agrees that the disc went over the OB line at point A, over the inbounds playing surface at point B, and then back over the OB line at point C, it's not a group decision bout whether the disc should be marked at point A or point C. It should be marked at point C, according to the rules. Being over the playing surface in the air is still a disc that is inbounds. That's not a group decision.

Side note: In a tournament, if everyone in the group agreed on the points of entry and exit, but misunderstood the rules, and the player who threw believed they should play from point C but the group had decided they needed to play from point A, the player could play out from point A and play out a provisional from point C and the ask the TD for a ruling after the round (and would take their score from the provisional disc.

I've never thought to do a provisional until clarification. That's a good way to do it. It might even end up being the same score and therefore a moot point.

 

[Rastnav]

I've never thought to do a provisional until clarification. That's a good way to do it. It might even end up being the same score and therefore a moot point.

Speaking of moot points, in tournament coverage PP once played a provisional from shot from 10 feet away from the basket for a disc that was moved a few inches by an approach shot because the card wasn't sure what the rule was on that.

 

[_MTL_]

That's not the actual question being asked, though.

If everyone in the group agrees that the disc went over the OB line at point A, over the inbounds playing surface at point B, and then back over the OB line at point C, it's not a group decision bout whether the disc should be marked at point A or point C. It should be marked at point C, according to the rules. Being over the playing surface in the air is still a disc that is inbounds. That's not a group decision.

For clarity, that is a group decision. The group is unanimously deciding that it last crossed at point C.

Side note: In a tournament, if everyone in the group agreed on the points of entry and exit, but misunderstood the rules, and the player who threw believed they should play from point C but the group had decided they needed to play from point A, the player could play out from point A and play out a provisional from point C and the ask the TD for a ruling after the round (and would take their score from the provisional disc.)

This is correct.

However, it's very important to clarify how a provisional should and should not be used in this situation.

Wrong way (not a provisional)

The group is unable to come to a consensus on the last place in bounds so the player played both lies (the group has to make a call and when it's a tie amongst the group, better ruling is awarded).

correct use of a provisional

The group comes to the decision that the disc was in bounds at point C, but unsure if they should play from the last place it bounds or the first place it crossed OB (point A). They play from both lies and then ask the TD. The TD would then confirm point C and the player would receive the score from point C.

 

[mojorooks]

Speaking of moot points, in tournament coverage PP once played a provisional from shot from 10 feet away from the basket for a disc that was moved a few inches by an approach shot because the card wasn't sure what the rule was on that.

THAT is pretty moot! Personally I would have a hard asking for a provisional on something like that.



I'm REALLY fighting making a comment about PP not wanting to take a couple extra inches...

 

[Rastnav]

THAT is pretty moot! Personally I would have a hard asking for a provisional on something like that.

Oh, it wasn't about "asking" for a provisional ruling, nor any question of wanting advantage. PP was just trying to make sure she didn't get docked for playing from the wrong lie. They could either spend a lot of time making sure they had the rule exactly correct, or just hole out twice and clarify it at the end.

And, for all I know PP did know the rule but there wasn't consensus on the card about the appropriate mark, so, again, saving time and effort by just holing out twice.

 

[timothy42b]

Thanks all, I appreciate the input.

 

[BillFleming]

A good example of this (OB, inbounds, OB) happened during round 1 at Worlds. Check out the Jomez video on YouTube. I don't remember which hole it happened on...so you'll have to watch for it. Golf greens are OB, a player threw the disc went over the near edge of the golf green (OB if it had landed), over the far edge of the golf green (inbounds) and then rolled back onto the golf green (OB). In this case, the spot SHOULD have been the far edge of the golf green (where it passed over inbounds and then rolled back OB)....but because there wasn't a spotter and none of the players saw it, it had to be taken on the side where it initially crossed over the green. ((Yes, the camera person saw what happened, but this is a tournament and spectators cannot make calls)).

 

[chevis]

A good example of this (OB, inbounds, OB) happened during round 1 at Worlds. Check out the Jomez video on YouTube. I don't remember which hole it happened on...so you'll have to watch for it. Golf greens are OB, a player threw the disc went over the near edge of the golf green (OB if it had landed), over the far edge of the golf green (inbounds) and then rolled back onto the golf green (OB). In this case, the spot SHOULD have been the far edge of the golf green (where it passed over inbounds and then rolled back OB)....but because there wasn't a spotter and none of the players saw it, it had to be taken on the side where it initially crossed over the green. ((Yes, the camera person saw what happened, but this is a tournament and spectators cannot make calls)).

they should have asked the cameraman/spectators before they made their decision, but i guess being blind they wouldn't think it was possible for it to cross inbounds.

 

[R-Ogre]

I'm REALLY fighting making a comment about PP not wanting to take a couple extra inches...

As far as I can tell uh….not sure Paige is about the inches iykwim

 

[BillFleming]

they should have asked the cameraman/spectators before they made their decision, but i guess being blind they wouldn't think it was possible for it to cross inbounds.

The Rules of disc golf, under 801, use the terms players, Tournament Official, and Director as being able to make calls.

It's been my understanding, playing in tournaments and as a volunteer, that spectators and others cannot make calls. That's why they didn't ask the camera person. It's all due to fairness....the spectator or camera person might not be available to all groups to assist with spotting on that hole. That's why spotters are assigned specific holes to work and don't just work with one group or go where they want - if there is a spotter at one spot, there is supposed to be one there for all the groups.

And a spotter isn't an official, in most cases, so they can only provide advice on the disc location, etc. The players still have to accept that or make their own decision - but the spotter is there for every group.

 

[chevis]

The Rules of disc golf, under 801, use the terms players, Tournament Official, and Director as being able to make calls.

It's been my understanding, playing in tournaments and as a volunteer, that spectators and others cannot make calls. That's why they didn't ask the camera person. It's all due to fairness....the spectator or camera person might not be available to all groups to assist with spotting on that hole. That's why spotters are assigned specific holes to work and don't just work with one group or go where they want - if there is a spotter at one spot, there is supposed to be one there for all the groups.

And a spotter isn't an official, in most cases, so they can only provide advice on the disc location, etc. The players still have to accept that or make their own decision - but the spotter is there for every group.

i'm not saying the spectator/cameraman make the call, just they would be able to ask someone with a better perspective to help make their decision... is that allowed?

it would be more interesting if the opposite situation happened; where the disc didn't cross, but they decided it was possible for the disc to cross & thus marked on the far side (closer to pin).

 

[BillFleming]

i'm not saying the spectator/cameraman make the call, just they would be able to ask someone with a better perspective to help make their decision... is that allowed?

I don't believe it is. Again, it's in the fairness of the sport. That camera person/spectator may not be there for other players. But this is just my understanding of the rules based on playing in tournaments and volunteering (I've been told non-cardmates and spectators can't assist with making calls - about the only thing they can help with is finding discs).

it would be more interesting if the opposite situation happened; where the disc didn't cross, but they decided it was possible for the disc to cross & thus marked on the far side (closer to pin).

I think clear evidence is needed, not guesswork or possibility. Your situation would be feasible if they got to the disc and saw a divot inbounds where the disc could have hit and then rolled back. But without evidence of the disc going inbounds...it has to be played as lies which is out of bounds.