#11  
Old 02-18-2019, 09:44 AM
brutalbrutus's Avatar
brutalbrutus brutalbrutus is online now
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: the nati
Years Playing: 8.6
Courses Played: 52
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 8,625
Niced 3,091 Times in 1,655 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JC17393 View Post
This isn't a rule that ever had a warning. It wasn't even a rule until last January when the current rule book took effect.

I agree that if it is obvious the disc made contact, then an interference penalty is warranted. My point all along has been that the contact has to be obvious. If it barely brushed the towel on its way by, such that it would take slow mo replay and a super zoom to confirm contact, then it can't justifiably be considered interference.

As to the merits of the rule itself, I think a great deal of players' carelessness with their equipment is rooted in this interference rule being so new. For years, players didn't pay attention to where they left their equipment because the prospect of interference or more specifically, a penalty, was a non-factor. Even if interference was obviously a likely possibility, because of the grey area of "intention" being required, penalties were near impossible to impose.

By and large, I think the current rule is better than the nebulous nature of the old one. I don't think it's a bad thing for players to be penalized if a disc like the one in the video rolls away and strikes them or their equipment. Perhaps habits like the one displayed in the video of leaving equipment laying around need to be broken to comply with the rule rather than the rules being relaxed to accommodate the players. There's no real need to just drop the towel and disc there...they could have been placed with the player's bag, which is nowhere in sight and must not be anywhere close enough to interfere. Or, they could have been set down in a place where the player could pick them up as quickly as he did the mini.
You're right, I remembered that wrong. The old rule was based on whether the player intentionally placed the equipment in the way, or something like that, right?
Sponsored Links
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 02-18-2019, 09:48 AM
Steve West Steve West is offline
Par Delusionary
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Years Playing: 44.8
Courses Played: 326
Posts: 4,559
Niced 1,269 Times in 649 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JC17393 View Post
I think the marker, being where it is due to the rules of the game rather than an explicit choice by the player, doesn't have to be moved to prevent it from being struck by a moving disc. The marker in that instant is the same as any other player's disc on the playing surface, and since there would be no penalties assessed if the thrown disc struck another player's disc, striking the marker shouldn't incur a penalty for the thrower.
I don't see any wording that would exempt the marker. Also - as demonstrated in the video - it is possible to move it out of the way, and doing so does not violate any other rule.

I reject your CK-like extension of the treatment of other players' thrown discs to your own marker. Besides, the rules don't actually have special treatment for thrown discs in the equipment interference rules. Perhaps they should.

This new own-equipment rule was spawned from the expectation of a lot of pros. There was a phantom rule - which was widely, if not universally, enforced at the highest levels. That non-rule gave two penalty throws for allowing your thrown disc to hit your own equipment. The current rule was put in the rule book to kill the phantom rule. It specifically refers to a player's own equipment so that players who read the rule book know they have found the real rule, and don't assume the two-throw penalty rule is somewhere else in the book.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 02-18-2019, 09:57 AM
JC17393 JC17393 is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Years Playing: 21.2
Courses Played: 144
Throwing Style: LHBH
Posts: 7,046
Niced 2,537 Times in 1,064 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by brutalbrutus View Post
You're right, I remembered that wrong. The old rule was based on whether the player intentionally placed the equipment in the way, or something like that, right?
The old rule only penalized intentional interference. And in addition to the debate over what was intentional vs not (particularly regarding placing equipment), there was also the debate about whether the rule being about interfering with "another player's disc" meant that it wasn't applicable to interfering with one's own disc.

Now it still requires intent to be penalized for interfering with another player's disc, but any interference with your own comes with a penalty...intent only serving to determine the severity of the penalty.

Niced: (2)
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 02-18-2019, 11:49 AM
_MTL_ _MTL_ is offline
Flippy Flopper
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Raleigh, NC
Years Playing: 25.8
Courses Played: 128
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 2,870
Niced 737 Times in 336 Posts
Default

My interpretation is that a mini is equipment. I would argue another disc laying on the ground would be equipment too
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 02-18-2019, 11:51 AM
_MTL_ _MTL_ is offline
Flippy Flopper
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Raleigh, NC
Years Playing: 25.8
Courses Played: 128
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 2,870
Niced 737 Times in 336 Posts
Default

I'll add this. The rule is vague. And vagueness sometimes is rightfully criticized. But in this situation, I think it's intentionally vague. Leaving it as just "equipment" instead of a long list of items takes out the chances of missing something odd or unforeseen.

Niced: (1)
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 02-18-2019, 12:02 PM
brutalbrutus's Avatar
brutalbrutus brutalbrutus is online now
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: the nati
Years Playing: 8.6
Courses Played: 52
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 8,625
Niced 3,091 Times in 1,655 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by _MTL_ View Post
My interpretation is that a mini is equipment. I would argue another disc laying on the ground would be equipment too
Discs or markers establishing the lie shouldn't apply to the penalty though. Now if a player missed a putt and left the marker/disc there, then went to hole out and this happened on the next throw, I would agree.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 02-18-2019, 12:06 PM
JC17393 JC17393 is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Years Playing: 21.2
Courses Played: 144
Throwing Style: LHBH
Posts: 7,046
Niced 2,537 Times in 1,064 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by _MTL_ View Post
My interpretation is that a mini is equipment. I would argue another disc laying on the ground would be equipment too
So, what of other players' discs laying in the fairway between the thrower and the target? Are those "equipment" that those players should be taking care to not be in a place where interference might occur? If I make a throw and my disc strikes my cardmate's disc, do I have a case for an interference call against him?

Where I draw the line in terms of what is or isn't equipment for the parameters of the interference rule is whether or not the object is required to be there. Other players don't have to move/remove thrown discs from the playing surface to prevent interference as they would their bags or their carts or themselves. The discs are live and the rules require that they be left in place. Same applies to the thrower's marker disc. Rule dictates that it be exactly where it's sitting when the throw is made. The same can't be said of a towel, or an extra disc, or one's bag.

Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 02-18-2019, 12:39 PM
Steve West Steve West is offline
Par Delusionary
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Years Playing: 44.8
Courses Played: 326
Posts: 4,559
Niced 1,269 Times in 649 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by brutalbrutus View Post
Discs or markers establishing the lie shouldn't apply to the penalty though. Now if a player missed a putt and left the marker/disc there, then went to hole out and this happened on the next throw, I would agree.
It seems the instinctive thing to do was to snatch the marker out of the way. Why write a rule that goes against that? Is it worth the extra words and complication to make an exception to allow something that a lot of players think should not be allowed?

Quote:
Originally Posted by JC17393 View Post
So, what of other players' discs laying in the fairway between the thrower and the target? Are those "equipment" that those players should be taking care to not be in a place where interference might occur? If I make a throw and my disc strikes my cardmate's disc, do I have a case for an interference call against him?
Good question. It would seem adding “except discs in play” would be warranted.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JC17393 View Post
Where I draw the line in terms of what is or isn't equipment for the parameters of the interference rule is whether or not the object is required to be there. Other players don't have to move/remove thrown discs from the playing surface to prevent interference as they would their bags or their carts or themselves. The discs are live and the rules require that they be left in place. Same applies to the thrower's marker disc. Rule dictates that it be exactly where it's sitting when the throw is made. The same can't be said of a towel, or an extra disc, or one's bag.
The throwers marker is different than thrown discs. While the marker needs to be in place when the throw is made, as soon as the disc is released there is no requirement to leave it there. You don’t get penalized for picking up your marker while the disc is still in flight.

So for now, getting your own marker out of the way is the way to go.

Now, to speculate about a better rule. If we make the exception for discs in play, it would make sense to also exempt a non-throwing player's marker from interfering with another player's throw. If we did that, it might make sense to also exempt the player's own marker.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 02-18-2019, 01:11 PM
IHearChains IHearChains is offline
Eagle Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Years Playing: 14.8
Courses Played: 161
Posts: 585
Niced 99 Times in 51 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve West View Post
It seems the instinctive thing to do was to snatch the marker out of the way. Why write a rule that goes against that?
....
The throwers marker is different than thrown discs. While the marker needs to be in place when the throw is made, as soon as the disc is released there is no requirement to leave it there.
Two points:

It is not reasonable to expect a player to quickly remove the mini AND then run to the bag/cart/towel/etc, wherever that happens to be, and move that too, all in the space of a couple of seconds.

The marker may be used to establish the lie in case of an optional rethrow. So it does have a purpose for being there, even after the throw.

For these reasons I would argue that the marker disc is different from other equipment and should be treated like any other disc or marker that is in play. No penalty.

Reply With Quote
 

  #20  
Old 02-18-2019, 01:20 PM
_MTL_ _MTL_ is offline
Flippy Flopper
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Raleigh, NC
Years Playing: 25.8
Courses Played: 128
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 2,870
Niced 737 Times in 336 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JC17393 View Post
So, what of other players' discs laying in the fairway between the thrower and the target? Are those "equipment" that those players should be taking care to not be in a place where interference might occur? If I make a throw and my disc strikes my cardmate's disc, do I have a case for an interference call against him?
I'm not sure why this matters.

810F clarifies that "If a player or their equipment interferes with their own throw, the player is assessed one penalty throw."

So if YOUR equipment, like your disc in the fairway, hits my shot, this rule doesn't apply.

And there's no way this would ever be intentional.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Interference with a Throw Dr_Johnson Rules Questions & Discussion 16 06-04-2018 05:27 PM
Bag Interference lasasj Rules Questions & Discussion 56 02-18-2017 11:36 PM
St. Jude OB Interference Question discgolfer25 Rules Questions & Discussion 5 05-30-2016 03:51 AM
Interference or not? sqatch Rules Questions & Discussion 88 04-03-2014 09:49 AM
interference question joesouthfla General Disc Golf Chat 22 02-25-2011 09:26 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:55 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.