30 second clock

[sneakytiki]

I know ... I'm a broken record ... but I'm going to do some math this time too.

I'd like to see the clock shortened to 20 seconds, but then give each player 5- 2 minute clocks to be used during the round. Assuming a 54 shot round, that adds 10 seconds to the allowed prep time (for the entire round; (5(120-20))-(49(30-20))=10). It's plenty easy to do: just put 5 "T"s beside each players' name on the card, and cross one off when they use one.

Again, sorry for being a broken record, it just seems to me this clears up all the issues we're talking about. I'd also be more likely to clock someone when I know all they had to do is ask for their extension.

I think you would run into trouble with the 20 second clock being short in that case. That same DB will time you, say you are over 20 seconds and make you burn one of your 2 minute clocks on a shot you only took 21 seconds to throw.

 

[araytx]

I think you know I wasn't asking about the definitions of regular or repeated.

I know it falls on the judgment of the players currently. It is for that reason that someone can harass you about it even if you aren't a major offender.

What DG_Player was saying was that "the rule should reflect that you must be disrupting the pace of play" before you can violate the 30-second rule. So, in that case the rules would have to be changed to define how many times one needs to go over 30 seconds before they can even be "put on the clock" and how that regularity would be measured (especially since you cant put them on the clock until they have gone over 30 seconds some amount of times...). It would suggest that it should not fall on the judgment of the players, and that it should be in the rules.

Sneaky:

That (the part in red) is not what I said nor is it what the rules say. I said that is what I do -- not to be confused with what is allowable or what you can/can't do within the rules. In practice I don't call any player for a 30-second clock vio until I have personally saw what I thought might be a really long time (when it's not a difficult lie), then the next time within a hole or two or three the same thing occurs and I've timed it, then I warn them unofficially that they are getting close to being called for a 30-second violation, then I time the player again within the next few holes (still not talking about difficult lies) and they do go over 30 seconds, then I call a vio. That's because in my judgment, they have repeatedly and/or regularly disrupted the pace of play by utilizing more than the allotted time unnecessarily. I DO NOT THINK the rule can be written any better than that, and no, I DO NOT THINK it is a rule that can be legalized to a black-or-white either-or kind of rule. You have to use common sense as I've said to others before. In my judgment (right or wrong) the "common sense" is the way I handle it like I described which I believe to be both practical and within the spirit of the rules. Legally, they've probably likely violated the rule 3 or 4 times before I made the official call of the violation and recorded it. But no, I don't see a "rules re-write" to legislate common sense, practicality, or fair officiating. There are simply some rules, pretty much in every sport, that cannot be written that way and this is one of them. Hence I vote for keeping it the same.

By the way, in 5 years of playing tournaments I've unofficially warned players 3 times, and they've never gotten a violation called. To me it's obvious the preventative officiating works. I've been warned unofficially at least twice I can remember, and I never got called for a violation after either time (or a second warnign in a later round) b/c after that I was timing myself.

 

[sneakytiki]

Sneaky:

That (the part in red) is not what I said nor is it what the rules say. I said that is what I do -- not to be confused with what is allowable or what you can/can't do within the rules. In practice I don't call any player for a 30-second clock vio until I have personally saw what I thought might be a really long time (when it's not a difficult lie), then the next time within a hole or two or three the same thing occurs and I've timed it, then I warn them unofficially that they are getting close to being called for a 30-second violation, then I time the player again within the next few holes (still not talking about difficult lies) and they do go over 30 seconds, then I call a vio. That's because in my judgment, they have repeatedly and/or regularly disrupted the pace of play by utilizing more than the allotted time unnecessarily. I DO NOT THINK the rule can be written any better than that, and no, I DO NOT THINK it is a rule that can be legalized to a black-or-white either-or kind of rule. You have to use common sense as I've said to others before. In my judgment (right or wrong) the "common sense" is the way I handle it like I described which I believe to be both practical and within the spirit of the rules. Legally, they've probably likely violated the rule 3 or 4 times before I made the official call of the violation and recorded it. But no, I don't see a "rules re-write" to legislate common sense, practicality, or fair officiating. There are simply some rules, pretty much in every sport, that cannot be written that way and this is one of them. Hence I vote for keeping it the same.

By the way, in 5 years of playing tournaments I've unofficially warned players 3 times, and they've never gotten a violation called. To me it's obvious the preventative officiating works. I've been warned unofficially at least twice I can remember, and I never got called for a violation after either time (or a second warnign in a later round) b/c after that I was timing myself.

Yes. We agree on all of this, and have from the start. I was originally just getting at the impossibility of augmenting the rules to allow what DG_Player was originally proposing. That part in red was not saying that it is what the rules say, or what you said. I was just exploring the oxymoronic nature of the hypothetical rule change.

 

[Dave242]

Speed of play is essentially a courtesy thing. It is impossible to put clean boundary lines between acceptable and non-acceptable. By looking at the rules below it seems to me that Excessive Time would fit best in this section.

They should mention the rule in the throwing procedures section (804), but reference the Courtesy section for enforcement/punishment. Notice how the word "Should" and "May" is used throughout this section rather than the word "Shall" and "Will" everywhere else?

801.04 Courtesy
A. Players should not throw until they are certain that the thrown disc will not distract another player or potentially injure anyone present.

B. Players should watch the other members of their group throw in order to aid in locating errant throws and to ensure compliance with the rules.

C. Players should take care not to produce any auditory or visual distractions while other players are throwing. Distracting actions include: shouting, cursing, freestyling, striking course equipment, throwing out of turn, throwing or kicking golf bags, throwing minis, and advancing on the fairway beyond the away player. Shouting at an appropriate time to warn someone in danger of being struck by a disc is not a courtesy violation.

D. Refusal to perform an action expected by the rules, such as assisting in the search for a lost disc, moving discs or equipment, or keeping score properly, is a courtesy violation.

E. Littering is a courtesy violation.

F. Courtesy dictates that players who smoke should not allow their smoke to disturb other players. Disposing of a cigarette butt by dropping it on the ground is littering.

G. A player violating a courtesy rule may be warned by any affected player, even if from another group, or by an official. The player shall be assessed one penalty throw for each subsequent courtesy violation of any type in the same round. Repeated violations of courtesy rules may result in disqualification in accordance with Section 3.3 of the Competition Manual.

 

[sneakytiki]

Speed of play is essentially a courtesy thing. It is impossible to put clean boundary lines between acceptable and non-acceptable. By looking at the rules below it seems to me that Excessive Time would fit best in this section.

They should mention the rule in the throwing procedures section (804), but reference the Courtesy section for enforcement/punishment. Notice how the word "should" is used throughout this section rather than the word "Shall" or "will" everywhere else?

801.04 Courtesy
A. Players should not throw until they are certain that the thrown disc will not distract another player or potentially injure anyone present.

B. Players should watch the other members of their group throw in order to aid in locating errant throws and to ensure compliance with the rules.

C. Players should take care not to produce any auditory or visual distractions while other players are throwing. Distracting actions include: shouting, cursing, freestyling, striking course equipment, throwing out of turn, throwing or kicking golf bags, throwing minis, and advancing on the fairway beyond the away player. Shouting at an appropriate time to warn someone in danger of being struck by a disc is not a courtesy violation.

D. Refusal to perform an action expected by the rules, such as assisting in the search for a lost disc, moving discs or equipment, or keeping score properly, is a courtesy violation.

E. Littering is a courtesy violation.

F. Courtesy dictates that players who smoke should not allow their smoke to disturb other players. Disposing of a cigarette butt by dropping it on the ground is littering.

G. A player violating a courtesy rule may be warned by any affected player, even if from another group, or by an official. The player shall be assessed one penalty throw for each subsequent courtesy violation of any type in the same round. Repeated violations of courtesy rules may result in disqualification in accordance with Section 3.3 of the Competition Manual.

I'd say its not only a courtesy issue. Limiting the time one has to choose their shot and throw, it is not just a limit on what you can make the others around you endure. It is also a limit that you must follow and be ready for mentally in your own game, as far as your ability to pick the disc you want and make your throw in a certain amount of time. I'd say there should be a time window for shot selection and execution even if somehow (hypothetically of course) a tournament was being held where everyone played solo and couldn't possibly hold each other up.

 

[DG_player]

Yes. We agree on all of this, and have from the start. I was originally just getting at the impossibility of augmenting the rules to allow what DG_Player was originally proposing. That part in red was not saying that it is what the rules say, or what you said. I was just exploring the oxymoronic nature of the hypothetical rule change.

I don't understand why everyone thinks it's impossible to write a rule that does what I proposed.

The other golf already wrote that exact rule long before disc golf even existed. And it works fine and is DB proof. Just carbon copy it.

 

[JC17393]

I don't understand why everyone thinks it's impossible to write a rule that does what I proposed.

The other golf already wrote that exact rule long before disc golf even existed. And it works fine and is DB proof. Just carbon copy it.

Ball golf's rule relies on non-playing officials to make the call and watch the clock and penalize players. We don't have those. Until we get to a point where we do have those available at every tournament, maybe a carbon copy of the ball golf rule would be in order. Until then, we have to have rules for which the players themselves are the arbiters.