Bending Shrubs

[Steve West]

There's a great definition of "permanent obstacle" already, and that is everything is a permanent obstacle unless it meets the limited criteria of a casual obstacle

More precisely, it doesn't matter whether it is permanent or not. "A player is not allowed to move ANY obstacle on the course, with the following exceptions:..."

Emphasis added.

 

[BogeyNoMore]

Is there a player safety exemption for this?

Last year in our unsanctioned doubles league, my team had one of our drives land behind a hawthorn (I believe) branch. It was hanging from overhead and reached down to about two feet from the ground. Any shot was going to cause the branch to swing away, then swing back and slap us in the face with thorns. My partner claimed some kind of safety thing, then held the branch back while I shot. The guys on our card didn't care. Would that have been legal if it were a sanctioned tournament?

Rules don't guarantee what you have to work around/through/under/past is safe.
If you don't like what's gonna happen when you follow through, you can opt for option D below.

803.02 Relief from Obstacles
Last updated: Sunday, December 31, 2017 - 18:16

A. A player may obtain relief from the following obstacles that are on or behind the lie: motor vehicles, harmful insects or animals, people, or any item or area as designated by the Director. To obtain relief, the player may mark a new lie that is on the line of play, farther from the target, at the nearest point that provides relief.

B. If a large solid obstacle prevents the player from taking a legal stance behind the marker disc, or from marking a disc above or below the playing surface, the player may mark a new lie immediately behind that obstacle on the line of play.

C. A player who takes relief other than as allowed above receives one penalty throw.

D. A player may elect at any time to take optional relief by declaring their intention to the group. The lie may then be relocated by marking a new lie which is farther from the target, and is on the line of play. One penalty throw is added to the player's score.

E. No penalty throw is added if optional relief is being taken following a penalty taken for a disc out-of-bounds or above two meters.

I've always found it interesting that the rules specifically mention harmful animals/insects, yet ignores harmful plants.

 

[JC17393]

I've always found it interesting that the rules specifically mention harmful animals/insects, yet ignores harmful plants.

Insects/animals are much more readily identifiable than plants, so there's a lot less chance of abuse of the rule citing a harmful object. If I point out a swarm of bees or a snake, anyone can see it and confirm it. Not everyone knows what poison ivy or poison oak looks like by sight. I could point it out and move my lie to a more advantageous place whether there's ivy or not if no one knows what it looks like. Or maybe worse, I can point it out to another player and cause them to move their lie to perhaps a less advantageous spot or otherwise put them off their game.

Not everyone is affected by plants either. For example, if I'm stung by bees, I'm gonna feel that immediately and for a while (and I'm not allergic) but I could roll around in poison ivy all day and never break out. Even if I were affected by poison ivy, its effects aren't immediate and can be remedied before they even take effect. I think that difference is a big reason why one is addressed in the rules and one is not.

 

[Putt for D'oh]

Insects/animals are much more readily identifiable than plants, so there's a lot less chance of abuse of the rule citing a harmful object.

Not everyone is affected by plants either.

I don't like this line of thinking at all. There are people who would be way more affected by poison oak than a bee sting. Poison oak is everywhere on all of the courses within a couple hundred miles of me, and people know what it is. Blackberry vines and other bushes with big obvious thorns are also pretty identifiable. They may not poison or kill but they certainly let you know if you are running into them. Stinging nettles are very painful right away and that pain lasts and lasts. Picking up your disc or grazing one with a swing will be painful on your throwing hand/arm and I would rather have a bee sting in the back than stinging nettles on the fingers of my throwing hand. Also yes snakes are readily identifiable but the arguments about harmful snake or not can be down right comical and I would say way less reliable.

I guess the best way to take relief from hazardous plants, is to claim you are allergic to bees and there bees on the plant.

 

[dysmike]

Rules don't guarantee what you have to work around/through/under/past is safe.
If you don't like what's gonna happen when you follow through, you can opt for option D below.



I've always found it interesting that the rules specifically mention harmful animals/insects, yet ignores harmful plants.

One word. Cholla.. Everyone is affected by cholla.


I laugh at poison oak, I'm not allergic. Poison ivy too.

 

[brutalbrutus]

Is it just me, or does anyone else get reminded of really bad porn movies when they see this thread title?...

 

[zontar]

Is it just me, or does anyone else get reminded of really bad porn movies when they see this thread title?...

I was thinking of really good ones....

 

[BogeyNoMore]

For once, I won't go there.

 

[roblee]

Our standing "Local" rule and "Official" rule for all tournaments is to define all cactus, yucca, and all plants with thorns as casual obstacles. Never had an issue with interpretation.

 

[JC17393]

Our standing "Local" rule and "Official" rule for all tournaments is to define all cactus, yucca, and all plants with thorns as casual obstacles. Never had an issue with interpretation.

And *this* is the solution for issues with harmful plants. If they are present in enough abundance to be a factor, the TD has the authority to make them casual obstacles for an event.

I think having a blanket rule in the book declaring harmful plants as casual obstacles is too open to abuse. Not just in misidentifying non-harmful plants as harmful, but stretching the harm of "thorns" to include plants that don't really have thorns just to avoid having to stand in/under a bush or a tree with low branches that might impede one's shot (with no real danger to the player).

 

[GoobyPls]

Don't know that it would have helped in my case, since you can't move casual obstacles in front of the lie.

 

[F. Howl]

I played a tourney where my disc stuck into a steep cliff side, impossible to stand on unless also holding onto a branch of a manzanita behind my lie (which, as I understand it is permitted, though it did bend just a little). The disc stuck in maybe 5 feet high from ground and the cliff continued on just as steep, climbing directly away from the basket, which was about 20 feet from the base of the cliff. Bringing the disc down, would be advancing it toward the pin, but it would be impossible to scale and find a safe stance further up.

I was pretty much dangling like a monkey to get a foot behind my disc, and made the putt. Was this a legal stance, and if so, if one was less deft and couldn't pull this off, how would they proceed? (The disc was pin deep, and flew directly over the basket.)

 

[krupicka]

We have a similar feature at one of the courses where I run an event. The course rule is you get .5 m relief away from the cliff wall.

 

[kenjiac]

I have seen a cool trick to deal with cliff/ledge of this sort. Have the TD put an ob line with no ob area at the top or bottom of the ledge. It allows you 1 meter relief from the line but no possible way to actually be ob as only the line is ob. Some part of the disc will always be in bounds.

 

[BobFromAccounting]

Thanks everyone.

https://www.pdga.com/rules/official-rules-disc-golf/80301


It took me one minute to find this in the rules.

Well done, my friend.

 

[sidewinder22]

I think having a blanket rule in the book declaring harmful plants as casual obstacles is too open to abuse. Not just in misidentifying non-harmful plants as harmful, but stretching the harm of "thorns" to include plants that don't really have thorns just to avoid having to stand in/under a bush or a tree with low branches that might impede one's shot (with no real danger to the player).

If you must distinguish between a rat snake and black mamba, as "harmful" then what is the difference here?

 

[BogeyNoMore]

If you must distinguish between a rat snake and black mamba, as "harmful" then what is the difference here?

That's racial profiling. Green mambas can kill too, but mention black mamba and people immediately assume the worst.