Ken Climo full on foot fault in the finals...

[lyleoross]

One obstacle is getting a definition of stand and deliver that is less prone to misinterpretation or cheating than the current stance rule.

The best idea I've seen is that you have to have a supporting point in contact with the lie for two seconds before releasing the disc.

Now I'm worried, the smart guys are chiming in.

Agreed, but I'd think that the greater issue is how do you move the PDGA? I've seen some really great ideas on this topic and others, come up, but it takes pressure. To make sure we all understand, I've been in business, academia, and government regulated business, the PDGA is one of the more versatile, flexible and mature organizations I've seen, but this would be tough for them to swallow.

BTW - I don't think it would take long for guys like Steve, look at how long he's been playing and recognize what he's seen in terms of this issue, to come up with a great solution.

 

[Dcinmd]

I've advocated the deliver and stay approach where the supporting point remains in contact with the lie until balance is demonstrated. This allows various approaches into the lie, but keeps the foot there for verification. It also disallows step and jump putts. Keeps the rule simple (minimal change to current wording), but disallowing jump putts is like a third rail for many.

So us old guys with bad knees that do not demonstrate proper balance after the release received a foot fault every time?

How long does the balancing act last? Till the disk hit the ground?

 

[BrotherDave]

Stand & Deliver is boring and less fun. Can disc golf tournaments stand to get any more boring and less fun? I would honestly consider not playing tourneys if S&D was the rule. It's just lame, like basketball requiring all shots to be set shots b/c they have a hard time calling travels accurately. S&D will make disc golf even less television friendly by making our athletes look less athletic than your average pro bowler and if it encourages shorter courses that also hurts tv viewing (since long, open courses are easier to film and provide room for galleries).

S&D is a backwards solution.

 

[krupicka]

So us old guys with bad knees that do not demonstrate proper balance after the release received a foot fault every time?

How long does the balancing act last? Till the disk hit the ground?

You'd be amazed at how often you probably already do keep your foot in place after throwing. My proposal would be no different than the current demonstrate balance rules during putting (which do not have have a time limit or qualifications on the current state of the disc, etc.)

 

[Atvizory2000]

Stand & Deliver is boring and less fun. Can disc golf tournaments stand to get any more boring and less fun? I would honestly consider not playing tourneys if S&D was the rule. It's just lame, like basketball requiring all shots to be set shots b/c they have a hard time calling travels accurately. S&D will make disc golf even less television friendly by making our athletes look less athletic than your average pro bowler and if it encourages shorter courses that also hurts tv viewing (since long, open courses are easier to film and provide room for galleries).

S&D is a backwards solution.

:clap: I AGREE

 

[lyleoross]

Stand & Deliver is boring and less fun. Can disc golf tournaments stand to get any more boring and less fun? I would honestly consider not playing tourneys if S&D was the rule. It's just lame, like basketball requiring all shots to be set shots b/c they have a hard time calling travels accurately. S&D will make disc golf even less television friendly by making our athletes look less athletic than your average pro bowler and if it encourages shorter courses that also hurts tv viewing (since long, open courses are easier to film and provide room for galleries).

S&D is a backwards solution.

I'm gonna have to disagree with this, I don't find S & D boring, but then, I like the sport, and given that many of the shots I already see in video are of the S & D type, then either we have to concede that the sport is already boring or that possibly the point has less merit than might be thought.

Lets give a couple of counters. Baseball, it's hard to believe but pitchers pretty much stand and deliver. They can be compared to the much more exciting sport of Cricket, where the bowler takes a hard run and much more exciting windmill wind up before their delivery. Now some might point out that both sports, per say, are boring, and they are entitled to their opinion, but no one would say that one is, and one isn't because of the way the ball is thrown.

Golf, ball variety. I know, I much prefer the variety where the player grabs the club, runs quickly up to the ball, and smacks it with the head as he runs through, as opposed to the guys who take a stance, play with their club, and sometimes with their ball, before smacking the ball, but since the first type never happens, and plenty seem to like the sport, I'd say it's irrelevant. Of course you have Polo, where the guys ride horses to get speed before clocking the ball, and well, no one hardly watches that sport at all. Apparently, movement before hitting or releasing the ball is not completely the point, but maybe discs are different?

Basketball. Yeah I know, that final freethrow at the buzzer, after the guy got smacked in route, in a desperate attempt to stop him from scoring, is boring as hell; you know, with all the fans yelling in his face, and him standing there bouncing the ball through a rather boring routine, wait, what were we talking about.

The basic notion that the difference between exciting and non-exciting in our sport is the open field run up seems misplaced to me. I'm too busy watching exciting putts and drives that are seeing eye through the trees, S & D or not, to worry about such things.

 

[araytx]

Kenny is "the Champ" No way either of those 4 are going to call him on a foot fault, he knows it. And his complaints to a call would have frozen that group from calling him on anything else that round. Dont know if it was intentional, but he knows how to work the game, and it would be pretty genius to ask for a line so that he could foot fault then "argue." YOU said the line was ok (even though he didnt throw from that line.)

Very, very judgmental.

And then very, very much making an assumption (that no one would make a call the rest of the round).

That is exactly the point, I stayed within the law, but there is clear evidence that police do stop non-whites, not in violation. There is a point of issue here that Ken and Patrick didn't really see a foot fault, but rather, decided to take an issue with Mr. Stokely. Because the violation happens on the fly, Mr. Stokely can't defend himself against a potential abuse. He has no real course of action.

The rule, as it stands, allows for abuse. It isn't grassy knoll stuff, it's a rule that doesn't work well because it is taken on the fly, in a round, where players may or may not be paying attention, unless they have a grudge or similar to play out. That makes it an issue, like it or not. The solution is simple enough, the rule can be modified to make the call easier and getting it right easier, again, like it or not.

So, lets just take the point of view, Scott didn't foot fault on the second call, for funsies. Yet here he sits, with a stroke, and a mind set that is anywhere that it needs to be, in the middle of worlds. Personally, I find that unfair. It is clear that many don't, but I do, and will continue to. Yep, first call legitimate, I think Ken and Patrick are turd sandwiches for the call, and do believe in karma. But you're correct, he broke a rule; second call, to all appearances was BS. So in our funsies fantasy world, are you standing by that call? Do you think it was okay? Do you think it was fair?

We aren't talking world shaking, or critically important to sport, or even to this sport in general. As a fifty five year old male, like yourself, wait, what's the purpose of that? Never mind.

Agreed to your last point, but your argument is implying the grassy knoll sinister plot.

(by the way it's self-officiating that is ripe or allows for possible abuse, not this specific rule). You say, let's for funsies begin with Scott didn't fault the second time and you conclude with he is being penalized unfairly or challenge us to stand by the call. And do I think it was fair. I do ... and I assume that the two players who called it legitimately called what they saw. You don't leave room for that possibility and consequently argue the rule is bad. "It's a BS call, which is predicated by the nature of the rule" -- that's your point. However, it's also possible that after Scott foot-faulted the first time, that the other two guys legitimately saw a second fault, clear as day in their minds, and they called it. And it's also possible, just like the best referees in the world that they sometimes flat out missed the call. Some people claim the grassy knoll because the nature of self-officiating can place you in a better position if you make calls against another. Which is exacerbated by the whether or not we like the person(s) being discussed or called. That's just human nature. I mean they were called turds.

So let's for funsies take the opposite position ... just for funsies, fantasy world as you say. Let's say Scott did foot fault the second time after a proper call the first time, and no one on the card calls it. Would you stand up on that being fair? A clear fault right after one on the previous throw, yet, not wanting to be that guy, no one calls the second one? ANd that's "fair" to everyone in that division, especially those fighting for a spot in the final 9.

In a general sense it should be noted that while it is fun to discuss this topic, at least for me, practically speaking, the likelihood of a change is very small. To affect a change it would require that the leadership in the PDGA acknowledge that the way it's been done, and argued for, for thirty years is wrong. My experience is that people, and especially, organizations, rarely have the skill of admitting to being wrong. Especially in a case where a significant number of members support the position. The rule is faulty, it isn't horrific, but it does allow for abuse. Of course when you can only find one possible case that can be seen with any detail in thirty years, well, you're not going far.

[to the bolded:] Isn't it the case if we are to truly be a member-driven organization, that the majority of players make that determination? Are you saying that there's a lot of players on both sides without a strong consensus? Given that, doesn't that also mean stay with the current rule, since we are a member-driven organization?

...Changing the rule would solve a problem, it would put all players on a more equal footing, it would stop the silly notion that some players purposefully misstep to gain an advantage (with the exception of course of the step putt), and it would normalize the sport for prime time television, in the event that ever happens. Getting it done, not so much.

You made two assumptions there.

There's a reason I like to use the speeding analogy for this situation -- and the only real argument against that analogy is that we have a non-affected official making the call. [well that plus the obvious safety of mankind.] It's a good analogy because even the best police force with the best equipment and strongest officers in terms of skill and ability and the best data team behind them, there is no way they will "equally" ticket all the people who speed on that highway. But that does not mean that those who do speed and get caught shouldn't be penalized, and it surely does not mean that the rule should be changed to allow speeding or only a certain # of mph over what the sign says, etc. Sorry guys, I can't buy it.

 

[BrotherDave]

I'm gonna have to disagree with this, I don't find S & D boring, but then, I like the sport, and given that many of the shots I already see in video are of the S & D type, then either we have to concede that the sport is already boring or that possibly the point has less merit than might be thought.

Lets give a couple of counters. Baseball, it's hard to believe but pitchers pretty much stand and deliver. They can be compared to the much more exciting sport of Cricket, where the bowler takes a hard run and much more exciting windmill wind up before their delivery. Now some might point out that both sports, per say, are boring, and they are entitled to their opinion, but no one would say that one is, and one isn't because of the way the ball is thrown.

Golf, ball variety. I know, I much prefer the variety where the player grabs the club, runs quickly up to the ball, and smacks it with the head as he runs through, as opposed to the guys who take a stance, play with their club, and sometimes with their ball, before smacking the ball, but since the first type never happens, and plenty seem to like the sport, I'd say it's irrelevant. Of course you have Polo, where the guys ride horses to get speed before clocking the ball, and well, no one hardly watches that sport at all. Apparently, movement before hitting or releasing the ball is not completely the point, but maybe discs are different?

Basketball. Yeah I know, that final freethrow at the buzzer, after the guy got smacked in route, in a desperate attempt to stop him from scoring, is boring as hell; you know, with all the fans yelling in his face, and him standing there bouncing the ball through a rather boring routine, wait, what were we talking about.

The basic notion that the difference between exciting and non-exciting in our sport is the open field run up seems misplaced to me. I'm too busy watching exciting putts and drives that are seeing eye through the trees, S & D or not, to worry about such things.

S&D is boring compared to a more active movement. More activity = more motion = more entertaining. Compare S&D to even less activity like a guy throwing from a chair and which is going to look more entertaining? Would you rather watch chess or chess boxing? There's a reason why the refs stand up MMA fighters if they're just laying on each other: Action.

To the uninitiated disc golf is basically guys throwing frisbees. When they actually see a big thrower uncorking a long throw it dawns on them that this isn't just guys tossing a frisbee. S&D looks like guys tossing a frisbee, even if it bombs the uninitiated just assumes that the disc is doing all the work and that disc golf is super easy and for kids.

For disc golf to grow it has to appeal to more non-disc golfers. We disc golfers are gonna watch this game regardless b/c we're initiated already. To appeal to a broader audience of sports enthusiasts it has to look more like a sport and less like a game.

Baseball: Pitchers are more active than what S&D would allow. They step-off the mound when they follow-through, even if modestly. Even at that, they're constantly besieged with arm and shoulder injuries and Tommy John surgeries are becoming commonplace. Disc golfers shouldn't want to mimic baseball in the "increase risk for injury" department. Cricket bowlers definitely follow-through commonly, way more than S&D would allow. They basically look like they're doing falling putts all the time.

Golf: Disc golf should not emulate golf. Golf is boring as hell to watch on tv and courses are closing up all around the country b/c young people aren't interested. The last thing we should do is become as static and stale as ball golf.

Basketball: People hate watching free throws. There is constant chatter about reducing the amount of foul shooting because of hack-a-Shaq strategies. People hate hack-a-shaq because it stops the fast-paced, free-flowing dynamic action of basketball with static, boring free throw shooting.

We need more dynamism, not less. They're called Dynamic Discs, not Static Discs for a reason.

 

[Aim For The Chains]

if throwing off the tee gives you a few feet to work with im not sure why peeps are so worried about inches.

stand and deliver is boring as hell. go play catch'

(PS I can use it and do but wtf?! get real...) its not even that big of a deal unless you are stepping WAY off line which even then unless straddling a tree or brush in the woods is much more of a concern which you see from the wannabe pros out here all the time.

 

[cooter]

Stand & Deliver is boring and less fun. Can disc golf tournaments stand to get any more boring and less fun? I would honestly consider not playing tourneys if S&D was the rule. It's just lame, like basketball requiring all shots to be set shots b/c they have a hard time calling travels accurately. S&D will make disc golf even less television friendly by making our athletes look less athletic than your average pro bowler and if it encourages shorter courses that also hurts tv viewing (since long, open courses are easier to film and provide room for galleries).

S&D is a backwards solution.

Absolutely. It's ridiculous to even mention an S&D rule. People want to crush a disc and people love distance so that dictates a run up. We play a sport in the woods with sticks, briars, roots, stumps, groundhog holes and uneven terrain everywhere. The best you can do is follow as the rule states and call it if you see it. You still have to make the shot and make the putt. 2 or 3 inches off a line won't win a tourney.

 

[krupicka]

FWIW Simon just threw 103 mph with a deliver and stay shot.

 

[Dcinmd]

You'd be amazed at how often you probably already do keep your foot in place after throwing. My proposal would be no different than the current demonstrate balance rules during putting (which do not have have a time limit or qualifications on the current state of the disc, etc.)

You would be amazing how many times I almost foot fault inside the circle since I have zero cartilage left in my knee of my plant foot.

 

[coupe]

S&D is a backwards solution.

S&D is the refuge of Internet tough guys who like to whine about foot faults but don't have the balls to call them when they occur.

 

[lyleoross]

S&D is the refuge of Internet tough guys who like to whine about foot faults but don't have the balls to call them when they occur.

Alright, I have to bite so accept my apology in advance. The internet is a refuge for tough guys who brag about calling foot falls, but don't recognize that they aren't being called at the highest level. Why do I know this, because the issue comes up repeatedly with lots of video. That is, no one is calling them, at least at the Pro level. I'm sure all those Ams and Pros who post on the internet are calling them, every one. But since those aren't the guys who define our sport, and aren't in the videos that the public might watch to see what we're about, well, maybe we should consider the problem.... BTW - the reason I know those guys aren't in those videos? Well since we know they call every foot fault, and by far the majority of the ones we see in video aren't being called, well, they can't be in those videos now can they?

 

[lyleoross]

FWIW Simon just threw 103 mph with a deliver and stay shot.

SWEEEEET!

 

[Craig639]

2 or 3 inches off a line won't win a tourney.

I disagree.
The guy who doesn't care about having a legal stance has a much better chance of making the up shot than the guy who is concerned about releasing from a legal stance.

 

[Anon]

S&D for everything but the tee shot. Either that or refs/officials for every top card in an important tournament.

Letting players call rules has clearly failed at even the highest levels.

Great 'sport' we're building. Nothing screams 'professional' like grey areas and murky rules that rely on emotionally invested participants making the calls.

 

[coupe]

they aren't being called at the highest level.

Because whenever players at the highest level DO call foot faults (see KC and Patrick Brown at Worlds, PMcB at the Aussie Open, Nikko at the HOF, etc.), the S&D crowd claim it wasn't a foot fault and accuse them of engaging in a nefarious conspiracy (see post #47 upthread), and make up fictitious "moral dilemmas" to excuse their own refusal not calling foot faults.

Maybe if those people who purport to care about foot faults would actually do something to ENCOURAGE a culture of compliance from both an execution and a rules enforcement perspective (like actually calling foot faults and supporting those who call them) instead of just crying "S&D! S&D! S&D!" in knee-jerk fashion, the problem that S&D purports to address would resolve itself.

 

[Steve West]

S&D for everything but the tee shot. Either that or refs/officials for every top card in an important tournament.

Letting players call rules has clearly failed at even the highest levels.

Great 'sport' we're building. Nothing screams 'professional' like grey areas and murky rules that rely on emotionally invested participants making the calls.

Self-regulation is widely regarded to be a fundamental aspect of professionalism.

 

[BrotherDave]

I disagree.
The guy who doesn't care about having a legal stance has a much better chance of making the up shot than the guy who is concerned about releasing from a legal stance.

This probably goes both ways. I find that in some scenarios focusing on my stance helps me focus on my shot b/c if I'm focused only on my shot I won't notice that I just put my foot on a wet root/loose soil that's begging to throw me off-balance and similar stuff. I don't know if "zoned out guy" has much more of a tangible advantage as "OCD by the book guy" insomuch as making "zoned out guy" pay attention takes him out of his routine/comfort zone. There are probably just as many "OCD by the book" guys that see their performance dip in casual settings b/c they're being taken out of their routine.