New Rules question

[peabody]

We were told of the 'new' OB rule at our local Ice Bowl Tournament.
I have searched on this site for info and I can't remember reading anything here on DGCR about this.
The new rule is the exact opposite of the former rule.
If any part of the disc is touching out of bounds then it is out of bounds.
Can any one here comfirm or deny this information?

 

[Apothecary]

from the pdga webbie:

803.09 Out-of-Bounds

A. A disc shall be considered out-of-bounds only when it comes to rest and it is clearly and
completely surrounded by the out-of-bounds area. A disc thrown in water shall be deemed to be
at rest once it is floating or is moving only by the action of the water or the wind on the
water. See section 803.03 F. The out-of-bounds line itself is considered out-of --bounds. In order to
consider the disc as out-of bounds, there must be reasonable evidence that the disc came to rest within the out-of-bounds area. In the absence of such evidence, the disc will be considered lost and the player will proceed according to rule 803.11B.

 

[Cgkdisc]

The new rule is the exact opposite of the former rule.
If any part of the disc is touching out of bounds then it is out of bounds.
Can any one here comfirm or deny this information?

Myth: The only rule change in 2006 was the OB line itself became OB. But just touching the line itself doesn't make a disc OB unless the rest of it is also on the OB side. If any part of the disc is IB then just touching the OB line doesn't make it OB. The disc has to still be completely OB like the rule was before.

 

[peabody]

Thanks guys, I guess the TD got some bad info.

 

[mashnut]

We were told of the 'new' OB rule at our local Ice Bowl Tournament.
I have searched on this site for info and I can't remember reading anything here on DGCR about this.
The new rule is the exact opposite of the former rule.
If any part of the disc is touching out of bounds then it is out of bounds.
Can any one here comfirm or deny this information?

Was it PDGA sanctioned? If yes, then the TD was totally wrong. If no, he can make any OB rule he wants.

 

[peabody]

He said it was the new PDGA rules. He isn't a dumba$$ either, very religous and a smart man.
I took what he said as gospel. I guess I should confront him with this info?

 

[mashnut]

Perhaps gentle correction would be better than confrontation if you want to play in his events in the future, but if he's running sanctioned events, or even claiming that his events follow PDGA rules and guidelines, he should definitely know that he is misrepresenting the rules.

 

[ejvogie]

Was it PDGA sanctioned? If yes, then the TD was totally wrong. If no, he can make any OB rule he wants.

I was under the impression that even unsanctioned tourneys are SUPPOSED to follow the official rules. Understood that this may be more of a guideline than a requirement.

 

[mashnut]

I was under the impression that even unsanctioned tourneys are SUPPOSED to follow the official rules. Understood that this may be more of a guideline than a requirement.

They're definitely guidelines, see tournaments like the ace race. The pdga says any disc on their approved list can be thrown in a tournament, but ace races limit you to a single disc. Odd formats are no different, things like doubles, skins, match play etc. If a TD is going to deviate from traditional rules or formats though, there is the expectation that they make the changes very clear to all participants.

 

[peabody]

I knew something was 'up' when I hadn't seen anything on DGCR at all on a new OB rule.
We have some great people on here that are ' UP ' on all things Disc Golf related.
Just proves that this is the place for ALL things involving revolving plastic.

 

[DavidSauls]

The subject of this thread---as opposed to the wild digression---is interesting. There's another thread where the subject of "PDGA presence" at tournaments is discussed. This is one of the factors.

At a PDGA-sanctioned tournament, you have the expectations that the PDGA rulebook will be followed, that the TD is a certified official, and that any deviations from the rules will be approved and published in advance. Compliance is less than perfect, but it's generally true.

At non-PDGA tournaments, there's more chance for "surprise" rules.

It's odd that this particular misunderstanding surfaced as we haven't seen "new rules" in several years. When the status of the O.B. line was changed (2006, I presume is correct) the misreading of it resulted in lots of these discussions, but it would seem it would've been all hashed out by now.

 

[billnchristy]

Dont they have to take a test?

 

[kerplunk]

Dont they have to take a test?

To be an official you take an open book test that you can miss some questions on, although I'm not sure how many you can miss and still pass. At least 2 or 3 out of 20 or so though, cuz I think that's how many I missed. And I don't think the PDGA does much at keeping officials up to date- I haven't gotten any rules change info or anything since I became an official in October.

 

[cydisc]

To be an official you take an open book test that you can miss some questions on, although I'm not sure how many you can miss and still pass. At least 2 or 3 out of 20 or so though, cuz I think that's how many I missed. And I don't think the PDGA does much at keeping officials up to date- I haven't gotten any rules change info or anything since I became an official in October.

Since 1997, I haven't had to do anything to renew my official's card.

 

[magictenor1]

for some people nothing is ever out of bounds!

 

[tallpaul]

I will leave the religion subject completely alone; as it has no business in this thread....

In regards to o.b., the interesting thing I saw last year, and which was new to me, is the ruling when you disc never hits in bounds....i.e. you drive off the tee and your disc ends up in a lake. It never hit ground anywhere o.b., and in the past we would throw 3 from the point it was last seen crossing the o.b. line. These days, players seem to be playing a rethrow 3 from the tee; due to the fact that land was never hit.

 

[Cgkdisc]

In regards to o.b., the interesting thing I saw last year, and which was new to me, is the ruling when you disc never hits in bounds....i.e. you drive off the tee and your disc ends up in a lake. It never hit ground anywhere o.b., and in the past we would throw 3 from the point it was last seen crossing the o.b. line. These days, players seem to be playing a rethrow 3 from the tee; due to the fact that land was never hit.

That's another non-rule. Player always has the default options to throw from the last point a disc is over IB or the previous lie when going OB UNLESS the TD has specifically restricted the options to a drop zone or previous lie (typically tee).

 

[tallpaul]

That's another non-rule. Player always has the default options to throw from the last point a disc is over IB or the previous lie when going OB UNLESS the TD has specifically restricted the options to a drop zone or previous lie (typically tee).

Luckily, we were playing a team tournament, skins format...I actually threw a second shot in the lake, as I figured, one in, I've probably lost the hole; might as well go for the glory! The only other hole I lost was also a great drive that finished less than 20 foot from the pin; but in the lake! I won the match...and despite losing two discs (I had some I didn't care about in my bag; just for this purpose), I enjoy playing at West Lake, Iowa. I was just kind of surprised that playing with three other members from three different geographical areas; that all three considered it normal to play o.b. in this manner; when I was always used to playing as you describe; i.e. playing from last point over i.b.

 

[cydisc]

I will leave the religion subject completely alone; as it has no business in this thread....

In regards to o.b., the interesting thing I saw last year, and which was new to me, is the ruling when you disc never hits in bounds....i.e. you drive off the tee and your disc ends up in a lake. It never hit ground anywhere o.b., and in the past we would throw 3 from the point it was last seen crossing the o.b. line. These days, players seem to be playing a rethrow 3 from the tee; due to the fact that land was never hit.

This is the third time I've heard of this "it has to hit ground to be in bounds" ruling. Who is making these rulings?

 

[Cgkdisc]

I was just kind of surprised that playing with three other members from three different geographical areas; that all three considered it normal to play o.b. in this manner; when I was always used to playing as you describe; i.e. playing from last point over i.b.

It's usually a choice and sometimes reteeing is a better position to throw from if the OB is fairly close in front of you and you would have to take a stance on muddy ground or a sloped bank.